exploration of life on earth

[Stuart G. Poss]

Like Dr. Schatz, I am equally concerned when such large sums are being spent to achieve lofty scientific goals such as  "establishing the existence of water on mars".  From the perspective of a marine biologist, who has only to step outside his office and see an ocean full of water, it is extremely hard to understand the rationale at spending such extraordinary sums on "throw-away" science, when the biology of marine organisms, as important as they are to the human condition, remain extraordinarily understudied and diminishing at an alarming rate.  I too would call for a national reassessment of scientific spending priorities.

In my view, if elements of the space program are critical to our national security needs, let us spend these resources on such needs directly.   Even in the short term it is important for space exploration that "space ship earth" to be brought back to "safe-mode", so that it will ultimately support startrek-like visions.  It seems time for national science spending priorities to change.

From my perspective the failed Mars missions and the failed WTO meetings are not altogether unrelated.  They are symptomatic of a mentality that fails to recognize the urgent unmet need to quickly launch a NASA-like initiative to study the remaining vestiges of our biosphere and build an economy on preserving it, while there is still time to do so.  IMHO Mars will likely remain a largely barren landscape well into the 24th century and from either an economic or military perspective will provide nowhere near the riches or value that we are likely to discover by better understanding our own backyard or nearby coastal ecosystem.  There is no pressing scientific need to go there now, when there are so many critical environmental health issues right here on earth and when biological science stands at the threshold of understanding biodiversity at the molecular level and employing this knowledge to the benefit of mankind.   Certainly, it seems increasingly clear that the cost of putting a man on Mars will be high, $5-10 trillion at the current rate of expenditures.

Perhaps it is time for the scientific community and the public to debate this issue and the consequences of shooting this kind of money into outer space.


"George E. Schatz" wrote:

> I don't want us to start kicking NASA while they are down, but is anyone else somewhat bothered to read in a NY Times Op-Ed about how "cheap" a failed $165 million Mars Mission is?   Or the other recent $125 million Mars feet/meters "mistake" ( I'm not aware of any systematists who use inches)?  Those are purportedly "cheap" mistakes in comparison to the $2 billion failed Mars Mission in 1992?  Does anyone have a figure for the amount of money our government allocated to the exploration of life on earth this past year?  Now I know that we could (and should) just as easily go down the "defense budget road", and, of course, the discovery and analysis of an independent origin and evolution of life would be utterly fascinating, but what is going on here? Why don't we collectively "get it" yet?  Life on earth, which is superficially understood at best, is under siege by one outstandingly successful species.  Could we be so naive as to hope that these unfortunately failed Mars missions might engender a "wake-up" call for better stewardship of our one and only home?
>
> Dr. George E. Schatz
> Missouri Botanical Garden
> P.O. Box 299
> St. Louis, MO 63166-0299
> U.S.A.
> Phone: 314-577-9512
> Fax: 314-577-9596
> schatz at mobot.org