Posted on 02/21/2005 7:04:50 AM PST by Alex Marko
The fabled marshes of Mesopotamia, largely destroyed by Saddam Hussein in one of the worst pieces of ecological vandalism in recent history, can be partially restored, scientists said on Sunday.
The first scientific assessment of the marshes in southern Iraq, al considered by some to have been the Biblical location of the Garden of Eden, was presented to the American Association for the Advancement of Science meeting in Washington.
Saddam's drainage programme - accompanied by the persecution and forced relocation of the Marsh Arabs who had lived there for 5,000 years - reduced the wetlands to 7 per cent of their original 20,000 sq km area. But some of the former marshland is already recovering, following the actions of local people who broke down Saddam's dikes and dams after his regime fell in 2003.
The study by US, Canadian and Iraqi scientists showed a surprising rapid return of plants and wildlife to the areas that have been reflooded by the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. "The quality of the river water turns out to be much higher than many people had expected," said Curtis Richardson of Duke University in North Carolina, the study leader.
"Immediately after [the overthrow of Saddam] we saw just a dozen birds in the marshes," Prof Richardson said. "A year later, there were hundreds and now they are talking about many thousands."
The marshes were once an important resting point for waterfowl migrating between Siberia and Africa. The local otter species, which survived in the small area of the marshes along the Iranian border that were not drained, is also making a come-back.
Barry Warner, a botanist at the University of Waterloo in Canada, said: "There are encouraging signs that a vibrant and healthy plant community will re-establish itself in the newly wetted areas."
Because the marshes were drained only recently - mainly during the 1990s as Saddam took revenge on the Shia Marsh Arabs for their failed insurrection after the first Gulf War - many desiccated areas retain a large and viable seedbed.
But the scientists said a sustained international effort would be needed to support Iraqis' efforts to turn the current ad-hoc flooding into a sustainable long-term revival. Peter Reiss, director of the US Agency for International Development's marshland restoration project, said: "Within Iraq the destruction of the marshes has become a symbol of the oppression by Saddam's regime."
Most Iraqis support restoration, but there is no consensus about how much of the marshes to restore permanently given the competing demands for scarce water. Prof Richardson said 30 per cent would be a reasonable target.
Plans by Turkey and Iran to take more water from the Tigris and Euphrates rivers also pose a long-term threat to marshland restoration.
Even the Marsh Arabs have somewhat ambivalent attitudes about restoration of the wetlands. Their population, estimated at 350,000 in 1950, is now little more than 100,000, none of whom are living in their original homes, Mr Reiss said. Their traditional way of life, documented by Wilfred Thesiger, Gavin Maxwell and other authors, was based on fishing, water buffalo herding and reed cutting. This is virtually extinct today and most of the remaining Marsh Arabs are impoverished sedentary farmers. But according to Mr Reiss, many of them feel it will be impossible to recreate their way of life and would prefer outside investment in conventional agriculture.
Actually, when you get about 45 miles due west of NYC, it's really rather pretty. The western part of NJ is hilly and green, and there are areas south of the Raritan River and west of the Garden State Parkway, that are more rural, too. We used to live in Freehold Township, which is about halfway between Trenton and Asbury Park, and less than 10 minutes drive West of us were big farms, and East of us was Colt's Neck township which also has big spreads, some of which are owned by wealthy folks who work in NYC.
Approach any study of Scripture with the same intellect with which you would study science, and not with emotion.
The Word of God can withstand any intellectual assault you can give it (after all, it is God who gave you your keen mind, and He wants us to worship Him with our minds, as well as our spirits).
Read it openly (no emotional baggage), and see if it doesn't make sense to you. There may be seeming inconsistencies at first glance, but if you grapple with them, you will see what's really being said.
Keeping in mind, of course that people have been studying God's word for centuries, and have come up with many shades of interpretation........but the essence of its truth is there to anyone who honestly looks.
It contains no errors. Only we do.
Try the book of John. Or Romans........it's incredibly deep and complex intellectually.
It really is a beautiful state. :o)
> then an intelligent person with a quest for knowledge (that you clearly have), might have chosen to investigate what he had been taught more thoroughly, rather than reject it.
And what makes you think that an honest quest for the facts would NOT lead to abandoning Christinity as a religious faith? I would hardly be the first, won;t be the last, to be confronted with ridiculous in one's religion, decide to investigate, and find that the rest of it all falls down.
Trust me, this is NOT a realization that filled me with joy then, nor does it now.
> You are basing your view that the Bible is "chock full of errors" on insufficient information,
Incorrect. The Bible, especially the Old Testament, is nearly entirely fantasy, just fantasy set in and around historical places. Think "Buffy the Vampire Slayer."
> You need to go to the Christ of Christian Scriptures (without error) and study what He has really said and done, and you will find out that His (historically provable) life is a fact
Sadly, Christ's historiocity is *not* proven. To assume the arguements "proving" Christ are valid, one can just as readily "prove" that Elvis isn't dead. Even though coroners photos and reports on Elvis were made available, even though a large number of witnesses testified to the fact of Elvis' death... within very short order a great many people came to believe - on nothing but faith - that Elvis was still alive. Within a very short length of time, witnesses came forth stating that Elvis was alive, and they'd seen him. A quarter century after the man died, many people believe he's alive.
Look at how fast urban legends spread *today*, when the ability to fact-check and debunk them is vastly superior to what it was 1960 years ago. So a few decades after the supposed resurection, some people were fervent believers? Unimpressive.
Except for the Newark/Elizabeth area. That really IS the armpit of NJ! LOL!
I've heard this claim made before, and it is so stupid. Assuming the creation is literally true (which I do), the former world was destroyed in the flood. The Euphrates and Tigris rivers that exist today are not the same rivers mentioned pre-flood. They are rivers that were named for those rivers. The Garden of Eden could have been in Nebraska or Japan. The former world was washed away. Noah was in the ark for a year, floating randomly. None of the previous landmarks would have survived the flood, although new landmarks would be named for the old ones.
You may have 'investigated' it (which I seriously doubt), but my guess is that you did it with an intent to prove it was as silly and ridiculous as you thought it was because you were still mad at your Sunday School teacher.
Try it again honestly sometime......without your hurt feelings getting in the way.........like a scientist ought to.
And try weighing the New Testament against the same proofs of other ancient texts. It stands up to all the tests, whether you admit it or not. The Gospels are valid historic documents.
And Jesus is an historical figure, and your denial of the facts tells me a whole lot about your intellectual honesty........or lack thereof.
> I'll call you on your bluff.
And what "bluff" is that? Just because a fantasy is set in a real place does nto make the fantasy fact.
> Try it again honestly sometime...like a scientist ought to.
Already done. How many times must a scientist prove that something isn't so?
> And Jesus is an historical figure
A statement for which there is no factual basis.
If you want to be consistent, you must deny the historical existence of all ancient figures, because more authentic historic evidence exists for the reality of Jesus than any of the above.
And your ignorance of the data proves to me that your 'investigation' is a bluff. You don't know what you're talking about.
You may say you don't believe Jesus is the Messiah, that he isn't God made flesh, but to say he isn't an historical figure only reveals your own lack of information and ignorance.
Do some study, and get back to me. Then we can have a discussion based on intellectual honesty, and not emotional bluster.
And don't ever teach science if you have such a blatant disregard for facts.
Because, another group which commonly disregards facts based on feelings is the political left.
Since you are using the same MO here, the question can legitimately be asked of you......
The garden of Eden is/was in Iran about 10 miles outside of Tabriz.
Ummm...there were two troublesome trees: the tree of life (immortality) and the tree of knowledge (of good and evil).
There is an old joke that asks, "How many of each species of animal did Moses bring into the ark?"
Of course you now know the answer.
From whence, then, comes emotional response?
Further, why is there emotional response at all?
What adaptive purpose does emotional response play in evolution?
Even further, explain the adaptive purpose of spirituality in evolution; do other creatures have spiritual experiences?
Why do human beings have spiritual experiences?
Why do reason and belief both exist in human beings? If one is an adaptive necessity, surely the other is as well, true?
> From whence, then, comes emotional response?
From the brain. The heart has nothing to do with it.
> Further, why is there emotional response at all?
Basic emotions are useful survival traits. Fear keeps you alive, anger defends your young, love keeps you with your mate and your young, etc. Humans, having evolved intellects rather more advanced than the norm, also evolved more complex emotions than the norm.
> Why do human beings have spiritual experiences?
One possibility: the universe is extremely complex and chaotic, and not at all set up to make life easy and comfortable. Spirituality may well be simply a means by which humans rationalize such complexities.
> do other creatures have spiritual experiences?
Dogs sure seem to.
Using emotion rather than reason (and facts) to argue a point is not conservative, and that's what the young man was doing.
Nice try, though.............well.........not really. Pretty vacuous try, actually.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.