4 ms·

> For one, the spacecraft (or the empty capsules) could have been pre-contaminated before their launch. I had a really interesting discussion with someone who

> For one, the spacecraft (or the empty capsules) could have been pre-contaminated before their launch. I had a really interesting discussion with someone who oversaw decontamination protocols and preparations for various satellites, including the JWST. The protocols they use to prep satellites for these types of missions are beyond stringent, and the chemicals they use are exotic as all hell. All this to say, contamination is absolutely possible, but there is so much insane behind the scenes work to control for it that it shouldn’t be thought of as something they might “just forget” or casually missed.

stonemetal12 4y ago
Remember the faster than light neutrinos that turned out to be a loose cable? I doubt they "just forgot", but being perfect is more difficult than making a mistake somewhere in the process. Before they publish I would hope they Quadruple checked for every source of possible contamination. Instead of saying we did it right so obviously nothing went wrong.
- craftsman 4y ago
  I think you're reading too much into the phrase "can be ruled out." I suspect that the leader author was saying "Contamination is possible, but based on our procedures, test methods, etc, the overwhelmingly larger probability is that we did detect <...> in the samples, and that the detection was not from pre- or post-contamination." Could the paper's conclusions be incorrect? Yes, I think everyone--the authors included--will agree that "something could have gone wrong." But pointing out that "something could have gone wrong" is probably not a new idea to most readers.
dekhn 4y ago
I've talked to a few scientists in this area and I found out the Viking project life detection experiments generated a lot of controversey. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/04/science/space/gilbert-v-levin-dead.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/04/science/space/gilbert-v-l...

stonemetal12 4y ago

Remember the faster than light neutrinos that turned out to be a loose cable? I doubt they "just forgot", but being perfect is more difficult than making a mistake somewhere in the process. Before they publish I would hope they Quadruple checked for every source of possible contamination. Instead of saying we did it right so obviously nothing went wrong.

craftsman 4y ago
I think you're reading too much into the phrase "can be ruled out." I suspect that the leader author was saying "Contamination is possible, but based on our procedures, test methods, etc, the overwhelmingly larger probability is that we did detect <...> in the samples, and that the detection was not from pre- or post-contamination." Could the paper's conclusions be incorrect? Yes, I think everyone--the authors included--will agree that "something could have gone wrong." But pointing out that "something could have gone wrong" is probably not a new idea to most readers.

dekhn 4y ago

I've talked to a few scientists in this area and I found out the Viking project life detection experiments generated a lot of controversey. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/04/science/space/gilbert-v-levin-dead.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/04/science/space/gilbert-v-l...