Here's a classic psuedo-scientist goof-up. Barry supports Chandra as a panspermia pioneer yet denies Martian microbes could be transported to Earth. Chandra believes viruses, prions, and bacteria can survive unprotected in space yet Barry won't admit they can survive inside meteorites. This is one of the clearest signs of his lack of scientific outlook. Pick the data that supports your stance but ignore related data that contradicts it.

I got to laugh that he thinks a pure fictional paper case study has more value than a cheap real life simulation. I'm not real fond of the Mars simulation bases, but I do understand the goal. I question whether the fidelity is enough to be of great value, but I think it is clear they are at least of some value. They certainly provides more insight than doing thought scenarios in your head and writing down outcomes that easily match your preconceived opinions. Anyone who has followed the Mars analogue base work knows the real world has intruded rather harshly from time to time in unexpected ways. These provide real learning opportunities that you don't get from writing fictional scenarios. I'm not at all sure however that these are the best use of resources. I'm certainly not willing to spend my time and money on them. I'm far more excited about the translife mission which is clearly groundbreaking research (and something which Barry clearly ignores). I am also very impressed by the set-up of the European station. They are taking great pains to increase the fidelity and scientific value of the third base.

Regards,
Mark