Greenberg says the planned Europa Jupiter System Mission (please,
Lord, don't let NASA allow some kid give it a cutesy name - not again!)
which won't even be launched until 2020 at the earliest, should carry
a lander because the evidence for that Galilean moon having a liquid
ocean under the ice is obvious and the space agencies need to take
the next step sooner if they want to look for life there.

While using a submersile to explore that alien ocean should always be
on the books, earlier missions might just have to land near a crack or
impact region if they want to find evidence of life. No one still has any
definite answer to why the material in those regions is brown in color or
what it is composed of.

Old established paradigms and political egos are holding us back from better examining what is probably the nearest place to Earth with life,
even more than celestial physics and money.

The book:

Unmasking Europa: The Search for Life on Jupiter’s Ocean Moon (Springer, 2008)

http://www.springer.com/astronomy/book/978-0-387-47936-1

http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2008/11/unmasking_europa.php

http://www.astrobio.net/index.php?option=com_exclusive&task=detail&id=2969

To quote from the last URL:

"With all the evidence in the book for thin ice, why do most planetary scientists continue to support a thick crust interpretation? Greenberg claims the thin ice model has been suppressed by the scientific community.

"It might seem hard to believe anyone would bother to stifle a theory about a frozen moon hundreds of millions of miles away, but Greenberg says that Galileo's team leaders decided prematurely that Europa had thick ice, and afterwards it became politically advantageous to toe that line.

"A cautious resistance to paradigm shifts is reasonable when a model has been serving well. But the isolated-ocean model for Europa had become the canonical paradigm for all the wrong reasons."