NASA presents arguments for life on Mars Fossilized structures in meteorite resemble bacteria on Earth

Clinton calls space summit

Interplanetary trip by rock raises talk of transfer of organisms

August 08, 1996|By Frank D. Roylance | Frank D. Roylance,SUN STAFF

WASHINGTON -- Working late in their laboratory, two NASA scientists were startled when their electron microscope scanned across a tiny, segmented structure that looked for all the world like a string of primitive bacteria, fossilized in rock.

"Is this for real?" they asked themselves.

What stunned them that night a year ago, and what has stunned the world this week, is that the rock was from Mars.

And what they saw looked like signs of Martian life.

The 4.5 billion-year-old meteorite almost certainly was blasted off the surface of Mars by an asteroid or comet collision millions of years ago and fell onto Antarctic ice 13,000 years ago.

The structures and associated organic compounds would constitute the first physical evidence for the existence of life beyond Earth, with implications not just for science, but for philosophy and theology as well.

Assuming that further scientific studies don't reveal it all to be the product of lifeless inorganic chemistry, it would be one of the most momentous scientific discoveries -- and one of the biggest news stories -- of all time.

The discovery surely thrilled NASA geochemists David S. McKay and Everett K. Gibson Jr.

"When I went home, I had difficulty sleeping," Gibson told a packed news conference yesterday at NASA headquarters.

News of their discovery was too hot to contain. It was scheduled for publication in the scientific journal Science on Aug. 16, but word of it had already set the Internet abuzz.

The story hit the news wires Tuesday, forcing NASA to schedule yesterday's news conference.

NASA Administrator Daniel S. Goldin hastily briefed President Clinton, Vice President Al Gore and the congressional leadership this week, and consulted with leaders of the space community around the world.

NASA already had a series of unmanned Mars missions planned, including two due for launch late this year, and Goldin promised a scientific review of their objectives in light of the new discovery.

"What a time to be alive," he said.

If the scientists are right, Clinton said yesterday, "it will surely be one of the most stunning insights into our universe that science has ever uncovered. Its implications are as far-reaching and awe-inspiring as can be imagined."

He said he was "determined that the American space program will put its full intellectual power and technological prowess behind the search for further evidence of life on Mars."

He called for a November White House "space summit" to discuss how the nation should respond to the discovery.

The initial reaction from the Roman Catholic Church -- which reacted with hostility to discoveries by the likes of Galileo and Copernicus that seemed to reduce Earth's supposedly unique status in the universe -- was calm, even cheerful.

The Rev. James A. Wiseman, chairman of the Theology Department at the Catholic University of America in Washington, said, "Theologically, I see no problem. Personally, I have always suspected that there are forms of life elsewhere in this immense universe.

"If theologians, or theists in general, take seriously what is meant by the phrase 'an omnipotent God,' it should not be surprising at all if signs of this creator and life-giver's power were to be found throughout the universe."

A skeptical approach

The scientific community will take a more skeptical approach, however, and Goldin yesterday urged researchers to scrutinize the data and the meteorite.

Dr. William Schopf, a paleobiologist at the University of California in Los Angeles who is not connected with the NASA team, called the NASA investigation "a fine piece of work" and said, "This is not easy science."

But noting that it remained a "preliminary report," he urged caution.

"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence," he said.

Although he agreed that the meteorite is "quite probably" from Mars, and that organic compounds probably formed there 3.6 billion years ago, Schopf said it was too soon to say the compounds got there by way of biological processes.

"The mere presence of organic matter by itself is not definitive of life," he said. Inorganic chemistry could explain everything the NASA team found.

Likewise, the structures identified by the NASA team as fossil bacteria are one-hundredth the size of most terrestrial bacteria, Schopf said, and could be "mineralogic pseudo-fossils," or "foolers."

He said McKay and his colleagues at the Johnson Space Flight Center in Houston and at Stanford University in California must conduct further studies, especially some that would establish whether the supposed Martian bacteria show any fossil evidence of the cell walls and interior chemistry of once-living microbes.

The NASA scientists agreed there are inorganic processes that could produce the compounds and structures they saw combined in spaces just a few hundred-thousandths of an inch across.

"None of this is, by itself, definitive," McKay said. "But taken together, the simplest explanation is that they are the remains of Martian life."

Baltimore Sun Articles
Please note the green-lined linked article text has been applied commercially without any involvement from our newsroom editors, reporters or any other editorial staff.