By 
August 4th, 2024
Wait a Minute!
Image credit: Barbara David
On Mars, it’s a wait-a-minute conundrum.
Question: Has life been found on Mars?
The answer: Well, maybe…maybe not.
Clear as mud.
NASA’s Perseverance rover is busily scouting about Jezero Crater on the Red Planet. Indeed, the Mars machinery is doing its assigned job with a key objective that’s fine-tuned for astrobiology, including caching samples that may contain signs of ancient microbial life.
Ken Farley, project scientist for NASA’s Perseverance Mars rover mission.
Image credit: Caltech/Inside Outer Space screengrab
New discovery
On July 25, Ken Farley, project scientist for NASA’s Perseverance Mars rover mission, shared information about a new discovery that is now tagged as “the most puzzling, complex, and potentially important rock yet investigated by Perseverance.”
Farley spoke to a full auditorium of Mars researchers during the 10th International Conference on Mars at Caltech in Pasadena, California.
“So I call this rock ‘the unknown,’ but also tagged the find as “potentially very important.”
Under Sapphire Canyon skies
The rock outcrop is called Cheyava Falls. Perseverance drilled a core from Cheyava Falls, the rover’s 22nd rock sample on July 21, as the robot probed the northern edge of Neretva Vallis, an ancient river valley.
Image credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech/MSSS/Inside Outer Space screengrab
Perseverance obtained a full-length, 6.2 centimeters long core of the rock, filling an onboard sampling tube. The sample is called Sapphire Canyon.
Farley said that sample is a potential biosignature, carefully defining that term: “A potential biosignature is a substance or structure that might have a biological origin, but requires more data or further study before reaching a conclusion.”
Image credit: Caltech/Inside Outer Space screengrab
The Sapphire Canyon sample has a collection of features, possibly several potential biosignatures.
“So I think it is safe to say,” Farley told the attendees, “this rock constitutes a rock that has potential biosignatures in it,” and a sample that “is the strongest case that we have for why sample return should go forward.”
Rethinking underway
That going forward is now stuck in neutral.
The currently being rethought Mars Sample Return effort, due to cost, complexity, and timeliness, is a joint campaign being blueprinted by NASA and the European Space Agency.
Independent reviews had price-tagged that initiative at a whopping $10 billion, perhaps more. No easy undertaking, rocketing specimens of Mars to Earth is an endeavor that entails multiple missions and components.
Mars sample return to Earth – a major undertaking by NASA, the European Space Agency.
Image credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech
But it’s also a project mantra resolute in bringing Mars rock, loose surface material, and gas samples to Earth for detailed laboratory analysis and study.
By using an array of techniques, those specimens on inspection could, quite literally, de-muddy the question of whether or not the Red Planet was an extraterrestrial address for life…or possibly a comfy home for life today.
To view Ken Farley’s intriguing, fact-filled presentation, along with audience reactions, go to:
Posted in 
It’s dead, Jim. Always has been.
The “news” about the new rock found by Perseverance is typical of the kind of tactics NASA uses to entice the public into accepting the Mars Sample Return initiative. In this cleverly designed report about possible signs of ancient microbial life on Mars it concludes that in order to be sure it contains evidence of life we have to bring a sample to Earth to be sure. In other words it is another MSR support article. Fortunately a former NASA Planetary Protection Officer had the guts enough to file a whistle blower spilling the beans about how the sample collection tubes from Perseverance violate planetary protection protocols and cannot be safely returned to earth.
You can read the full whistle blower report “Whistleblower Response to Agency Investigation Report at http://www.icamsr.org or
https://osc.gov/Documents/Public%20Files/FY23/DI-000239;%20DI-21-000325/DI-21-000239%20-%20WB%20Comments_Redacted.pdf
Here are a few excerpts from one of the most important whistle blower reports ever filed against NASA’s current MSR campaign:
“As PPO, since 2009 I advocated for the applicability of PD/NSC-25 to Mars Sample Return: its’ inclusion in NPR 8715.24, although that document took effect after the launch of the Mars2020 mission, serves to confirm the relevance. In light of NASA requirements and US presidential directives, this cover letter provides evidence confirming all of the violations it mentions, except the ‘specific’ qualifier to the public health threat, have occurred.
I filed this disclosure because NASA and the Mars Program at the Jet Propulsion Lab were failing to take appropriate precautions to assure that the Earth will be safe from biological risks associated with bringing samples collected by the M2020 mission to Earth from Mars. The substance of my complaint is that NASA repeatedly refused to take the steps necessary to ensure a future Returned Sample Analysis program would have the ability to differentiate rare Mars organisms from ubiquitous Earth contamination introduced into Mars samples collected for return by the M2020 mission.
NASA justifies waiving planetary protection requirements for low levels of Earth contamination by claiming the probability of Mars biohazards should be low, ignoring decades of international scientific consensus that emphasize the risk is not zero. These decisions violate NASA policies on planetary protection, US regulations including the National Environmental Protection Act and PD/NSC-25 on Experiments with Possible Large-scale Adverse Environmental Effects, and Article IX of the Outer Space Treaty. Some possible negative consequences of a Mars biohazard release are illustrated by the recent global COVID pandemic: massive societal upheaval and many trillions of dollars in economic damage. Further, actions taken by NASA and the Mars Exploration community after my initial filing have introduced conflicts of interest into the management of planetary protection, both at NASA and also within the larger US government, potentially leading to lax oversight of commercial space exploration and collaboration with international partners. If consistent and appropriate regulatory oversight of planetary protection is not implemented before Mars materials are brought to Earth — by either public or private missions — undetected martian biohazards could be released into the environment of the Earth and cause potentially-global negative consequences. The amount of Earth biological contamination known to be present on Mars2020 hardware collecting samples at Mars means biosignatures will certainly be detected in samples, if the hardware is returned to Earth. The safety of Earth should not rely on assuming that no Mars biohazards are present, just because Earth contaminants were found.
If the US and EU taxpayers who are funding Mars Sample Return truly understood the risks, would they really consider it worthwhile to spend additional billions of dollars/Euros to repeat the 50-year-old mistakes made by Viking — not to mention possibly putting the environment of the Earth at risk from undetected Mars organisms in samples brought here?”
The “news” about the new rock found by Perseverance is typical of the kind of tactics NASA uses to entice the public into accepting the Mars Sample Return initiative. In this cleverly designed report about possible signs of ancient microbial life on Mars it concludes that in order to be sure it contains evidence of life we have to bring a sample to Earth to be sure. In other words it is another MSR support article. Fortunately a former NASA Planetary Protection Officer had the guts enough to file a whistle blower spilling the beans about how the sample collection tubes from Perseverance violate planetary protection protocols and cannot be safely returned to earth.
You can read the full whistle blower report “Whistleblower Response to Agency Investigation Report at http://www.icamsr.org or
https://osc.gov/Documents/Public%20Files/FY23/DI-000239;%20DI-21-000325/DI-21-000239%20-%20WB%20Comments_Redacted.pdf
Here are a few excerpts from one of the most important whistle blower reports ever filed against NASA’s current MSR campaign:
“As PPO, since 2009 I advocated for the applicability of PD/NSC-25 to Mars Sample Return: its’ inclusion in NPR 8715.24, although that document took effect after the launch of the Mars2020 mission, serves to confirm the relevance. In light of NASA requirements and US presidential directives, this cover letter provides evidence confirming all of the violations it mentions, except the ‘specific’ qualifier to the public health threat, have occurred.
I filed this disclosure because NASA and the Mars Program at the Jet Propulsion Lab were failing to take appropriate precautions to assure that the Earth will be safe from biological risks associated with bringing samples collected by the M2020 mission to Earth from Mars. The substance of my complaint is that NASA repeatedly refused to take the steps necessary to ensure a future Returned Sample Analysis program would have the ability to differentiate rare Mars organisms from ubiquitous Earth contamination introduced into Mars samples collected for return by the M2020 mission.
NASA justifies waiving planetary protection requirements for low levels of Earth contamination by claiming the probability of Mars biohazards should be low, ignoring decades of international scientific consensus that emphasize the risk is not zero. These decisions violate NASA policies on planetary protection, US regulations including the National Environmental Protection Act and PD/NSC-25 on Experiments with Possible Large-scale Adverse Environmental Effects, and Article IX of the Outer Space Treaty. Some possible negative consequences of a Mars biohazard release are illustrated by the recent global COVID pandemic: massive societal upheaval and many trillions of dollars in economic damage. Further, actions taken by NASA and the Mars Exploration community after my initial filing have introduced conflicts of interest into the management of planetary protection, both at NASA and also within the larger US government, potentially leading to lax oversight of commercial space exploration and collaboration with international partners. If consistent and appropriate regulatory oversight of planetary protection is not implemented before Mars materials are brought to Earth — by either public or private missions — undetected martian biohazards could be released into the environment of the Earth and cause potentially-global negative consequences. The amount of Earth biological contamination known to be present on Mars2020 hardware collecting samples at Mars means biosignatures will certainly be detected in samples, if the hardware is returned to Earth. The safety of Earth should not rely on assuming that no Mars biohazards are present, just because Earth contaminants were found.
If the US and EU taxpayers who are funding Mars Sample Return truly understood the risks, would they really consider it worthwhile to spend additional billions of dollars/Euros to repeat the 50-year-old mistakes made by Viking — not to mention possibly putting the environment of the Earth at risk from undetected Mars organisms in samples brought here?”
Sincerely,
Barry E. DiGregorio – Director for the International Committee Against Mars Sample Return
The “news” about the new rock found by Perseverance is typical of the kind of tactics NASA uses to entice the public into accepting the Mars Sample Return initiative. In this cleverly designed report about possible signs of ancient microbial life on Mars it concludes that in order to be sure it contains evidence of life we have to bring a sample to Earth to be sure. In other words it is another MSR support article. Fortunately a former NASA Planetary Protection Officer had the guts enough to file a whistle blower spilling the beans about how the sample collection tubes from Perseverance violate planetary protection protocols and cannot be safely returned to earth.
You can read the full whistle blower report “Whistleblower Response to Agency Investigation Report at http://www.icamsr.org or
https://osc.gov/Documents/Public%20Files/FY23/DI-000239;%20DI-21-000325/DI-21-000239%20-%20WB%20Comments_Redacted.pdf
Here are a few excerpts from one of the most important whistle blower reports ever filed against NASA’s current MSR campaign:
“As PPO, since 2009 I advocated for the applicability of PD/NSC-25 to Mars Sample Return: its’ inclusion in NPR 8715.24, although that document took effect after the launch of the Mars2020 mission, serves to confirm the relevance. In light of NASA requirements and US presidential directives, this cover letter provides evidence confirming all of the violations it mentions, except the ‘specific’ qualifier to the public health threat, have occurred.
I filed this disclosure because NASA and the Mars Program at the Jet Propulsion Lab were failing to take appropriate precautions to assure that the Earth will be safe from biological risks associated with bringing samples collected by the M2020 mission to Earth from Mars. The substance of my complaint is that NASA repeatedly refused to take the steps necessary to ensure a future Returned Sample Analysis program would have the ability to differentiate rare Mars organisms from ubiquitous Earth contamination introduced into Mars samples collected for return by the M2020 mission.
NASA justifies waiving planetary protection requirements for low levels of Earth contamination by claiming the probability of Mars biohazards should be low, ignoring decades of international scientific consensus that emphasize the risk is not zero. These decisions violate NASA policies on planetary protection, US regulations including the National Environmental Protection Act and PD/NSC-25 on Experiments with Possible Large-scale Adverse Environmental Effects, and Article IX of the Outer Space Treaty. Some possible negative consequences of a Mars biohazard release are illustrated by the recent global COVID pandemic: massive societal upheaval and many trillions of dollars in economic damage. Further, actions taken by NASA and the Mars Exploration community after my initial filing have introduced conflicts of interest into the management of planetary protection, both at NASA and also within the larger US government, potentially leading to lax oversight of commercial space exploration and collaboration with international partners. If consistent and appropriate regulatory oversight of planetary protection is not implemented before Mars materials are brought to Earth — by either public or private missions — undetected martian biohazards could be released into the environment of the Earth and cause potentially-global negative consequences. The amount of Earth biological contamination known to be present on Mars2020 hardware collecting samples at Mars means biosignatures will certainly be detected in samples, if the hardware is returned to Earth. The safety of Earth should not rely on assuming that no Mars biohazards are present, just because Earth contaminants were found.
If the US and EU taxpayers who are funding Mars Sample Return truly understood the risks, would they really consider it worthwhile to spend additional billions of dollars/Euros to repeat the 50-year-old mistakes made by Viking — not to mention possibly putting the environment of the Earth at risk from undetected Mars organisms in samples brought here?”
Barry E. DiGregorio – Director for ICAMSR