Slashdot Mirror


ESA's Scientist Suggests A Noah's Ark On the Moon

13.7BillionYears writes "Many are familiar with a supermarket tabloid (whose name eludes me) offering ridiculous headlines, one of the most famous being 'Noah's Ark Found on the Moon!' In an ironic twist, that one may yet come to pass. The BBC reports that the European Space Agency's chief scientist, Dr. Bernard Foing, has said that there should be a Noah's Ark on the Moon consisting of a repository for the DNA of every single species of plant and animal, in case the Earth is destroyed by an asteroid or nuclear holocaust. One wonders how you'd go about indexing every life form including undiscovered species and how you'd protect the DNA from radiation."

102 comments

  1. Ob Biblical by daeley · · Score: 3, Funny

    One wonders how you'd go about indexing every life form...

    Two-by-two, of course!

    --
    I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate.
    1. Re:Ob Biblical by Tyreth · · Score: 1

      Carved onto stone tablets, of course. Everyone knows this form of record lasts the longest.

  2. how you'd protect the DNA from radiation... by Libertarian_Geek · · Score: 1

    How about just reference the patterns without the actual molecules. AKA print out a hard copy.

    --

    www.facebook.com/DareDefendOurRights

    www.fairtax.org
    1. Re:how you'd protect the DNA from radiation... by mbstone · · Score: 1

      EPROMS, my boy, EPROMS. The kind where you zap the bits onto the chip with high voltage. Or if you don't think the Aliens would have an IC Master or National TTL databook handy, there are always -diodes-. About a billion 1N34s soldered into double-helixes ought to do the trick....

    2. Re:how you'd protect the DNA from radiation... by UranusReallyHertz · · Score: 2, Informative

      EPROMS are only good for about 10 years, and thats without all the radiation theyd get from being in space. I think Charles Stross had the right idea with using gold-and-diamond optical discs.

      --
      Smoking is an expensive, slow, and unreliable method of suicide.
  3. It's not the worst idea by cephyn · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's not that illogical. It's just a little odd. I mean, so we get a bunch of earth DNA up there. So what? Personally I think it makes more sense to populate the moon and mars and beyond with people, instead of just sending DNA. Who's gonna be able to replicate it and recreate the living earth if we're all dead or bombed back into the stone age? Or what if it gets destroyed in the 2112 moon vs. earth war? Seems like more reasons NOT to do it than to do it. And any ET's that happen upon a DNA stash would probably be very wary of bringing it back to life.

    --
    Moo.
    1. Re:It's not the worst idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And any ET's that happen upon a DNA stash would probably be very wary of bringing it back to life.

      Except us, because we're just stupid when it comes to things like that...

    2. Re:It's not the worst idea by cephyn · · Score: 1

      well that couldnt be helped. she IS pretty hot...

      --
      Moo.
    3. Re:It's not the worst idea by eingram · · Score: 4, Funny

      And any ET's that happen upon a DNA stash would probably be very wary of bringing it back to life.

      Unless they're like us!

      Jurassic Park 4, anyone? Aliens setup a park to show an extinct race, but when the power fails, the extinct race starts climbing over the walls and killing... each other! 4 billion years in the making!

      Of course, they could probably just load the DNA into Random ET Super Computer, hit the "Go" button, and watch it all unfold in a computer simulation with x number of outcomes. Hmm.

    4. Re:It's not the worst idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is DNA by itself good enough? Isn't a human required to bear another human with human DNA?

    5. Re:It's not the worst idea by Zemrec · · Score: 1

      No. There's plenty of examples of one species acting as a surrogate mother for another's offspring. In fact in plenty of sci-fi books, movies, and games creatures are birthed through artificial mechanical "wombs".

    6. Re:It's not the worst idea by Rei · · Score: 1

      DNA alone is not enough. If you were just given a bunch of code for some sort of random alien, you couldn't do anything with it. DNA is only one part of the system - you need to preserve information about the other cellular components (and often their positions, folding states, etc, for a given point of time) as well.

      DNA is not life; it is just one particularly complex part of it.

      --
      Santa Ana Winds: Like the Dustbowl, but with awards shows.
  4. Wow!!! by aeakett · · Score: 5, Funny

    This is the ultimate off-site backup!

  5. ESA by Pi_0's+don't+shower · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I wish that they would publicize the things that the ESA does well, such as the upcoming Herschel mission, the upcoming Planck space satellite (the successor to WMAP and COBE), etc. Instead all we hear about in the US is a disappointing garbage idea like this (with no scientific merit) and the disaster of the BEAGLE 2. Come on, people. Don't take this seriously (and if you have the power, don't support this) -- this is basically a time capsule. Whatever we do to our Earth, I'm still sure it will provide a better record of life on Earth than whatever we might drop on the moon.

    1. Re:ESA by VanillaCoke420 · · Score: 1
      I wonder why ESA's projects are often unknown to pretty much everyone. Is NASA better at informing the media on what they're up to? Or is it because so far, NASA has done the coolest things and that's why everyone only cares about NASA? Or is it ESA who doesn't understand the value of informing the public?

      And what about Japan's adventures in space? Apparently they have a sample return mission en route to the asteroid Itokawa. It's highly interesting because it is a sample return and because it's using an ion engine, yet noone knows about it. Anyway, here's a link.

  6. Terrestrial sites? by betelgeuse-4 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Wouldn't a location (or several) underneath the surface of the earth be better. The rock would protect against a lot of radiation (and getting lead down there would be easier than getting it to the moon) and there are places where the digging has already been done. Any event that can destroy a number of sites located around the world would probably also have a serious affect on the moon wouldn't it?

    1. Re:Terrestrial sites? by burns210 · · Score: 1

      Maybe we could plop it next to the Nuclear Waste repository. That way, in a couple million years when the radiation has died off, the DNS capsule will be there for the next species. Surely, we will not outlive that.

    2. Re:Terrestrial sites? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What would they want with our DNS cache? I'm pretty sure the internet will be long gone in 250 million years.

    3. Re:Terrestrial sites? by Old+Wolf · · Score: 1

      Today's version of DNS is the last thing I would want to inflict on another species

  7. Need something like this soon by laupsavid · · Score: 2, Interesting

    We need something like this soon, anyway.

    The next ice age (or whatever you call it when the glaciers are coming, because we've been in an 'ice age' for the past 2-1/2 million years) has been modeled to be in full swing by 2900. Unlike the last one, which lasted a mere 20,000 years, you can bet the Yellowstone supervolcano will go off and deepen this one, and maybe it'll last 100,000 years or more.

    In the next 80-150 years, due to global warming, the carrying capacity of the earth is going to be drastically reduced. So we need to put something together while we still have population and resources to do it.

    1. Re:Need something like this soon by keiferb · · Score: 1

      Sure, but we also need to have a second planet to live on. If our only inhabitable planet is horked, what good is the bucket o' DNA?

    2. Re:Need something like this soon by hoggoth · · Score: 0

      > ... The next ice age ...
      > ... global warming ...

      Could you be a little less self-contradictory in your disaster scenarios?

      --
      - For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat /dev/random (may take some time)
    3. Re:Need something like this soon by El · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I think building artificial "planets" will happen a lot sooner than finding another inhabitable planet. If you've got a Sun and an asteroid belt to mine for materials, what more do you need? Build a solid ring of space stations at close to earth's orbit, and it would support several thousand times the carrying capacity of the Earth. Plus, you get built-in redundancy; sort of hard to wipe them all out with anything short of a supernova. In the meantime, yes, storing DNA repositories at the center of some of the moons out there might be a good idea... if we can afford it.

      --

      "Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney

    4. Re:Need something like this soon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      > what good is the bucket o' DNA?

      Really, man. I've got a bucket o' DNA right next to my porn collection. Trust me, it's not doing anybody any good.

    5. Re:Need something like this soon by Tango42 · · Score: 1

      A supernova is kind of unlikely, but the sun going red giant would be enough to destroy stations at 1AU. Of course, we have about 5 billion years before that, but why leave everything till the last minute?

    6. Re:Need something like this soon by Josh+Booth · · Score: 1

      Another possiblity is a large mass screaming through our solar system. I've heard before that it is possible that Pluto was a moon of Uranus and got shot out into a wierd orbit by a passer-by. That also may explain the recurring exinction cycles on Earth. But I don't buy into it much. It still wouldn't be good if something like that passed by Earth.

    7. Re:Need something like this soon by jekewa · · Score: 2, Informative

      Because of global warming, the polar ice caps melt causing the ocean temperatures to drop leading to an overall drop in temperature to where the next ice age begins. Duh.

      --
      End the FUD
    8. Re:Need something like this soon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Could you be a little less self-contradictory in your disaster scenarios?

      could you research a little bit before shooting your mouth off?

      http://www.google.com/search?q=global%20warming%20 ice%20age

    9. Re:Need something like this soon by bhima · · Score: 1
      I know you were trying to make a joke but you should review theories of the consequences of global warming...

      an end to exit of the ice age we are in and a return to the depths of a new a longer lasting ice age.

      Global Warming is not exactly a good name, it should be called "fucking our environment up" or something more accurate.

      --
      Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
    10. Re:Need something like this soon by ceejayoz · · Score: 1

      A supernova in our Sun is impossible, but a supernova of a nearby star would do a hell of a lot of damage.

    11. Re:Need something like this soon by ceejayoz · · Score: 1

      Could you be a little more informed?

    12. Re:Need something like this soon by Tango42 · · Score: 1

      Nothing's impossible, but yes, accoring to current theory, our sun will not go supernova. A nearby supernova would do a lot of damage regardless of where in the solarsystem we put ourselves, or our DNA.

    13. Re:Need something like this soon by Tango42 · · Score: 1

      Isn't the theory a star moving past our solar system, rather than anything going through it?

    14. Re:Need something like this soon by soyuz_2 · · Score: 1

      That's a seriously scary thought: something maybe the size of our solar system moving through space at .3c or something... :/ Not likely though.. wouldn't it collapse due to all that gravity? And how would such a thing be created in the first place? Maybe a black hole moving at .5c through space? ... :(

    15. Re:Need something like this soon by DerWulf · · Score: 1

      hear, hear. A comprehensive prediction of earths climate for a minimal span of 100,900 years. Probably from a person not sure if there is clean underwear left for tomorrow.

      --

      ___
      No power in the 'verse can stop me
    16. Re:Need something like this soon by freqres · · Score: 1

      What the hell are you saving it for? Atkin's approved protein shakes?

      --
      Rampant Ninja related crimes these days...Whitehouse is not the exception
  8. Not far enough out by Artifex · · Score: 0

    A significantly large Earth-destroying asteroid could be large enough to cause debris to escape our atmosphere and end up hitting Luna. Large enough, it could cause orbital eccentricities such that Luna would spiral in over time.

    Even if we do have some kind of ark, what would be the point, if we don't know that anyone will be along to use the material, or any place to put it?

    The article quotes the scientist saying that we could repopulate the earth after an event of this magnitude, but I don't think he's given thought to how long it would take before the Earth would be hospitable again, assuming it was only a "mild" Earth-cleansing climatological disaster. We're talking decades or centuries, perhaps longer, for dust to settle out of the atmosphere, etc.

    In the longer term, we need self-sufficient colonies far enough away that they're not affected when Sol becomes a red giant and eats all the inner planets, anyway. I don't know about you, but I don't think survivability will be high on the remaining planets, either.

    Make many arks, but send them far.

    --
    Get off my launchpad!
    1. Re:Not far enough out by Tyndmyr · · Score: 1

      I agree...if you intend to go to the trouble to archive humanity, you may as well get some separation there. However, I doubt this plan could really be seen as practical. Given the apparent lack of evidence for other life forms, the odds that any given "ark" would ever be brought to life(let alone the strand of human DNA out of the myriad forms of life in the capsule) before being destroyed are extremely slim. Use the resources to help spread humanity itself, making us more resilient as a species. I don't really see a reason we couldn't have a station on the moon if we were prepared to drop some cash for it...

      --
      Support more choices in goverment-Vote 3rd party.
    2. Re:Not far enough out by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

      At least Pluto. Such a record wouldn't be Nova proof, it's too close to the sun.

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    3. Re:Not far enough out by The+FooMiester · · Score: 1

      We don't know if anyone would be able to use it, correct, but I know one thing for sure.

      If we don't put it there, then they definatly can't use it.

      --
      The previous has been a secret message to my comrades.
    4. Re:Not far enough out by soyuz_2 · · Score: 1

      we need self-sufficient colonies far enough away that they're not affected when Sol becomes a red giant and eats all the inner planets

      I was born a thousand years too early/have read too many science fiction books... It would be a dream to go on such a trip... sigh... If the world could just be a little more like Songs of Distant Earth (after they got out there, that is, not while the solar system was going to hell... :)

    5. Re:Not far enough out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The record won't be nova proof anyway as there is no known way to store data for such a long time (several billion years)

    6. Re:Not far enough out by CodeMonkey4Hire · · Score: 1

      Sorry for being redundant (but so is your post - there appears to be many similarly misinformed "astronomers" on /.).

      According to our current understanding of Astrophysics, the Sun will not be going supernova.
      This Wikipedia article seems to indicate the sun would need to be >12 solar masses to form a Type II Supernova (with Type 1 only being possible with a companion star).
      This page from NASA's website claims the lower limit is 8 solar masses.

      Point is, we don't need to worry about the sun going supernova. In fact, it would be more interesting to wonder what the nearest star capable of supernova is. It would still be irrelevant though.

      --

      Let's go Hurricanes!!! 2006 Stanley Cup Champions!!!
    7. Re:Not far enough out by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

      Interesting. I had not heard that before. Suddenly the sun as a place to dispose of nuclear waste seems a lot more usefull- seeing as how it will be a long, long time before we use 8x the amount of nuclear material as the SUN has!

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    8. Re:Not far enough out by CodeMonkey4Hire · · Score: 1

      AFAIK, the biggest hurdle to disposing of nuclear waste (or nukular as W would say) is safely launching it. And it would be expensive.

      There is a large enough risk that it could blow up in the atmosphere (same fear that some people have over nuclear powered satellites, but it is much more realistic of a danger) or that it could reach space but reenter earth or some other planet.

      Using something like a space ladder would be great, because if something went wrong, the radiation wouldn't be released in an explosion and there could be more safegaurds (like parachutes?).

      --

      Let's go Hurricanes!!! 2006 Stanley Cup Champions!!!
    9. Re:Not far enough out by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

      Either that, or use the HG Wells method (very big gun, purely ballistic beyond that). After all, you only need shielding and the waste itself, no need to launch a bunch of fancy electronics and the rocket motor into the sun. All you need to do is figure out how to reach escape velocity from Earth and fire it in the opposite direction that the Earth is going. Since it will then be (by definition and Newtonian physics) in the same orbit but at a slower speed, the sun's gravity will do the rest, and it will be well inside Earth's orbit by the time you catch up to it next year.

      And if it reenters on Venus or Mecury, why would we care? Even nuclear waste wouldn't surivive in the atmosphere of Venus if the Russian probes are any example, and even if it slams into the cold side of Mercury I doubt we'd care (neither one of these are usefull planets to mankind).

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    10. Re:Not far enough out by CodeMonkey4Hire · · Score: 1

      There are a lot of people that don't believe that life exists in any fashion on Venus, but just in case do not want to contaminate it. Also, what if we decide to colonize it one day (it is possible, though unlikely in the next few centuries)? Hate to shoot ourselves in the foot before getting a chance.

      But really, I wish we could just shoot it all into the sun and use nuclear power instead of oil, coal, wood, etc.

      --

      Let's go Hurricanes!!! 2006 Stanley Cup Champions!!!
    11. Re:Not far enough out by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

      Why would we want to colonize a planet where the average temperature is 600C and it rains sulfuric acid? We'd have to have some pretty good materials for that one- none of the Russian probes lasted more than an hour. Now I'll agree that it's possible life may exist under those conditions, but why would we care about contaminating a few bacteria that manage to thrive in that atmosphere?

      Shoot, that's the real keyword isn't it? Can't use a rocket- too damn finicky. But fire it out of a rail gun heading East at the proper moment- that'd be the key.

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    12. Re:Not far enough out by CodeMonkey4Hire · · Score: 1

      I was hoping not to keep this off-topic thread going for too long, but....

      It is believed that by dropping enough limestone, the atmosphere can be broken up. I think it has something to do with reacting with the CO2. With the CO2 absorbed and the clouds dissipated, the temperature would hopefully drop to a much more hospitable range (no more greenhouse effect). The entire process would take a very long time.

      I have also heard theories about using certain plants/bacteria in place of/in conjunction with the above theory. If such organisms could survive high temperature and high acidity then they might be able to process the CO2 into O2 as well. This would also take a very long time (centuries?).

      It's too early in the morning, so I'll have to ask you to google for yourself. Venus/Mars/Moon colonization strategies get to be pretty interesting (and sometimes far-fetched), but the repetutable are grounded in good science.

      --

      Let's go Hurricanes!!! 2006 Stanley Cup Champions!!!
    13. Re:Not far enough out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sort of like the Arthur C. Clarke book... I think it was called "Call of a Distant Earth". Been a while since I even looked at it though.

  9. Yeah, well... by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1


    I hope he also suggested a way for growing money on trees.

    Elephants supposedly eat about 400 pounds of food per day. Anyone want to calculate the annual cost of merely keeping a pair of elephants fed? Let alone the initial transport and the construction of their pen?

    --
    Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
  10. Ooo! Me! Me! by GypC · · Score: 1

    One wonders how you'd go about indexing every life form including undiscovered species...

    Step one: discover all the undiscovered species.

    Step two: index every life form by eye color.

    Simple enough. Pshh, I can't believe I have to lay all this out for you.

    1. Re:Ooo! Me! Me! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Step three: Profit!

    2. Re:Ooo! Me! Me! by shobadobs · · Score: 1

      no no no...

      Step Three: ...
      Step Four: Profit!

  11. Simple by El · · Score: 1

    "...how you'd protect the DNA from radiation." Uh, try putting it in the moon instead of on the moon. Bury it deep enough, and it should also solve the problem of being hit by space debris.

    --

    "Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney

    1. Re:Simple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lol its very simple, a few meters of moon dirt wouldl shield pretty much all the cosmic an solar radiation , an if not, add a few more meters an be done with it.

  12. We Need Another Timmy! by Spencerian · · Score: 1

    Well, it's not a bad idea...so long as we don't fly it in as we did Genesis this morning...we want to make a soft landing, not make a core sample.

    --
    Vos teneo officium eram periculosus ut vos recipero is.
  13. Do your best by tickticker · · Score: 1
    One wonders how you'd go about indexing every life form including undiscovered species and how you'd protect the DNA from radiation.

    I think I'll go drink a soda... but how can I drink the molecules that evaporate? or stick to the lining of the can?

    One wonders how you'd go about drinking every drop of soda incuding evaporates and how you'd clean the inside lining.

    You do the best you can, jackass.
    That may be one of the dumbest, most smartass trolls I've seen on /. so they went and made everybody read it cuz it's a headlining article.

    I just read the italicized line again and I am amazed once more. I don't use the word stupid often but in this case....

    1. Re:Do your best by tsm_sf · · Score: 1

      One wonders how you'd go about indexing every life form including undiscovered species and how you'd protect the DNA from radiation.

      No kidding. Too much coffee or not enough. Oh, I hear lead works pretty well for that radiation thing. (Your Mitochondria May Vary)

      --
      Literalism isn't a form of humor, it's you being irritating.
    2. Re:Do your best by tickticker · · Score: 1
      "don't do it at all"

      You live your life your way, I'll live my life my way.

  14. My guess is.. by Klowner · · Score: 3, Funny

    That Dr. Foing was watching the animated film TITAN A.E. while half asleep and upon waking, thought he had some amazingly original idea.

    Think again Docta Foing!!
    (wow that's fun to say out loud)

  15. Surely too close? by reclusivemonkey · · Score: 1

    IANAAP (I am not an astro-physicist) but surely anything powerful enough to take the earth out will wreak havoc on the moon too?

  16. Protect it from Radiation by Photar · · Score: 2, Funny

    By Putting it on the Dark Side of the moon.

    --
    He who knows not and knows he knows not is a wise man. He who knows not and knows not he knows not is a fool.
    1. Re:Protect it from Radiation by AlphaPB · · Score: 1

      What's with the funky capitalization? Maybe I'm missing out on some kind of joke, but assuming that you're serious, the "dark side" of the moon isn't dark all the time; it still receives light from the sun. It's just the side that doesn't face Earth.

    2. Re:Protect it from Radiation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Personally, I don't think a Pink Floyd album will protect DNA from mutation from ionizing radiation for long. I'd personally suggest a blank CDR instead, fewer micro-holes.

  17. Low-cost indexing method by vasqzr · · Score: 3, Funny

    Just get a bunch of mosquitos, and a bunch of tree sap...Then we just need someone to extract them in 65 million years!

  18. Anna Kournikova & I by DeadBugs · · Score: 3, Funny

    I would like to nominate myself and Anna Kournikova as canidates to re-populate the earth. Once funding has been approved the practice sessions can begin.

    --
    http://www.kubuntu.org/
  19. Not Thinking Big Enough by Hythlodaeus · · Score: 1

    I can one up this ESA guy and suggest terreforming Mars and populating it with all of Earth's species. Where does one sign up to be a professional suggester?

    --
    For great justice.
    1. Re:Not Thinking Big Enough by kippy · · Score: 1

      No reason not to do both. The thing is with the ark plan, you can do it in a few years assuming you have some database of wet or dry DNA to send up. Hell, you could put one on the moon, one on mars, every world in the solar system either in orbit or on the surface. Even send one on course for another star system. Again, all in just a few years.

      Terraforming Mars will take at least hundreds and probably thousands of years. I'm all for terraforming Mars but you've got to admit, the ark plan has a bit more efficacy.

  20. tcejbuS by jasno · · Score: 1

    IIRC, the lead scientist for the ESA in the 80's, Peter Schilling, already had a similar plan drawn up.

    --

    http://www.masturbateforpeace.com/
  21. How useful is DNA, really? by Bastian · · Score: 4, Insightful

    DNA by itself does not a creature make. You still have to have a cell to put that DNA in, and that cell has to be able to repsond properly to the protiens that that are transcribed from that DNA, and also be able to produce the proper chemical signals to cause the correct parts of that DNA to be transcribed at the right time.

    Until bringing back the Dodo and the Passenger Pigeon becomes feasible, I fail to see how sending DNA from every animal to the moon is any better a way to spend research money than sending a box full of the covers to every O'Reilly book ever publshed tot he moon.

  22. How many fucktons in a metric shitload? by sendai2ci · · Score: 1

    ...how you'd protect the DNA from radiation.

    The same way that a human habitat on the moon would be protected. A metric shitload of rock.

  23. DNA might already be there by thenumberone · · Score: 1

    Remember those stories about finding lunar and martian rocks down in Anartica? Those come by a process called interplanetary transfer.

    When an impact happens on a body, the crash sends debris up, sometimes with enough force to exit the gravitational pull of the planet. Through interplanetary transfer, that debris may land on the Earth, or really anywhere else in the solar system.

    The process also works in reverse, if the Earth was struck by a large meteorite, debris would fly up and exit the Earths gravitational pull. This is similar to the process that formed the moon.

    If there is a chance that bacteria from Mars can land on the Earth, then there is a chance that bacteria from the Earth could land on Mars. DNA is a little bit of a stretch, but with the scales and timeframs you work with in Astronomy, it is possible.

    A DNA description or sample from every species on the Earth, that may never happen. There are too many genetic mutations that are constantly happening. DNA is to variant to have a complete catalog.

    More likely, I think, is that some basic structures of DNA will survive. In the end, DNA is just DNA. All DNA is made up of nucleotides that are stung together to form long strings. This gives DNA have some common properties, and thats probably already whats up there.

    An interesting side thought, we have interplanetary transfer, could there be such a thing as inter-solar-system transfer, or maybe even inter-galactic-transfer? The physical laws stay the same, just the scale and timeframes change.

  24. We need populations, not just genomes by Chilltowner · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's no good to just throw a sample of DNA up on the moon. We must have some kind of way to represent the genetic diversity within a species. The diversity itself is the mark of a species and its ability to prosper.

    There've been recent articles that indicate that climate change is causing an overall loss in diversity among the world's species. Once the diversity decreases to a certain point, the populations will crash (I've read about computer simulations done on Atlantic salmon populations that bear this out.) In short, simply saving the DNA, either the actual molecules or a printout, will not do anyone any good in the future. Not only will it be impossible to resurrect the species, they future researchers will have only the very limited insight into just one example of a creature that once numbered in the thousands, millions, or billions with the genetic diverity to match.

    The project, conceived this way at least, is doomed to failure. The best way to preserve what we've got is to reduce the threat of mass extinction with proper management of the planet we have now.

    1. Re:We need populations, not just genomes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You want diversity?

      How about generating random base pairs starting with the one example species and adjusting the variance of the random noise. The fundamental aspect of a species is its ability to reproduce, so whether it is nature or humans causing the genetic variations, we will not be able to produce a variation so different from the previous examples and yet still be able to have this abomination to reproduce.

      The only tricky thing is to figure out what sort of a variance and threshold (we only have 4 base pairs) we should use. Seems like a little trial and error could be of use here.

      JAAC

  25. why bother? by nusratt · · Score: 1

    It would be useless unless it was later discovered by sufficiently intelligent beings.
    And it "they" did discover it, why should they consider us so special as to be worth regeneration?
    For that matter, why should they consider it SAFE to regenerate us?
    "Good riddance!" I say; let them regenerate everything except the primates.

  26. Why? by dchamp · · Score: 1

    If the earth gets destroyed by an asteroid... it's pretty much a moot point. There's not any place else where all of the plants & animals can survive that we know of, much less feasably use.
    It's very egocentric to think that millions of years later some alien race would want to resurrect the creatures of a planet that was destroyed.

    1. Re:Why? by foniksonik · · Score: 1

      Have you seen the study where they connected a robotic arm to a gorilla's brain output? The gorilla learned how to control the arm and stopped using her own arm... then the arm atrophied! Her brain stopped recognizing her arm and let it die.... freaky.

      my 2

      --
      A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
    2. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      True, there isn't such a place, so we'd have to build one. It could all be done with existing technology - although currently at a very high price - if we really wanted to do it.

  27. Actually, there's another factor involved... by Dave21212 · · Score: 1


    If there is a chance that bacteria from Mars can land on the Earth, then there is a chance that bacteria from the Earth could land on Mars. DNA is a little bit of a stretch, but with the scales and timeframs you work with in Astronomy, it is possible.

    Actually, it's the gravitation pull of the Sun that allows material from Mars to reach Earth. For Earth material to reach Mars it would have to travel against the pull of the Sun, which it can't do without propulsion.

    I would think inter-solar transfers would be limited in the same manner...

    --
    "Whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freeness of speech."--Benjamin Franklin
    1. Re:Actually, there's another factor involved... by thenumberone · · Score: 1

      They really dont need acceleration during the transfer, they just need a great enough inital velocity to escape. If its not great enough, your right, theres not much of a chance of it getting out to a further orbit.

      I am not sure if this would have any effect, but what about if its initial orbit was highly elliptical, and it used a type of 'sling-shot' boost off the sun or an inner planet?

    2. Re:Actually, there's another factor involved... by shobadobs · · Score: 1

      No, it's not as simple as that. Take, for instance, one of my favorite short stories by Arthur C. Clarke (I conveniently forget the title, but it's about an extraterrestrial, artificial moon of Jupiter). In the story, one group holds the captain of the other group hostage in hope of trading him for a statue of an extraterrestrial - if they didn't get the statue back, they'd throw the captain off the moon and have him fall to Jupiter. The other group calls their bluff, believing they wouldn't kill him. So they throw the captain towards Jupiter. They can still retrieve him, which they say they'll do when they're given the statue.

      So the statue is given to them, but instead of flying out to retrieve the captain, they GO HAVE TEA! (Or they do something to bide their time; I do not remember exactly.) Why? The captain isn't falling to Jupiter - he still has the horizontal velocity of the moon/alien spacecraft. He just makes a slightly elliptical orbit around Jupiter, ending up a couple of miles away from the spacecraft at perigee. After one revolution, the hostage ends up back where he started!

      The point is, when two orbiting bodies strike, the debris does not simply lose velocity and fall into the sun; it simply creates an elliptical orbit of its own. For debris of a collision on Mars to get a sufficiently eccentric orbit, it needs a rather large initial velocity (relative to Mars, and generally in a different or opposite direction than Mar's orbit)! However, the same goes for material escaping from Earth - with a sufficient initial velocity, its orbit can become eccentric enough to reach Mars' orbit.

    3. Re:Actually, there's another factor involved... by Dave21212 · · Score: 1


      Thanks, very insightful... (too bad I can't mod it up ;)

      But how do those microbes computed the orbit ? (j/k)

      --
      "Whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freeness of speech."--Benjamin Franklin
  28. Work on this project has already started. by spin2cool · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    Craig Venter (yes, the Craig Venter of Celera/Human Genome fame) is undertaking a mission to do just that - catalog every species on earth's DNA. He's starting with the largely under-explored ocean species.

    Here's the Wired News article about it.

  29. On the Moon? by hike2 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    And the real purpose would be?
    Say the Earth is destroyed or afflicted by one of the things mentioned, then WHO is going to take advantage of that repository?
    Say somehow some people survive. The next question is HOW are they going to use that to rebuild?
    Interesting idea but I think just a *little* bit early for its time

    A
    P.S.: If the Sun goes then that was pointless anyway. I say make it hang-out a nova-safe distance somewhere in space ...

    --
    Fourty-two!
  30. Why? by cr0sh · · Score: 2, Informative
    Last week at Burning Man 2004, I spent time listening to a series of talks at John Smart's camp, "Singularity Point", from a variety of speakers, including a couple of talks (one impromptu) by John Smart.

    I found his speaking style engaging and intelligent, and his theories to be enlightening. You each owe it to yourself to read an interview with him, which he gave out copies of to participants in the talks at the camp.

    The interview details his theory on the whys and hows of what has been termed "the coming technological singularity". Transhumanists here will know what I speak of - all others, please look into it - google is your friend.

    One of the ideas presented in the above interview referenced, John Smart lays out the idea that natural disasters do little to impeded evolutionary development, in fact, he contends that such disasters cause leaps in development:

    from the above interview

    "Catastrophes are to be expected, and they accelerate change whenever immune systems learn from them. In my own research, there has never been a catastrophe in known universal history (supernova, KT-meteorite, plague, civilization collapse, nuclear detonation, reactor meltdown, computer virus, 9/11, you name it) that did not function to accelerate the average distributed complexity (ADC) of the computational network in which it was embedded." - John Smart

    The ideas and theory he sets forth in the above interview make a lot of sense. He does, however, always hold that it is a theory, and may be wrong - several times during his talks at Burning Man he was adament in stating this. However, I think his ideas highlight and explain certain domains within the idea of a technological singularity in a logical and consistent manner.

    Please note that I am open to debate on this entire issue. If anyone can offer me detailed analysis or references to papers or writings regarding the unlikelyness or impossibility of a technological singularity occurring, I am all ears, so to speak. I want to hear the other side of the story, from the dissenters. All of it is fascinating, but it is hard to determine what the likelyhood of any of it is if you have only heard one side...

    --
    Reason is the Path to God - Anon
  31. um. by syukton · · Score: 1

    Something tells me that in the event of a catastrophe, the farthest thing from our minds will be to come together as a people in order to build the requisite spacecraft in order to retrieve the DNA. We'd have better luck with something buried in a mountain; for some reason I think it's more likely for people to pick up shovels and start digging than pick up pens and papers to calculate the proper re-entry vector.

    --
    Reinvent the wheel only at either a lower cost, greater effectiveness, or your own personal enrichment and satisfaction.
  32. Re:ESA how about mentioning SMART-1?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    SMART-1 is a pioneering ESA mission involving use
    of an ion drive as main power for a moon mission.
    It should be front page news in any scientific
    journal. It is working just fine and should get the
    credit it deserves, just like our American Deep Space 1 which flew all over the solar system on one
    tank of 'gas'.....and still has fuel and still works!

  33. Don't laugh... by Embedded+Geek · · Score: 3, Funny

    The unicorns thought the original was a foolish idea, too.

    --

    "Prepare for the worst - hope for the best."

  34. Call it Tyco Station... by jonadab · · Score: 1

    From the Sci-Fi book _Terraforming Earth_, which is based on this premise.

    --
    Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
    1. Re:Call it Tyco Station... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From the Sci-Fi book _Terraforming Earth_, which is based on this premise.

      That sounds like a very easy and inexpensive project....

    2. Re:Call it Tyco Station... by jonadab · · Score: 1

      The premise of the book was that an asteroid impact made it a much more
      tricky prospect. More than once, ISTR. But it eventually got (re)done
      and humanity developed to the point of space flight again yadda yadda and
      they all lived happily ever after, the end.

      --
      Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
  35. Space and survival: links by colonist · · Score: 2, Informative

    CNN is also covering the story.

    More information:

    The relationship between space and survival has been expressed by many others, such as Carl Sagan, Stephen Hawking, Martin Rees, William Burrows and Robert Shapiro.

  36. depends by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    if our sun went nova then both earth an moon are toast. but if earth or moon are hit by a large asteroid, the other would survive--unless it was big enough to hit the earth and moon at once, an then we are really fuct

  37. It's a colony; not just an ark by colonist · · Score: 1

    The CNN article quotes Dr. Bernard Foing talking about a permanent, manned lunar colony with a tissue/DNA repository:

    We hope to have the first manned mission to the moon by 2020.
    Perhaps five years later it would be possible to establish a permanent lunar base with a closed biosphere where a crew of 10 people could live for 100 days at a time.
    There we could conduct experiments and learn to be independent of Earth by living off the moon's resources: by using solar energy and the minerals from the soil.
    The next project would be to build a real community on the moon comprising hundreds of people of both sexes.
    In the event of a catastrophe on Earth -- either caused by a nuclear attack or an asteroid collision, which we hope would not happen -- using samples of all organisms and a DNA repository, a Noah's Ark could be used to repopulate Earth when it was safe to return.
    The tissue/DNA library part of the lunar colony would probably be based on the Frozen Ark project announced in July, 2004.
  38. A little lesson for you sonny, Jim: by turgid · · Score: 1

    This is the Central Scruitinizer speaking. Please have a doughnut and stick to Church-based social activities in future.

  39. Interesting... by cr0sh · · Score: 1

    Can't say I have - do you have a link or reference I could follow?

    --
    Reason is the Path to God - Anon
    1. Re:Interesting... by foniksonik · · Score: 1

      I'll see if I can find it again... was one of those articles interesting enough to remember but not useful enough to bookmark...

      --
      A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
    2. Re:Interesting... by cr0sh · · Score: 1

      Similar to that "tapping in a cat's optic system" experiment - I know what you mean...

      --
      Reason is the Path to God - Anon
  40. Why the moon? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    To find out why they chose the moon, follow this link.

  41. easy DNA source by BeaverCleaver · · Score: 1

    I can provide large quantities of DNA. If I wait a few days I could probably even build up enough pressure to shoot it to the moon.

    Alternatively, we could just send my bedsheets up there.