TPMCafe
« Bill Kristol Depressed: Thinks Obama Is Going To Win | Home | This Week At Cafe »

Life on Mars? A Bridge in Brooklyn?

user-pic

I grant you this is not high on the next President's priority list; however, if he cannot ground NASA, he will never be able to rein in the much more powerful Pentagon. NASA has a very effective propaganda machine. Its most recent PR move is to tell Congress and the public that it is out to find "life" on Mars and other planets. When many people hear references to life, images of Martians spin through their heads; some even envision civilizations that we could ally ourselves with, maybe against China, at least against some other aliens in some other galaxy. Actually, what the multi-billion dollar agency is looking for is some organic material, the size of amoebas or--even less. It would be nice to know, I grant you; however, given other priorities, it hardly belongs at the top of the list of what ought to be studied. Indeed, even if one insists that these funds are to be used for exploration--and not, say, finding better ways to fight disease or poverty--much more promising targets are near by, right here on Earth, in the oceans.

Although oceans cover more than 70% of the Earth, less than 5% of them have been mapped with the same degree of detail as Mars. We have rarely ventured below 6,500 meters in the oceans, although they are more than 11,000 meters deep. We know much less about the deepest layers of the oceans than we know about the dark side of the moon.

Yet, the potential payoffs are huge. First of all, this is the place, bar none, where the largest amounts of untapped oil and gas are to be found. Next: NASA claims that space exploration has led to all kinds of new technology--for instance, it maintains that the coatings that allow space capsules to withstand the heat of reentry are used to make better pots and pans. But deep-sea expeditions are likely to yield even greater benefits. In order to freely explore the oceans' deepest reaches, we must learn to construct submersibles that can handle extreme pressure, as much as 18,000 pounds per square inch. The resulting materials and techniques might help us design and construct homes that could withstand cyclones, hurricanes and earthquakes.

In contrast to cells of organic material that may be present on Mars, it is estimated that there are up to 2 million marine life forms that are yet to be discovered in the oceans. Whenever we venture deeper, we find new species, for instance lithistids, a rare kind of sponge present only in deep waters. Such discoveries are likely to reveal secrets of earlier life on Earth, and make up for other species that are being lost due to human expansion on the surface.

Moreover, deep-water habitats teem with life that contains the promise of new drugs and new cures for diseases. In what are still largely unexplored deep-water reef communities, the Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institution in Ft. Pierce, Fla., has discovered what is believed to be an anti-tumor agent (discodermolide); its value for humans is being tested in clinical trials. Also, scientists expect that organisms in the deep oceans can consume the methane that is seeping through the ocean floor and convert it into energy for themselves. They hope that we could learn to harvest such energy for our own use.

The discovery that dust on Mars is finer than previously thought or that water once flowed down its now barren craters doesn't bowl me over. Even the seas' more obvious secrets are much richer--for instance, sunken ships. Consider the Swedish warship Vasa, which sank in 1628. Raised in the 1960s, it now tells us volumes about earlier historical periods.

Perhaps most important, the oceans are the major part of our environment. They greatly affect the climate and the conditions that allow life--of real, two-legged creatures, our life--to survive. And yet we are turning one sea after another--the Mediterranean, for instance--into garbage dumps. Studying the health of oceans and how they may be protected is much more urgent than re-visiting Mars.

There are some--including researchers who do not receive grants from NASA--who believe that we can draw inspiration from walking on the moon, but not from diving into the oceans. They may be too young to remember the admiration with which many millions followed the explorations of Jacques Cousteau. All we need is a good race with other nations--measured by how much ocean we cover and who can find more goodies faster--and ocean exploration will be all the rage.

Granted, Obama and McCain have more urgent priorities than worrying about either outer space or deep oceans. However, Presidents have assistants, and they have assistants. Somebody, one cannot but hope, can bring some sense into setting priorities in spending those dollars dedicated to exploration. These may well be dedicated to discovering ways to fight disease and finding sustainable new sources of energy. However, one hopes that some funds will be set aside to probe the oceans; these funds can be found on Mars.


Amitai Etzioni is University Professor at the George Washington University and, most recently, the author of Security First: For A Muscular, Moral Foreign Policy (Yale, 2007).
www.securityfirstbook.com


12 Comments

| Leave a comment
user-pic

What stunning condescencion. People quite clearly understand that the search for extraterrestrial life is a search for microorganisms. I'm stunned that you want to pull the pluyg on Mars right when we're on the verge of knowing whether or not there was or is life in the red planet's polar ice.

Of course, I'd like to know more about the oceans as well. But why are space and ocean exploration mutually exclusive? Any number of government programs can be halted in order to pay to explore both space and the undersea Earth. We can start by dropping the costly and unpopular RealID program. Oh wait, you support that, don't you?

user-pic

As to exploration of Mars you fail to make an important distinction. The question should be do we do it with robots or with manned explorations. The former is quite doable with modest budgets. Efforts to do so with manned exploration carries a price tag in the trillions of dollars. This latter project is absurd.

It is true that NASA has a huge budget but it is being pissed away primarily with the space shuttle and space station boondoggles. If they simply focused on the real science -- mapping and sampling the planets with robots -- and eliminated the manned spacecraft their budget could be reduced by 90% without hurting the science.

We can afford the science. I agree with you that we are not going to find life there, but there is a chance of finding fossil remains. Now knowing that would definitely be worth the little effort that is required.

About half of one percent of the government budget is what NASA gets. A couple days of the Mess in Mesopotamia, in other words.

I agree wholeheartedly, mind you, that there should be a great deal more exploration of the oceans, and particularly of the deep oceans, but cutting out NASA's pathetic snippet of the budget isn't a smart way to do it - certainly not a forward-thinking way to do it.

user-pic

Why pick on NASA when its budget is so tiny compared to almost everything else?

As to whether to support manned space exploration, setting it against robotic efforts is a false zero-sum challenge. Both are needed. One goes somewhere first with robotic probes. But humans will eventually be exploiting resources out in the wider solar system.

Should we wait for other nations to lead in that field, too?

user-pic

Incorrect that manned missions to Mars are trillion-dollar cost. $20 billion is the low end for an initial visit.

Somebody will go there. Should we let China be first?

user-pic

Excellent points. I hope we do go first. If only because I won't be able to stand all the "Red Planet" headlines if China beats us there.

user-pic

Yes let China go there first. By the time they get there the US will be bankrupt from our glorious wars of foreign conquest and China will we the world's sole superpower. This would likely knock them back a notch or two in the wealth department and give us some breathing room.

Manned exploration of Mars is really nuts. Some people wasted too many years of their youth on science fiction -- they should now spend some time going over the cost over-runs experienced by the Shuttle and Space station programs. It goes like this: we can imagine that it will cost 20 billion, then multiple by 100.

user-pic

Exploration, meeting the challenge of the unknown, brings out the best in humanity. It is when we draw back from challenges that we cease to grow. Investing in deep ocean exploration, as well as space exploration and developing alternative energy technology, are all far more noble endeavors for our efforts than making war in the Middle East. And at a fraction of the cost, too.

Unfortunately, we cannot withdraw from our costly obligations in Asia and the Middle East. To do so would be to deny reality. But to turn our backs on the unknown, whether in the deep sea or on Mars, is to stop growing as intelligent beings with a need to discover and learn.

Next you are going to tell us that we need to pull funding from DARPA. We don't need less R&D we need more.

Our nation needs to encourage children to go into engineering fields and one of the biggest bits of positive PR for that is NASA.

Should life, existing or fossil, be found on Mars it would be one of the most profound discoveries of human history. It will tell us that the appearance of life is likely ubiquitous in the universe rather than a rare or a one time event.

user-pic
Excellent points. I hope we do go first. If only because I won't be able to stand all the "Red Planet" headlines if China beats us there.

Yes, but if we let China get there first, will it lower the cost of chemically-suspect toys at Walmart?

user-pic

They're not cheap enough for you already?

Leave a comment

Advertisement
Please disable your adblocker!
Ads are how we pay the bills!

Subscribe

The Coffee House
TPMCafe's regulars

House Brew
From Your Cafe Editor

Special Guests
Big names and big brains

Special Features
Pressing topics and trends

Table for One
An expert's week-long talk.

All Reader Posts
TPM readers discuss.

Recent Reader Posts

All Reader Posts »



Book Club Calendar


Coming Soon



Nov. 30-Dec. 4



January 12-16



« Book Club ArchiveFull calendar »

Book Club Archive



Masthead

Editor-in-Chief
Josh Marshall

Site Editor
Lila Shapiro

Intern
Kyle Krahel-Frolander



Subscribe to TPMCafe's feed.
Subscribe to TPMCafe's reader blog feed.

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address