None agree with me? What about the scientists supporting ICAMSR?

ICAMSR has always been out there to tell people what they were not being informed of properly. Namely the extremly risky way in
which NASA planned to return Martian soil samples, by a
Passive Earth Entry capsule that would use Earth as a
catchers mit. I invite everyone to read over the ICAMSR
website and see if there is any hysteria invloved:
http://www.icamsr.org

Understand that Mark Eby has to promote his campaign against planetary protection for the sake of preserving his Mars Society fantasy - the manned Mars mission. The reality is (as Zubrin and Mark know)if there is life on Mars, then it will need to be studied
thorougly before humans can ever go there. This completely throws the Mars Society schedule of sending humans to Mars off by fifty or more years depending on how soon we get started actually sending life sciences experiments.

For anyone wanting to know the truth about Zubrin's views
on planetary protection, read the online Planetary Report
article and the comments Zubrin received from the
scientifc community.

http://www.planetary.org/html/news/opinions/nothreat.html

Zubrin is convinced any Martian life would be harmless,
he tells this to the public all the time. Futhermore in a
recent article for Space.com Zubrin says there is not one
shred of evidence to support that Martian life exists. I
guess he has not kept up with the latest findings nor the
ALH 84001 meteorite story:

http://www.biospherics.com/mars/index.html

Yet the National Research Council has issued a report
recently that said NASA did not ever have a facility in place
to examine Martian soil samples. Yet, in 2003 and 2005 NASA
was going to go ahead with MSR anyway until the loss of
the Mars Polar Lander stopped them dead in their tracks. Why
would NASA want to risk contaminating the biosphere by not having a proper facility in place? Here it is, plain as day. All you need do is read:

http://www4.nationalacademies.org/news.nsf/isbn/0309075718
?OpenDocument

Barry D.