Robert,

Barry should shut up and hire you as ICAMSR spokesperson. You are so much more reasonable and rartional than him in public debate. Still, you seem to be missing some glaring faults in his logic. Perhaps it is my writing that is unclear. I'll try to use different examples and provide more detail this time.

Your point about denying the ability for an independent assessment of Levin's work was a good one. However, if that is BD's gripe he should make it clear rather than imply the NRC ignored Levin's work. Your point is, however, valid enough for me to drop the issue as an example of gross misrepresentation on BD's part.

Off course the transmission of microorganisms from Mars is unproven! How would you prove this could be done unequivocally if there is no life on Mars? All we can do if Martian life is absent is measure Martian meteorite properties to determine if they appear capable of transporting microbes based upon what we know about the tolerances of Earthly microbes. That work has been done and strongly suggests that Earthly extremophiles could make such a trip. BD's claims regarding meteorite based transfer focus on a lack of evidence that transfer has occurred while totally ignoring the evidence that it likely would have occurred if life existed on Mars. This is appears to be a case of BD either ignoring data contrary to his stance or a failure to comprehend it. In this case I think it is the latter, because his replies on this issue always focus on the lack of proof of Martian life here.

BD's continued misrepresentation of Zubrin's comments as implying Martian microbes have already been transported to Earth despite a lack of evidence for it is one of many examples why I distrust both his veracity and comprehension. Zubrin has always prefaced his transfer remarks with "Even If life existed on Mars". These comments are further preceded by comments indicating life is unlikely on Mars' surface. Nowhere has Zubrin claimed Martian microbes have actually arrived on Earth.

I am not impressed by Barry's reading at all. Over half of the references he has posted links to do not in fact make the statements he claims. He has misrepresented both Benton Clark's comments on extremophiles and misrepresented optimum conditions for transport of Martian microbes as minimal ones to name just a few examples. Being able to provide a bibliography of astrobiology references does not mean you understand them. Were you impressed by Barry's NASA life evidence suppresion conspiracy theories as well?

The point with regard to Hoyle is that Barry sites Hoyle's viral panspermia theories when trying to stoke fears about alien microbes yet denies there is any evidence for much more likely meteorite mediated forms of panspermia. Do you really see no logical inconsistency in this? Do you see any rational reason for supporting a theory rejected for decades by practicing epidemiologists while rejected or ignoring other panspermia theories which have been well received?

No evidence acrues to support Hoyle's virus from space theories. Epidemiologists have tracked the sources of many viral outbreaks and mitigated their effects. This would not be possible without a real understanding of the source of infections. I've pointed out several times without reply from BD a potential (possibly unrealized) flawed assumption in Hoyle's flu theory. They make a big deal out of family contact not being a factor in the spread of flu. The only reason this should matter is if prolonged rather than casual contact is the primary source of transmission. Which do you think is the case for most types of flu?

Evidence is growing that life's basic chemicals are found or even originate in space. That does not mean life does. That's like claiming because coconuts are found in the ocean that palm trees grow there. Chemistry explains the origin of these chemicals without need for life.

The strangest thing about Barry's transport stance is that admitting Martian microbes have come to Earth does really nothing to prove they aren't hazardous. It only means his efforts are misguided. In my opinion, if Martian microbes do exist and are hazardous we should be getting controlled samples back here ASAP in order to develop counter measures after some preliminary robotic analysis on Mars. Refusal to return contained samples even of a hazrdous nature in a hail of uncontained ones is simply silly.

I'm not at all against Barry's contention that more life searches should be done on Mars. I even support Levin's proposed dual racimir LR repeat. I simply think that this should be limited to a few best shot probes followed by a realistic mission based on testable technology rather than a fear mandated, extravagant, over developed, and failure mode multiplied one.

Regards,
Mark