Article by Kirill Kurevlev December 27, 2020 (sputniknews.com)
• NASA plans to land the Perseverance rover on Mars in February 2021. The agency plans to return US astronauts to the surface of the Moon by the end of 2024, and a manned mission to Mars by the early 2030s. SpaceX CEO Elon Musk is determined to land humans on Mars and start a colony by 2026.
• “[M]icrobial life is [what] we’re most likely to find within our solar system,” states NASA’s chief scientist, Dr. James Green. “Intelligent life we may find outside of our solar system…” Dr. Green, believes that the discovery of even microbial life on planets like Mars may allow future astronauts to be genetically engineered into being able to live in the same environments. Dr. Green says that the discovery of life in the Solar System – any life – would completely change the worldview of mankind.
• Studying life that has evolved in an environment completely different from Earth would provide an example of how they’ve developed mechanisms to survive in it. Says Dr. Green, “[I]f we’re able to crack the concept of being able to live and grow using, using new changes in our DNA structure that maybe other life forms have really done, then we can go anywhere in the galaxy we want to, I mean, it just opens up everything!”
Dr. James Green
For many years of manned missions, scientists have been searching for other planets and moons that could be suitable for human life. However, most of them present very harsh conditions for us. The problem may be solved with a little help from Martians.
American National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) chief scientist, Dr. James Green, believes that the discovery of life on other Solar System planets, like Mars, may allow future astronauts to be genetically engineered into being able to live in the same environments, Green said in a podcast of “Gravity Assist”.
According to the scientist, studying life that has evolved in an environment completely different from Earth would provide an example of how they’ve developed mechanisms to survive in it.
“[…] if we’re able to crack that, if we’re able to crack the concept of being able to live and grow using, using new changes in our DNA structure that maybe other life forms have really done, then we can go anywhere in the galaxy we want to, I mean, it just opens up everything!”, the physicist stated.
FAIR USE NOTICE: This page contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. ExoNews.org distributes this material for the purpose of news reporting, educational research, comment and criticism, constituting Fair Use under 17 U.S.C § 107. Please contact the Editor at ExoNews with any copyright issue.
Below is my video blog on the Artemis Accords signed on October 13 between the United State and seven allied nations with national space programs: Australia, Canada, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, United Arab Emirates and United Kingdom. While the language is designed to fit into the provisions of the Outer Space Treaty ratified by UN member nations in 1967, these are bilateral accords with the US, and the UN is merely a place where the accords are placed for international recognition.
The Artemis Accords contain mutual defense provisions if any nations experience harmful interference in their explorations of the Moon, Mars, asteroids and minor planets. This is first step towards a Space NATO, and eventually a future Star Fleet.
The choice of Artemis as the name for the accords is also very significant symbolically given what has been happening in space in terms of space weapons, false flag events, galactic slave trade, etc., by major nations such as China and rogue secret space programs. Artemis was the Goddess of the forest, hunt, Moon, and righteous behavior. The hidden intent of the Artemis Accords is to clean up these rogue space programs, ensure ethical behavior in space, and to rein in Communist China, which plans to become the undisputed hegemon on Earth and in Space.
Article by Jeff Foust July 23, 2020 (spacenews.com)
• On July 23rd, the White House released a new National Space Council report entitled, “A New Era for Deep Space Exploration and Development”, which outlines how various government agencies, as well as international and commercial partners, will play a role in implementing a national space policy to include a return to the Moon and human missions to Mars.
• The report, requested in August 2019 by Vice President Mike Pence as chairman of the National Space Council, builds on an existing ‘SPD 1’ policy directive and a 2018 National Space Strategy which calls for a sustainable return to the Moon and “peace through strength in the space domain.” It’s not just about NASA or Space Force. It’s about an integrated approach to space exploration and development.
• Space exploration strategy will focus on three major functions: a) commercializing low Earth orbit activities; b) creating a permanently occupied Moon base; and c) sending humans to Mars.
• To accomplish this, the report identifies five roles for the government: a) to create a “secure” space environment with space traffic management; b) support commercial activities in space; c) fund the research and development of key space technologies; d) back space-related scientific activities; and e) being a “reliable customer” to the private space industry by investing in space infrastructure.
• The report outlines how existing policies will be implemented by NASA and other government agencies such as the Departments of Commerce, Defense and Transportation. Providing an idea of how the US government should proceed in the development of space should prove useful when forming international partnerships. “This is hopefully a useful communications tool for dialogue with other space agencies, expressing strategic intent,” said one government official.
• A ‘Users’ Advisory Group’ argued for more attention to academia in the strategy, which was later incorporated into the report. NASA feedback led to more discussion about ‘Low Earth Orbit’ commercialization.
• But the report warns against moving ahead too quickly. “Some people argue that humanity is destined to develop space settlements and become a ‘multi-planetary species,’” the report states. But in order to develop space commerce and habitation, we first need to develop both the technical knowledge of the use of space resources as well as economic rationales to sustain such settlements. “At present, we do not yet know if any of these conditions are possible,” the report concludes.
WASHINGTON — A new National Space Council report argues that the exploration and development of space must be an integrated effort that involves not just NASA but other government agencies, as well as international and commercial partners.
The report, “A New Era for Deep Space Exploration and Development,” released July 23 by the White House, is intended to outline how various government agencies will play a role in implementing national space policies, including a human return to the moon and eventual human missions to Mars.
Vice President Mike Pence
“Although NASA is, and will remain, the primary United States Government entity for civil space exploration efforts, other departments and agencies have increasingly important roles to play in space,” the report states.
The report builds on existing policies, in particular Space Policy Directive (SPD) 1, which called for a sustainable return to the moon led by NASA with various partners, as well as a 2018 National Space Strategy, a broader space policy document that called for “peace through strength in the space domain.”
A senior administration official, speaking on background, said that the new report was intended to emphasize an integrated approach to space exploration and development. “A lot of people weren’t aware of how our approach on space was not just about NASA, not just about Space Force,” the official said. “The point of the report was to build on SPD-1 and also to paint a whole-of-government picture about what we were doing.”
The report describes three major areas of effort in that overall space exploration strategy: commercializing low Earth orbit activities, returning humans to the moon permanently and then sending humans to Mars. Those elements, the report says, also support science and education.
To carry out that strategy, the report identifies five major roles for government: promoting a “secure and predictable” space environment that involves both addressing space traffic management as well as regulatory reforms, supporting commercial activities in space, funding research and development of key space technologies, investing in private space infrastructure by being a “reliable customer” and backing space-related scientific activities.
FAIR USE NOTICE: This page contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. ExoNews.org distributes this material for the purpose of news reporting, educational research, comment and criticism, constituting Fair Use under 17 U.S.C § 107. Please contact the Editor at ExoNews with any copyright issue.
by Abraham Loeb February 15, 2019 (scientificamerican.com)
• Because the Earth is prone to catastrophes from time to time, it would be prudent to spread Earth-like terrestrial life to other worlds. Yet, as On Walden Pond author Henry David Thoreau wrote, “…we are earnest to explore and learn all things, we require that all things be mysterious and unexplorable, that land and sea be indefinitely wild, unsurveyed and unfathomed…”. Thoreau raises a fundamental question in space exploration. Should we allow ourselves to terraform planets in an effort to make them habitable and seed objects in space with life as we know it, or should we leave nature out there to its own devices, intact and pure?
• Rather than descending upon a ‘new world’ in order to annex and appropriate it to our own designs, as the Spanish did when they invaded South and Central America in the early sixteenth century, perhaps we should be mindful of the natural aspects of existing extraterrestrial “Walden-like” ponds. Perhaps we should take advantage of the opportunity to appreciate other life-forms that have existed before our arrival.
• As we explore nature in extraterrestrial ponds, might life there resemble what we see on Earth, or take new forms? Could it follow a different chemical network? Could it flourish in liquids other than water? Could it adjust to conditions more extreme and longer lasting than on Earth?
• It would be particularly shocking to find out that our new pond included creatures far more intelligent than we are. For if alien civilizations had been already come there, they would have already contaminated its nature by artificial intent. There is no denying that it would be more poetic to find unspoiled the nature of our new extraterrestrial pond.
• At the same time, nothing done by humans really matters in the big scheme of the universe. Humans have access to an extremely limited fraction of the cosmos. So the human imprint on the cosmic stage is destined to remain negligible. Perhaps we should limit our cosmic ambitions in light of this perspective. As Thoreau said, “Let us first be as simple and well as Nature ourselves.”
• Cosmic modesty would leave us with the sole desire of embedding ourselves in the true nature of an extraterrestrial world, soaking in its beauty as spectators not reformers, and suppressing ego-motivated plans for space colonization.
In his celebrated book On Walden Pond, Henry David Thoreau wrote: “We need the tonic of wildness…. At the same time that we are earnest to explore and learn all things, we require that all things be mysterious and unexplorable, that land and sea be indefinitely wild, unsurveyed and unfathomed by us because unfathomable. We can never have enough of nature.”
Thoreau raises a fundamental question in space exploration. Should we allow ourselves to terraform planets in an effort to make them habitable and seed objects in space with life as we know it, or should we leave nature out there to its own devices, intact and pure?
On the one hand, it would be prudent not to keep all our eggs in one basket; we might choose to spread terrestrial life to other worlds in an effort to reduce the risk of it being eliminated by catastrophes on Earth. But at the same time, one might worry that by doing so we could unleash unforeseen forces that would modify natural ecosystems in ways that could get out of hand. Moreover, artificial seeding of Earth life would muddy the waters in extraterrestrial “Walden-like” ponds. It would deprive us from the opportunity to find out if other life-forms may have existed before our arrival.
Such an impact might resemble the effect of the Spanish invasion of South and Central America, which decimated the rich culture of local populations such as the Maya. For this reason, NASA enforces tight regulations on the sterilization of space vehicles in an effort to avoid contamination of space targets with terrestrial microbes.
As we explore nature in extraterrestrial ponds, the key question is whether life there resembles what we see on Earth or takes new forms. Could it follow a different chemical network? Could it flourish in liquids other than water? Could it adjust to conditions more extreme and last longer than on Earth? But most important, how intelligent is it? It would be particularly shocking to find out that our expanded habitat includes creatures that are far smarter than we are.
Our loyalty to Thoreau’s legacy would depend on whether we are alone, for if alien civilizations had been already engaged in such activities, then nature had been contaminated by artificial intent and there is no way to find it pure and primitive.
FAIR USE NOTICE: This page contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. ExoNews.org distributes this material for the purpose of news reporting, educational research, comment and criticism, constituting Fair Use under 17 U.S.C § 107. Please contact the Editor at ExoNews with any copyright issue.
• With all the suffering in the world — starvation, disease, persecution, and natural disasters — it is often asked, why should we spend public money on an enterprise like fundamental scientific research?
• A NASA rocket scientist named Ernst Stuhlinger responded to this question in 1970. Stuhlinger dreamed of a manned mission to Mars as early as 1958, and advocated for increased investment in science and exploration throughout his entire life. In 2008 he passed away, at the age of 94, as one of the last surviving members of Operation Paperclip. Stuhlinger said:
• – Goals of high challenge provide strong motivation for innovative work which serves as a catalyst for further lofty goals.
• – A mission to Mars, for example, would bring new technologies worth many times the cost of its implementation.
• – We need more knowledge in physics and chemistry, in biology and physiology, and very particularly in medicine to cope with all these problems.
• – We need more knowledge in physics and chemistry, in biology and physiology, and in medicine to cope with all these problems which threaten man’s life: hunger, disease, contamination of food and water, and environmental pollution.
• – We need new material and methods, to invent better technical systems, to improve manufacturing procedures, to lengthen the lifetimes of instruments, and even to discover new laws of nature.
• – Each year, about a thousand technical innovations generated in the space program find their ways into our earthly technology where they lead to better kitchen appliances and farm equipment, better sewing machines and radios, better ships and airplanes, better weather forecasting and storm warning, better communications, better medical instruments, better utensils and tools for everyday life.
• – Higher food production through survey and assessment from orbit, and better food distribution through improved international relations, are only two examples of how profoundly the space program will impact life on earth.
• – The space program is taking over a function which for three or four thousand years has been the sad prerogative of wars.
• – Traveling to the Moon and eventually to Mars and to other planets is a venture which we should undertake now. In the long run, space exploration will contribute more to the solution of the grave problems we are facing here on earth than many other potential projects.
• – This will become a better earth, not only because of all the new technological and scientific knowledge which we will apply to the betterment of life, but also because we are developing a far deeper appreciation of our earth, of life, and of man.
As vast as our observable Universe is and as much as we can see, it’s only a tiny fraction of what must be out there.
Around the country and around the world, there is no shortage of human suffering. Poverty, disease, violence, hurricanes, wildfire and more are constantly plaguing humanity, and even our best efforts thus far can’t address all of everybody’s needs. Many are looking for places to cut funding, ostensibly to divert more to humanitarian needs, and one of the first places that comes up in conversation is “extraneous” spending on unnecessary scientific research. What good is it to conduct microgravity experiments when children are starving? Why smash particles together or pursue the lowest possible temperatures when Puerto Rico is still without power? And why study the esoteric mating habits of endangered species when nuclear war threatens our planet? To put it more succinctly:
With all the suffering in the world — starvation, disease, persecution, and natural disasters — why should we spend public money on an enterprise like fundamental scientific research?
This is a line of thinking that’s come up repeatedly throughout history. Yes, it’s short-sighted, in that it fails to recognize that our greatest problems require long-term investment, and that society’s greatest advances come about through hard work, research, development, and often are only realized years, decades, or generations after that investment is made. Investing in science is investing in the betterment of humanity.
But that’s not always an easy path to see, particularly when suffering is right in front of you. Back in early 1970, shortly after the first Apollo landing, a nun working in Zambia, Africa, Sister Mary Jucunda, wrote to NASA. She asked how they could justify spending billions on the Apollo program when children were starving to death. If one pictures these two images side-by-side, it hardly seems fair.
To invest in any one thing means to not invest in something else, but both science/space exploration and humanitarian relief are worthy of the investment of human resources.
The letter somehow made it to the desk of one of the top rocket scientists at NASA: Ernst Stuhlinger. At the time, Stuhlinger, one of the scientists brought to the United States as part of Operation Paperclip at the conclusion of World War II, was serving as the Associate Director of Science at NASA. Facing an accusation of inhumanity must have been particularly painful for someone who was still often accused of being a Nazi for his role in the German rocket program, but Stuhlinger was unshaken. He responded by writing the following letter, reprinted in its entirety, below. (It’s long, and it only contained one picture, but it’s arguably even more relevant today than it was in 1970.)
Ernst Stuhlinger and Werner Von Braun
Your letter was one of many which are reaching me every day, but it has touched me more deeply than all the others because it came so much from the depths of a searching mind and a compassionate heart. I will try to answer your question as best as I possibly can.
First, however, I would like to express my great admiration for you, and for all your many brave sisters, because you are dedicating your lives to the noblest cause of man: help for his fellowmen who are in need.
You asked in your letter how I could suggest the expenditures of billions of dollars for a voyage to Mars, at a time when many children on this earth are starving to death. I know that you do not expect an answer such as “Oh, I did not know that there are children dying from hunger, but from now on I will desist from any kind of space research until mankind has solved that problem!” In fact, I have known of famined children long before I knew that a voyage to the planet Mars is technically feasible. However, I believe, like many of my friends, that traveling to the Moon and eventually to Mars and to other planets is a venture which we should undertake now, and I even believe that this project, in the long run, will contribute more to the solution of these grave problems we are facing here on earth than many other potential projects of help which are debated and discussed year after year, and which are so extremely slow in yielding tangible results.
Before trying to describe in more detail how our space program is contributing to the solution of our earthly problems, I would like to relate briefly a supposedly true story, which may help support the argument. About 400 years ago, there lived a count in a small town in Germany. He was one of the benign counts, and he gave a large part of his income to the poor in his town. This was much appreciated, because poverty was abundant during medieval times, and there were epidemics of the plague which ravaged the country frequently. One day, the count met a strange man. He had a workbench and little laboratory in his house, and he labored hard during the daytime so that he could afford a few hours every evening to work in his laboratory. He ground small lenses from pieces of glass; he mounted the lenses in tubes, and he used these gadgets to look at very small objects. The count was particularly fascinated by the tiny creatures that could be observed with the strong magnification, and which he had never seen before. He invited the man to move with his laboratory to the castle, to become a member of the count’s household, and to devote henceforth all his time to the development and perfection of his optical gadgets as a special employee of the count.
The townspeople, however, became angry when they realized that the count was wasting his money, as they thought, on a stunt without purpose. “We are suffering from this plague” they said, “while he is paying that man for a useless hobby!” But the count remained firm. “I give you as much as I can afford,” he said, “but I will also support this man and his work, because I know that someday something will come out of it!”
Indeed, something very good came out of this work, and also out of similar work done by others at other places: the microscope. It is well known that the microscope has contributed more than any other invention to the progress of medicine, and that the elimination of the plague and many other contagious diseases from most parts of the world is largely a result of studies which the microscope made possible.
The count, by retaining some of his spending money for research and discovery, contributed far more to the relief of human suffering than he could have contributed by giving all he could possibly spare to his plague-ridden community.
The situation which we are facing today is similar in many respects. The President of the United States is spending about 200 billion dollars in his yearly budget. This money goes to health, education, welfare, urban renewal, highways, transportation, foreign aid, defense, conservation, science, agriculture and many installations inside and outside the country. About 1.6 percent of this national budget was allocated to space exploration this year. The space program includes Project Apollo, and many other smaller projects in space physics, space astronomy, space biology, planetary projects, earth resources projects, and space engineering. To make this expenditure for the space program possible, the average American taxpayer with 10,000 dollars income per year is paying about 30 tax dollars for space. The rest of his income, 9,970 dollars, remains for his subsistence, his recreation, his savings, his other taxes, and all his other expenditures.
You will probably ask now: “Why don’t you take 5 or 3 or 1 dollar out of the 30 space dollars which the average American taxpayer is paying, and send these dollars to the hungry children?” To answer this question, I have to explain briefly how the economy of this country works. The situation is very similar in other countries. The government consists of a number of departments (Interior, Justice, Health, Education and Welfare, Transportation, Defense, and others) and the bureaus (National Science Foundation, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and others). All of them prepare their yearly budgets according to their assigned missions, and each of them must defend its budget against extremely severe screening by congressional committees, and against heavy pressure for economy from the Bureau of the Budget and the President. When the funds are finally appropriated by Congress, they can be spent only for the line items specified and approved in the budget.
The budget of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, naturally, can contain only items directly related to aeronautics and space. If this budget were not approved by Congress, the funds proposed for it would not be available for something else; they would simply not be levied from the taxpayer, unless one of the other budgets had obtained approval for a specific increase which would then absorb the funds not spent for space. You realize from this brief discourse that support for hungry children, or rather a support in addition to what the United States is already contributing to this very worthy cause in the form of foreign aid, can be obtained only if the appropriate department submits a budget line item for this purpose, and if this line item is then approved by Congress.
You may ask now whether I personally would be in favor of such a move by our government. My answer is an emphatic yes. Indeed, I would not mind at all if my annual taxes were increased by a number of dollars for the purpose of feeding hungry children, wherever they may live.
FAIR USE NOTICE: This page contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. ExoNews.org distributes this material for the purpose of news reporting, educational research, comment and criticism, constituting Fair Use under 17 U.S.C § 107. Please contact the Editor at ExoNews with any copyright issue.
believes that the discovery of life on other Solar System planets, like Mars, may allow future astronauts to be genetically engineered into being able to live in the same environments, Green said in a podcast of “Gravity Assist”.
WASHINGTON — A new National Space Council report argues that the exploration and development of space must be an integrated effort that involves not just NASA but other government agencies, as well as international and commercial partners.
