!! spellx done
159   Surprises From the Moon
      The Washington Post,  July 12, 1969

     The most important scientific task that faces the Apollo 11
astronauts Neil A. Armstrong and Edwin E. Aldrin is to pick up samples
of the moon's surface for study in earth laboratories.  This extension
of our scientific reach is not likely to upset many of our fundamental
theories of physics, chemistry or biology.  It will, however, surely
put our knowledge of the earth as a planet on an unprecedentedly
firmer basis by giving us samples of the kinds of materials from which
we have descended without their having been altered by weathering or
by the pervasive action of living organisms throughout geological
eons.  Above all, these studies are bound to have surprises for us;
many of them, no doubt, will seem simple and obvious after the fact.

     The successful landing of an astronaut will in the minds of many,
discharge the "national commitment" that was, perhaps a necessary
impetus to respond to such a formidable technological challenge.  It
will be only the beginning of the scientific studies, but these will
have enough of a start to be able to stand on their own feet in
asserting their claim to a proper portion of the national budget.  A
few weeks from now we will be much better able to judge the kind of
effort we should continue to put into the lunar part of space science.

     The return sample task has also rekindled a certain amount of
discussion about the hazard of contaminating the earth with lunar
microbes.  (This general subject was introduced for serious scientific
consideration for the first time, as far as I know, in a paper in
Science by Dr. Dean Cowie and myself in 1958, just after Sputnik was
launched).  The space agency has tried to go even beyond its
conservative scientific advisers in setting up precautions for
quarantining the astronauts and the return samples.  This in tune,
may have confused some observers into believing that the precautions
were a response to a real risk.

     The main principle that has to be understood is that the whole
program of returning a man from a lunar landing is based on the
conclusion that there is no risk.  We could not mount an effective
quarantine against a real peril of global infection unless we were
prepared to sacrifice the contraband (namely, the astronaut) or send
him back, which are unthinkable.

     The main argument for zero risk is quite persuasive: the moon has
no atmosphere, and therefore can have no moisture or other volatile
fluid on its surface, an absolutely necessary condition for life to
flourish.  Furthermore, secondary meteorites have been splashed from
moon to earth many times.

     The principal purpose of the quarantine is to protect the samples
from earthly contamination -- not altogether successfully in view of
the exhalations from the landing rocket and from the astronauts'
space suit.  It was then reasonable to throw an anchor to windward
and add on whatever additional precautions against back-contamination
were possible that would not impede the mission.

     The entire affair has helped to show that the present
arrangements would be quite inappropriate to a real risk, for example
a sample return from Mars.  Above all it makes the psychological point
that no system of precautions will be properly enforced, under the
pressures of a space mission, against purely hypothetical threats.
The lesson for our Mars program is that we must learn a great deal
more by instrumented observations, left there, before we could begin
to design the precautions needed for samples, or men, returned to
earth.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


Launch was July 16
Landing was July 20