Mark says: "Please note I edited your comments to make your link active for ease of access.

BD says: Now if only the Mars Society would place a link to it, we would all feel better. You do know what the word "biohazard" means in the nASA document right? NASA is talking about ways to deal with pathogens from Mars. Why isn't the Mars Society concerned about this? Because it puts a dent in your plans to send humans to Mars. Why not admit it. It is so obvious to everyone.

Mark says: Please explain how not discussing something constitutes trying to inspire fear of it? Fear mongering means raising unreasobable fears over an issue."

BD says: ICAMSR does not say that pathogens from Mars are an absolute. We never have. We do however say it is a possibility and therefore more in situ life sciences experiments are necessary before returning any Martian soil and rock samples to Earth. It is fact that Mars Society President Robert Zubrin himself denies any need for planetary protection. Remember those isssue of the Planetary Report (online)? Zubrin's (Mars Scoeity) no concern for planetary protection issues is dangerous. It tells me the Mars Society would risk contamination of the Earth or Mars for the vanity of sending humans to Mars. If life exists on Mars, it would be the most important single scientific discovery in the history of science. It would also be the most valuable. No scientist in their right minds is going to send humans to Mars before we know about whether or not life still exists there.

Mark says: Please explain how not discussing something constitutes trying to inspire fear of it?

BD: Youv'e got to be kidding right? By the Mars Soceity not posting relevant links to planetary protection documents like the one mentioned above it shows that the Mars Society would rather not have its members know about it or be aware of it. It is the one problem you people have no answer for.

Mark says: Fear mongering means raising unreasobable fears over an issue.

BD: We don't fear monger. ICAMSR raises public awareness to the problems of forward and back contamination. It is foll hardy to return smapls of Mars to the Earth if you don't know how any lifeforms would effect the biosphere. Plus, spacecraft missions fail. Like NASA's Polar Lander, Mars Orbiter and even Columbia. So here you have a scenario where technology fails and something bad happens. Now imagine a scenario where an MSR return capsule suffers some mishap and ends up in the bottom of the Pacific Ocena or worse? You don't think this needs to be addressed? Then maybe you should replace Mark Dittmore as the shuttle program manager.

Mark says: You do this by:

A) Using NRC recommendations to treat MSR as hazardous as proof they are thought to be hazardous when in fact the report clearly indicates expectations otherwise.

BD says: No one knows for sure so they?

B) Comparing release of Martian microbes to the impact of small pox on
native Americans without mentioning:

1) That this is a virus evolved along with humans to counter our general
immune systems.

2) How easily that outbreak would have been controlled/mitigated with
modern medicine.

3) Implying a release is likley before tests on the return system are even performed.

BD says: Martian life may have gotten started by Earht microbes transferred there billions of years ago making them likely to be dangerous considering the lenght of time they've had to volve to Martian conditions. No one can predict what they would do here now.

C) Promoting the flu from space concept when totally discredited by the
medical community.

BD: Chandra Wickramasignhe's theory, and though not popular is still a possibility.

D) Promoting space microbes as a mechanism for mass extinction when no evidence for this exists.

BD: We know mass exticntions occured, but no one knows why yet. Pathogens or toxins from extraterrestrial sources are a possibility. That is why there is a COSPAR and NASA planetary protection program. However, planetary protection, forward and back contamination issues never get the media attention they deserve. Instead, the media thinks Mars Society people running around in fake spacesuits in the Utah desert is more newsworthy. How sad. The media goes for cheap tricks rather than ask the hard questions. However, since Goldin left NASA I see the agency trying to put more emphasis on the possibility of finding a biohazard from Mars. It looks like you and the Mars Society will have to deal with it sometime. If Beagle 2 finds organics on Mars in December, the Man on Mars ball game is over for a long time.

BD