Of Mars and men

>> NASA planetary scientist Christopher
McKay talks about life, exploration and
the human experience

SKYWARD BOUND: Dr. Christopher McKay

by PATRICK LEJTENYI

The past few years haven’t exactly been spectacular for NASA, the American space agency. Following the Feb. 1, 2003 break-up of the space shuttle Columbia over Texas, killing all seven crew members, an independent investigation board bashed the agency for its careless management and dysfunctional culture. The shuttle program was shelved for two years while top brass tried to figure out where they wanted to go from here.

The answer, it turns out, was Mars. In January 2004, U.S. President Bush announced to a curious nation that he would add $11-billion to NASA’s current five-year, $86-billion budget. The shuttle program will be retired in 2010, and humans will return to the moon by 2020, and this time they won’t leave. A human footprint could be left behind on Mars by the middle of the century.

Dr. Christopher McKay, a planetary scientist with the NASA Ames Research Center’s Space Science Division, is in the thick of the race to Mars. He spoke to the Mirror prior to a talk at McGill earlier this week.

Going global

Any life on Mars is bound to be microbial, tiny, frozen bacteria that might have once evolved into living, breathing organisms. And therein, according to McKay, lies a dilemma. If evidence of life is ever found, he says, competing schools of thought will debate the best way to treat it. One camp thinks that, because life will be a microbe, it’s not worth keeping.

“We destroy bacteria every day when we brush our teeth,” he says. On the other hand, “because life has an intrinsic value, and because it is an alternative life form, we owe it some respect. We can leave it alone, or we can help it by doing things so life becomes widespread and global.”

Any process to help bacteria grow into bug-eyed, ray-gun toting Martians would not, of course, happen overnight. A long process of terraforming—altering the Martian atmosphere to make it similar to that of life-sustaining Earth—would have to ripen Mars from its frozen, waterless state. “We’d be interfering, yes, but interfering in the way we help a sick child who’s suffering from a natural illness.”

Although there is speculation that a massive ocean once covered much of the Mars surface, all of its water is now found in its frozen ice caps and underground. That’s where McKay will be focusing his attention when the next robotic mission to Mars, the Phoenix, lands there some time next year. The Phoenix will conduct on-site analysis of soil and ice samples, which will be closely watched back on Earth.

Humans vs. robots

Still, McKay admits that these “are tough times at NASA.” While he wants to expand human exploration to Mars, he is limited both by engineering and budgetary realities. But he believes that travelling to Mars is inevitable. If there was one positive aspect to the Columbia disaster, he says, it is the refocusing of efforts towards an achievable goal, rather than spinning the scientific wheels. Asked if it’s necessary for humans to go to Mars when robots have been doing a decent job, he says, “It depends on what you consider necessary. Is it necessary to go to France when you can just look at a postcard or buy French wine? Why do anything? Why do arts, or music, or science? Interplanetary travel must be part of the human experience, and science is a part of that. Science shouldn’t be about competition for performance per unit dollar.”

And speaking of dollars, McKay says he hasn’t yet met anyone who advocated mining Martian minerals. He does think, however, that private enterprise, especially space tourism, will play a significant and welcome role in humanity’s rise to the heavens. “A trip to Mars won’t ever be cheap, but comparable I think to a month-long vacation in Europe,” he says.

Stand-in meltdown

In the meantime, McKay has been spending a lot of time here in Canada. Specifically, the ever-balmier Arctic, where the hitherto permanently frozen landscape served as a good stunt double for our inhospitable planetary neighbour. “The weather was the most beautiful I’d ever seen it,” says McKay. “I was running in shorts and a t-shirt and actually had to cool down.”

McKay says global warming is definitely affecting his research, in that the data he’s collected over the past 20 years is now being used for other purposes. “Now the data has changed. The polar regions are viewed as first responders to global warming, so the data is very important.” Asked if he thinks political leaders in Canada and the United States are finally waking up to the problem, he is cautiously optimistic. “There’s more science now, and we’re seeing it as a global challenge,” he says. “I’m happy—indeed, I’m required—to apply my research to this pressing problem.”

McKay will moderate “Origins of Life:
What was the spark of life?” discussion at
McGill’s Leacock 132 (855 Sherbrooke W.),
5–7 p.m. tonight, Oct. 4, free