Another Lunar Effect Put to Rest

Another Lunar Effect Put to Rest Thirty years ago, published reports suggested that plants could grow better on lunar "soil" than they could on terrestrial soils. A series of experimental errors, reporting errors, and omissions led to this conclusion. Previously unpublished data easily explain the reported effects. HAVEN SWEET his article is long overdue. It has been written in my mind hundreds of times, only to be displaced by Tmore pressing activities. I eventually convinced myself that people had forgotten the claims made after man first landed on the Moon, claims that attributed very unusual properties to the Moon. My complacency changed while listening to one of the many twenty-fifth anniversary tributes to the first lunar landing. (Now the thirtieth anniversary has passed, in July 1999, and I can wait no longer.) I heard a former NASA official refer to the quarantine testing and indicate that there was one significant result: that plants had been shown to grow better on Moon dust than they did on Earth soil. SKEPTICAL INQUIRER November/December 1999 47 This statement thrust me back to my days with the space look at how these results came to be, and how the myth grew. program, a time when similar statements were made with little regard for the facts. At that time, the press was hungry for Background of Plant Quarantine Testing news. The excitement of the lunar landing still held the pub- As part of the trip to the Moon, NASA was required to deter- lic interest in everything dealing with space. T h e spotlight was mine if "lunar organisms" existed, and if so, whether they on NASA, and some used this opportunity to present specula- posed a threat to Earth. Although we now recognize the Moon tion as fact, speculation that might partially justify the mission as a very inhospitable place for life, before the first landing, to the Moon. Reporters sought people who would give the some people feared that life might exist in sequestered loca- best quotes, and these statements were often published with- tions. The lunar quarantine provided time to evaluate whether out question. such organisms existed, and whether they could infect plants At that time, I was intimately involved with the Lunar or animals. Quarantine, a program established to determine if lunar soil Introduction of organisms into new environments has resulted in countless environmental disasters; chestnut blight, Dutch elm disease, Plants fare OK in lunar soil and the fatal spread of European diseases among American natives Moon Dust Acting As Moon Dust Treatment are but a few examples. Thus, the lunar material was contained in Fertilizer on Plants Makes Plants Thrive isolation chambers while being Moon Dust tested on plants and animals. The Plants Amaze Scientists test organisms were then monitored Growing in Moon Soil Is Nutrient for signs of infection by putative lunar To Plants pathogens. Figure 1. A sampling of headlines touting lunar soil. Realizing there was little chance of alien life forms on the Moon, our might be harmful to Earth organisms. I was responsible for botanical group decided to also determine if lunar material testing the lunar material on plants and helped develop many could be used for plant growth. Since any lunar settlements of the experimental procedures used during the first few lunar would grow plants for food and oxygen, it was important to sample returns. know if the abundant lunar dust could physically support, or In addition, I was responsible for data collection and analy- provide some nutritional benefit to, the plants. Not having to sis during the early missions. It was here that the problems ship plant nutrients from Earth would provide significant sav- began. Although the experiments yielded results that were ings. fairly unambiguous, they were reinterpreted to imply much greater significance than was warranted. It was frustrating to Testing Procedures watch as unfounded statements to the press were eventually incorporated in a manuscript published in the respected scien- The plant experiments involved testing thirty-one species, tific publication Bioscience. which were exposed either as actively growing plants, seedlings Thus, I am obliged to set the record straight concerning that had just germinated, intact plants grown on artificial those aspects of which I have first-hand knowledge. I think media, or isolated tissues on artificial media. Some species readers of the SKEPTICAL INQUIRER will appreciate seeing how were given normal fertilizers, while others received only a few a combination of errors, some misrepresentation, and a large of the required nutrients. Because of the lack of nutrients, it dose of wishful thinking resulted in these conclusions that might be possible to determine if the plants "mine" the neces- plants grew better on lunar soil than on Earth soils. sary elements from the lunar material, just as is done in Earth There is danger in allowing this myth go unchallenged. The soils. belief tJiat die Moon possesses unusual and highly positive In almost every case, plants were given one of four dif- properties could erroneously justify return missions. In addi- ferent treatments: tion, some people may note the absence of further publica- 1) exposure directly to lunar material (this was the exper- tions dealing with this "lunar effect" and conclude that some imental treatment) sort of conspiracy caused the silence. What is needed is a clear 2) exposure to lunar material that had been heat- sterilized (to serve as a control for the possibility of a toxic Haven Sweet is Associate Dean of Arts and Sciences, University of lunar element) Central Florida, Orlando, FL 32816. E-mail [email protected]. 3) exposure to a sterilized sample of pulverized Earth During the Apollo program he was intimately involved with the rock that simulated the lunar soil (to control for effects lunar quarantine program and the testing of lunar material on caused by small particles) plants. 4) unexposed plants (as a general control) 4 8 November/December 1999 SKEPTICAL INQUIRER The amount of material exposed to each plant was typically Scientific Publication very small, being only a maximum of 0.22 grams per plant or The plant quarantine results appeared most prominently in culture. For comparison, this is the amount of material that 1, would fit in bottom half of a Bioscience. Unfortunately, this manuscript did nothing to cor- 22 mm bullet casing (in fact, rect earlier allegations that this was the dispensing scoop). plant growth had been stimu- lated by the lunar material; To prevent escape of any radier, these conclusions were putative lunar organisms to the repeated, and incomplete or outside world, all experiments were performed in sealed, gas- misleading data were presented tight cabinets. The amount of to support them. A careful space available to perform reading of the paper should experiments was minimal, the have raised some warning flags number of replicate samples (and did alert some of the was far below what was needed reviewers) since there were sig- for statistical significance, the nificant omissions and discrep- ability to manipulate the plants ancies. was very limited, and measure- With this background, let Figure 2. Liverwort cultures. Those on the top were exposed to lunar material while ments had to be made the bottom cultures were untreated, (originally published in BioScience. vol. 20, us review the actual experi- remotely through the cabinet #24. p. 1301. O1970 American Institute of Biological Sciences) ments, the claims based on windows. In addition, none of die plant materials could be them, and my interpretation of the same. sacrificed during the experiment, prohibiting tissue removal, chemical extraction, or dry-weight measurements. Liverwort Studies—Presented Results Perhaps the most dramatic effect of lunar material on plants Headlines appears in cultures of a primitive plant called a liverwort. The During the lunar missions, mission control in Houston was plant was grown on nutrient-containing agar in jars covered the focus of most news reporters, although the astronauts with a lid permeable to gas and light. As is readily apparent and the moon rocks were the primary story. The quarantine, from the photograph (figure 2), the cultures exposed to lunar on the other hand, was of little interest since the results were material (top row) were definitely larger than the untreated negative. Eventually, however, reporters were given informa- cultures. Indeed, one administrator kept these cultures on his tion implying that the lunar material was at least a fertilizer, desk for months after the quarantine ended and showed them and perhaps something more. This revelation resulted in to visitors to the lab. headlines such as Plants Fare The published text states that the liverwort, grown "on OK in Lunar Soil,1 Moon modified Hudson's solid Dust Acting as Fertilizer on medium, grew several times Plants,' Moon Dust Treat- larger and exhibited an enrich- ment Makes Plants Thrive,' ment in pigmentation over Healthier Plants Shoot Up untreated controls." From Moondust Diet,4 and Although figure 2 shows Good for Plants: Synthetic five lunar-treated cultures Moon Dust Fertilizer.5 which were substantially larger, National attention seized there are several alternate die program when a NASA explanations of these differ- official was quoted in Parade ences, and other data which magazine as saying "the cast doubt that this was an moondust plants were very effect caused by lunar material. clearly ahead of others in Figure 3 Gametophytes on the right side were on agar containing minimal nutn Liverwort Results— growth" and that the lunar ents. while those on the left grew directly on lunar material which was moistened by the agar solution. The color and size differences were very pronounced. Unconsidered Factors material is "not a fertilizer but you'd have to call it some kind of growth promoter." In addi- First, only five of the ten lunar-treated cultures were selected tion, he went on to suggest that the moondust should be for display.

Load more