Why should I be banned for defending myself? I always start off posting something relavant about science and I get persoanlly attacked. I didn't start this flame war - Mark Eby did. He always does. Besides I have been completely honest about my stand on issues involving life on Mars. Eby knows what they are but tries to discredit me anyway even after I have explained my stand at least a hundred times. Everytime I post, members of the Mars Society attack me like clockwork -- usually about anything I post. That is because I don't believe in their colonies on Mars in ten years dream.. I don't believe you can send humans to Mars before you are sure of the issue of microbial life. It would be too risky.

My stand: There was enough evidence for life returned from from the Viking mission to justify a full scale scientific investigation of the biology results - that never happened. The Viking PR (Horowitz's experiment), in contrast to the Viking GCMS, did find Martian organic molecules in seven out of nine ttests on Mars. No one ever talks about this result --- my question is why?

As far as dishonesty goes? Hmmm... If you tell people that living in a plywood and fiberglass structure in the Arctic and Utash is like living on Mars -- would you say that is honest? The only reason certain people like you want me banned is so I don't expose this kind of outrage. There is nothing scientific about it. It is all show. To back this up read this quote from a New York Times article. You decide:

Life Inside Tall Tin Can in Utah Is All Mars By BLAINE HARDEN
March 23, 2002, Saturday, Late Edition - Final

"The six recent pilgrims are practicing something even stranger
and more isolating -- living on Mars. They go outside in white canvas space
suits trimmed in duct tape. Their helmets are made from plastic light
fixtures and white bullet-shaped trash-can lids. In their habitation module
(the thing that looks like a silo), they sit with their laptops late into
the cold desert night, typing up reports of simulated Mars disasters."

Is the above real science or theatre?

In contrast, the article below from Biospherics why certain individuals want me banned:

Scientists Strengthen Prospects For Life On Mars

SAN DIEGO (PRNewswire) - On the heels of NASA's decision to land new rovers on Mars, the debate over the existence of life on the red planet is heating up. Dr. Gilbert V. Levin, a chief proponent, today advanced his claim to finding living microorganisms on the elusive planet 25 years ago. Dr. Levin, one of a trio of scientists, including himself and another who participated in NASA's Viking Mission, was presenting a paper at the Annual Meeting of the International Society for Optical Engineering refuting the mainstay arguments against life on Mars. He contends that those arguments -- the presumed absence of organic matter and of liquid water -- are no longer tenable.

Levi n, senior author of the paper and President of Biospherics Incorporated, Beltsville, Maryland, was Experimenter on the Viking Labeled Release (LR) life detection instrument that landed on Mars in 1976. His tests produced evidence for life that sparked a continuing controversy. The consensus of interested scientists has been that the Viking LR results on Mars, though positive, were chemical in origin and not biological. However, in a 1997 publication, following two decades of study, Levin finally concluded that Viking had, indeed, detected living microorganisms on Mars. Acknowledging that many scientists may remain unconvinced, he now proposes a new test to settle the issue once and for all and urges that it be sent on the next lander mission to Mars.

Co-author Dr. Arthur Lafleur, Assistant Director of MIT's Environmental Health Science Center, provided information that refutes the most often cited argument against the LR life detection experiment -- the lack of organic matter, the stuff of life, on Mars, as reported by the Viking organic analysis gas chromatograph mass-spectrometer (GCMS). Lafleur, who helped develop the Viking GCMS instrument and a co-author of the original report of no organic matter on Mars, revealed unpublished results of pre-mission tests. They showed that the instrument sent to Mars could easily have missed biologically significant amounts of organic matter in the soil, as it had in a number of tests on Earth. Thus, the Mars GCMS results no longer can be considered proof that the LR failed to detect living microorganisms.

Co-author Dr. Lawrence Kuznetz, University of California, Berkeley, Department of Planetary Sciences, has put to rest the second prevailing argument against the possibility of life on Mars: that the atmosphere of the planet is too thin to support the existence of life-essential liquid water. Results of a laboratory study by a team of researchers led by Kuznetz showed that liquid water does exist under Martian environmental conditions. In addition, Kuznetz found results from 1960s tests of cooling systems of astronaut space suits showed that water exists in liquid form under atmospheric pressure as low as that on Mars. The findings lend credence to a model for Martian water published in 1998 by Levin and his son, Ron, a Ph.D. physicist at MIT Lincoln Laboratory. Based on Viking and Pathfinder data, the model predicted amounts of moisture in the Martian soil equal to that found to nourish microbial life in the sand dunes of Death Valley, California. Corroborated by the new NASA announcement of evidence for recent or current liquid water on Mars, these reports dispel the no-liquid-water issue against the Viking LR results.

The authors support Levin's ``chiral LR'' experiment and propose that it be sent to Mars at the next opportunity. The experiment would apply the proven LR technology to test Martian soil for a unique characteristic found in all known forms of life, but not in chemical reactions. This characteristic is the biologihe experiment can return an unambiguous answer to the major scientific question of life on Mars that would be acceptable to virtually all scientists. Dr. Levin was an Experimenter on NASA's Viking Mission to Mars, a Co- Investigator on NASA's Mariner 9 Mars mission, and was a Team Member of NASA's MOx instrument placed on the ill-fated Russian 1996 Mars Lander. He received NASA's Public Service Award ``In recognition of his achievements in designing, perfecting, and conducting the Viking Labeled Release Experiment.''

Since his Viking experience, Levin has led the biotechnology efforts at Biospherics, the publicly held Maryland company he founded in 1967. His developments include a full-bulk, low-calorie sweetener, tagatose, soon to come on the market, and the safe-for-humans, environmentally friendly pesticide, FlyCracker(TM), introduced into the market this year. The Company also provides information services to government agencies and private industry.

Certain statements contained herein are ``forward-looking'' statements as defined in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Because such statements include risks and uncertainties, actual results may differ from those expressed or implied. Factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied include, but are not limited to, those discussed in filings by the Company with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including the filing on Form 8-K made on March 3, 1999.

Happy holidays to all