Bovine logic

Big news: scientists are telling us that the new Mars rover, Curiosity, has detected methane gas. Methane could indicate the presence of life—past, present or future—on the red planet.

But what kind of life? That presents a very interesting proposition, which has to be explained using the most rigorous logic. So here goes:

There is one earth presence that, above all others is associated with methane: the humble, common or garden cow. So if both cows and Mars share methane, doesn’t that mean the environment on Mars has supported, does support or will support bovine life?

In fact, upon reporting the methane story, the BBC used the word “belches” to describe what the rover was picking up. In the technical sense, a cow does not belch when it emits methane. It employs a different exit point. The fact is, however, that both the planetary and bovine emissions are involuntary expulsions of gas. All of which strengthens the logical connection.

But perhaps that is just the beginning of our journey in logic. There is a considerable scientific consensus, Stephen Harper and his government notwithstanding, that global warming is real, and that methane gas is a key culprit in that it is one of the greenhouse gases that traps heat in the atmosphere. Indeed, methane emission is the second largest source of greenhouse gas after carbon dioxide.

And guess what? According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the number one source of methane from human-related activities is livestock—that is, mostly cattle. In other words, cows.

So could we not significantly reduce our greenhouse gas emissions by reducing our cow population? And how would we do that, you ask? So far as I can see, logic again dictates the result.

Why not resettle a substantial part of our cow population onto Mars? There are some 1.5 billion cows on our planet, and many are no doubt still going to be needed for meat, milk, leather, worship and all kinds of other important uses. But if we could rid ourselves of, say, a billion or so, we would be cutting that largest source by two-thirds.

But just how feasible is the task, this new bovine Manhattan project? First of all, can the cows handle it? We are all familiar with the story about the cow jumping over the moon; and many of us know cows are quite accomplished jumpers. Now, while a cow has not made it to the moon in the literal sense, all kinds of other animals have made it into the moon’s orbit—as early as 1968, on the U.S.S.R.’s Zond 5 prototype. The slight hiccup was that the payload of turtles, worms, flies and other forms of life on that trip was subjected to fatal g-forces on re-entry into the earth’s gravitational field. But heck, that was almost half a century ago, it was the moon—not Mars—they visited, it was the Russians—not the Americans—who were in charge; and I’m not proposing we try to bring the cows home. So, without hesitation, I’d say the cows can handle it.

Second, can the equipment handle it? Well, that’s where another piece of news comes in. Just over a month ago, NASA launched its Orion space capsule with the objecitve of exploring beyond the moon, to Mars in particular. According to Bloomfield Businessweek, NASA wants to make it “abundantly clear that much of the hardware that can get humans to Mars already exists and is ready to fly.” Indeed, the first manned, or rather, peopled flight to Mars is scheduled for just six years hence.

Admittedly, there may be some additional considerations to take into account when there is a ruminant rather than human payload, and it may seem like a weighty task to ship a billion cows to Mars. However, I have every confidence in the can-do attitude of NASA, especially if it draws upon the skills of Canadian astronaut and superhero Chris Hadfield to tackle the problems.

I suppose there is one alternative way of looking at all this. The enlightened view would have it that we would be making Mars a generous gift by shipping it our billion surplus cows. But is it possible that some environmentalist Martians might regard it as a rather cynical gesture? Could we be accused of trying to externalize our problem to their shores? Or maybe, something on Mars is thinking “Hmm, methane gas on earth, eh? Maybe they’d be okay if we dumped a couple of billion of our surplus cows on them.” Probably not, but you just don’t know.

Hey, you there up on Mars: we come in peace!

And in late-breaking news, astronomers have just announced that NASA’s Kepler telescope has identified eight new potentially habitable planets. So if this Mars and methane business doesn’t work out…

dsimmonds@wellingtontimes.ca