interfering with evolution

[Rhythmdvl]

Sometime in the near future… a vast quantity of liquid water is detected on the surface of one of Neptune's moons. Subsequent visits by unmanned probes send back images that strongly suggest life. Most of the surface of the oceans and much of the exposed land of the coastal areas are covered in fibrous mats. That it is life is further reinforced by later probe visits that detect strong plumes of oxygen emanating from these mats. By now, the moon has been studied for close to thirty years by unmanned probes maintaining their orbit. Sending yet another unmanned mission to study the moon will yield results, but the decreasing marginal return of each probe has given rise to strong pressure to land on the surface, collect samples, and return those samples to earth.

As the mission is planned, several voices raise ethical concerns. Do we, as a species, have the right to interfere with the evolution of life on an entire planet? We landed on Mars in search of life, but this is life that is, for all intents and purposes, already known to exist. Our presence there, by way of stowaway bacteria or through the importation of foreign chemicals (remember, this is just a small moon), has the potential to drastically alter the course of evolution on that planet. Would it make a difference if there were signs that the mats were exhibiting signs of intelligence (i.e. they spelled out 'welcome'?)

Also, are there concerns about bringing a sample back to Earth? The use of radioactive materials in space vehicles remains controversial, especially when they are using the Earth to slingshot out to other planets. Bringing a probe that had been to Neptune and back safely to Earth is an engineering challenge on par with those spacecraft. Should the vessel fail to remain intact during reentry, it is possible that the foreign material inside could be dispersed to the atmosphere. Considering the damage Cane Toads, Zebra Muscles, Norway Rats, Kudzu, etc. have done to ecosystems around the planet, there is a great risk to life on this planet should a completely alien life form survive and reproduce.

I tried to search the archives for terraforming which has similar ethical concerns, but found nothing. Do any dopers out there have an opinion on this?

Thanks for listening,

Rhythmdvl

[JonF]

Well, I don't have much to discuss, but there's certainly plenty of information out there, and lots of people have thought about it.

Planetary Protection Bibliography

Planetary Protection Provisions For Robotic Extraterrestrial Missions

Mars Pathfinder: Planetary Protection Requirements

Guardian of the Planet

An Exobiological Strategy for Mars Exploration

[Ptahlis]

I find nothing especially problematic about either situation from a moral standpoint. Our species makes use of other life forms as we see fit already, and its location is not really relevant to me in a moral framework. (Note that I am not advocating enslaving ET or the Vulcans-- sentience falls into a different category than seaweed.)

From a scientific standpoint, we should be extraordinarily careful! If we were to place an environment like that at such risk, it may no longer be there to study and learn from.

I have to take issue slightly with the term "damage" when people speak of things like kudzu or multifloral rose. Just because a plant or animal becomes wildly successful in a new home and changes the status quo, that doesn't equate to "damage." There may be a loss of biodiversity as the ecosystem adjusts, but the idea that it is somehow damaged merely because man was an agent somewhere in the process is not valid. Ecosystems adjust, sometimes sacrificing one or more species in favor of others. Sometimes this benefits us, and sometimes it doesn't.

[Duck Duck Goose]

You're asking Captain Kirk if (a) we ought to violate the Prime Directive, and (b) whether it's a good idea to bring back some of that odd green scum in a Tupperware container?

(a) Certainly not. Wait--these people don't have a CONSTITUTION?! Phasers on stun...

(b) Of course. We're on a 5-year mission to seek out new life. Wait--let me make sure the lid is on tight...oops...got some on me...oh no oh no get it off me

[Rhythmdvl]

Heh… I never thought of it as a Star Trek question. But there it is, and put much more eloquently than I did. Do we violate El Primo Directivo?

Ptahlis I understand your hesitation to use the word damage. Species do adapt and do migrate on their own from continent to continent. But if I landed on the shores of the Galapagos tomorrow and let looks a pack of wild dogs, wild boars and norway rats, the ecosystem would be quite different within a short span of time. How would you describe the effects? Would that not be damage? If landing a spacecraft chock full of rabbits on the Moon would have the same effect, you do not see any problem with that?

[tracer]

Ptahlis wrote:

Note that I am not advocating enslaving ET or the Vulcans-- sentience falls into a different category than seaweed.

What if it were sentient seaweed?

[Ptahlis]

I don't disagree that damage is possible, just the way any change that is caused by man intentionally or otherwise is defined as damage by some folks.

I wouldn't have a problem with changing an ecosystem if there were legitimate goals. We do it now with agriculture, dams, levees, heck even a new strip mall going up. Everywhere we go we have an impact on the ecosystem, and sometimes it's a major one with unforeseen and unfortunate consequences. We hem species in, lose them or kill them off entirely, and increase the populations of others. It is one of the prices of admission. We cannot act at all without having these effects.

However, just because I don't think a planetary quarantine would necessarily be in order, that doesn't mean I think we should completely eradicate a native ecosystem in favor of something we put down. Things do have a certain amount of intrinsic value for esthetic and scientific reasons even if they are of no use to us otherwise. Like any other complex situation, I expect there would be a LOT of argument about how much change is appropriate, and the forces of exploration, exploitation, and conservation would all be duking it out in the political arena.