The Moon Is Not Your Trash Bin
- From: Jack Linthicum <jacklinthicum@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2009 04:18:49 -0700 (PDT)
But aren't trash bins the source of much of archaeology? Without trash
bins much of the daily life of those peoples whom we have no written
record of would be lost. But the concept of sending a mission, in this
case robotic, to a known pristine site, is asking for what happened to
Plymouth Rock.
June 3, 2009
The Moon Is Not Your Trash Bin
Jill Thomas and Justin St. P. Walsh
Cultural heritage has emerged in the last few decades as a subject of
increasing debate and interest. Controversies such as the Greek claim
on the Parthenon Marbles, in the collection of the British Museum
since 1816, the destruction of the Bamiyan Buddhas in Afghanistan in
2001 and the looting of the Iraq National Museum in Baghdad in 2003
have shown how objects and sites can have significance for both
scholars and the public.
Nations and collectors claim ownership, while disenfranchised
populations assert their rights and identities and experts work to
preserve fragile ruins. Now, efforts to preserve archaeological
remains face a vast and challenging new frontier lacking definitive
legislative regulation: outer space.
Man-made objects preserved in the vacuum of space are irreplaceable
artifacts of humanity’s scientific achievements. Although the United
States retains jurisdiction over the equipment left at the moon’s
Tranquility Base, the 1969 Apollo 11 landing site, for example, Neil
Armstrong’s famous words highlighted the importance of the first moon
landing for all of us: “That’s one small step for a man, one giant
leap for mankind.”
Today, however, some of the most important elements of that shared
space heritage, including Tranquility Base, are threatened. The Lunar
X Prize, a $20-million award funded by Google, is being offered by the
X Prize Foundation, which previously held a competition to develop
private space travel. The first private group to land and maneuver a
robotic rover on the moon before Dec. 31, 2012, will be the winner.
A “Heritage Bonus Prize” of perhaps $1 million (the actual amount has
not yet been made public) will be given to the team that also sends
back images of man-made objects on the moon. In order to take
photographs of these artifacts, groups would have to first target
their craft to land close to a previous landing site, then move their
rover as close as possible — even into the area where human activity
occurred 40 years ago.
The rules for the competition state only that participants seeking the
Heritage bonus must have their plans approved by the foundation “in
order to eliminate unnecessary risks to the historically significant
sites of interest,” but there is no explanation what criteria will be
used to judge risks as “unnecessary” or what steps are recommended to
avoid damage.
The sites of early lunar landings are of unparalleled significance in
the history of humanity, and extraordinary caution should be taken to
protect them. Armstrong’s iconic footprint and the U.S. flag placed by
the astronauts may yet be intact — there is no wind or rain on the
moon to damage or destroy them.
NASA, the most experienced, successful and best-funded space agency in
the world, has occasionally found it difficult even to place
satellites in orbit. And those missions are far simpler than landing a
robotic rover on the moon within a kilometer or two of a specific, and
culturally important, location. Private groups operating on much
smaller budgets and attempting such a project for the first time are
likely to encounter failure. But far more catastrophic would be a near-
success — a crash landing, for example, in which a historic site was
damaged or destroyed.
One team in the competition, Astrobotic Technology, plans to launch as
early as December 2010, with Tranquility Base as its stated target. It
is not too late for the sponsors to withdraw their bonus prize for
approaching and imaging lunar landing sites. Indeed, they should ban
competitors from targeting regions within 100 kilometers of prior
lunar landings, with violators excluded from receiving any prize
money. The bonus money could instead be offered as the award in a
competition to design plans for studying, preserving and protecting
sites such as Tranquility Base, and presenting them to the public.
We have no doubt that space tourism, perhaps even as envisioned by the
X Prize Foundation, will be a reality someday. The competition itself
has inspired interest in the Apollo sites among the general public.
Once lunar travel becomes easier, there will also be significant
interest from scholars in the emerging field of space archaeology. The
demands and desires of both groups must be respected. But in the
absence of effective international agreements that treat space objects
as heritage, it is necessary to take a step back and consider what the
best strategy would be for permanent preservation of sites and objects
of historic significance.
We have the opportunity now to ensure that there will still be
something there to see when tourists eventually visit, and for our
descendants to understand and appreciate.
http://www.archaeologynews.org/story.asp?ID=448149&Title=The%20Moon%20Is%20Not%20Your%20Trash%20Bin
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: The Moon Is Not Your Trash Bin
- From: Tom McDonald
- Re: The Moon Is Not Your Trash Bin
- Prev by Date: Re: 'Oldest pottery' found in China
- Next by Date: Re: The Moon Is Not Your Trash Bin
- Previous by thread: Re: Was there a "spiritual" purpose to the Qumran community?
- Next by thread: Re: The Moon Is Not Your Trash Bin
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
