RE: "The point is the Mars Society folks have no respect for the NASA planetary protection program or any other views on planetary protection."

A: Not at all. Many members of the Mars Society are all for NASA's planetary protection program. They are just not for your ridiculous demands to complicate it.

RE: “Instead they aimlessly set unrealistic goals of colonizing Mars when it fact it cannot ever happen until the issue of life on Mars has been settled.”

A: Absurd. Many places on Earth were colonized and even more frequently explored under much less potentially controllable hazardous conditions. Life on Mars is a potential exploration driver. Many expeditions have been conducted to do research on strange life forms even when potentially hazardous. Life on Mars and its potential for colonization are the two main drivers in the public’s fascination with Mars. Any mission dedicated to both is likely to generate more support than a single purpose mission. Your definition of settled is also open to interpretation. There is no way the issue will ever be truly settled until at least 1 and probably many missions as capable as a human one is conducted.

RE: “Your commander and chief Robert Zubrin continues to make a spectacle of himself with his baseless theories that Martian microbes would be harmless if brought to Earth”

A: As Nealson admitted and the report <a
href="http://www7.nationalacademies.org/ssb/mrsrmenu.html">; "Mars Sample
Return: Issues and Recommendations," ). gives plenty of rationale for, Zubrin’s claims are not baseless. There is no reason to believe Martian life would be hazardous to Earth life. The reverse is in fact true. The disagreement is over the fact that Zubrin considers the risk 0 based on those rationale’s while those having the responsibility of protecting the planet at NASA are not willing to bet everything on what the data suggests but does not conclusively prove. Since Zubrin is not a biologist, I think most Mars Society members would support the conclusions and recommendations of the report while believing Zubrin is most likely correct just as I do.

RE: “and in fact has said many times they rain down upon Earth routinely”

A: You have been corrected on this so many times one can only conclude you have no interest in accuracy. Zubrin has said IF THERE IS LIFE ON MARS then it has rained down on Earth many times. He has not made your distorted version of his claim. This is based on the work of many researchers listed earlier that is not strongly contested or readily dismissed like the work of Hoyle that you do support. Still waiting for an explanation of this convenient contradiction on your part. Your claim that there is no evidence for this transfer entirely ignores both the “if life existed part” and the serious research indicating the feasibility of this type of transfer. If the data based on Earth life supports transfer by this mechanism but it hasn’t happened that suggests there is no life on Mars or it can’t survive on Earth more than that this can’t happen.

RE: Trash talk.

A: Try and stay at least close to a scientific discourse if you want to be taken seriously.

Regards,
Mark