SADDAM DRAINED THE GARDEN OF EDEN

Boston Globe ^ | 4/1/2003 | Fred Pearce

[van_erwin]

Saddam Hussein turned a thriving marshland into a poisoned desert. Can it be restored?

The project, which has been discussed only in outline by scientists so far, would be the largest and most ambitious recovery of a wetland ever attempted. It might cost tens of millions of dollars or more, but could be a model for reviving many other natural water reservoirs as the world staves off growing water shortages.

[salmon76]

"Only wimps are scared of mosquitoes and snakes"

Whoa, partner...I live in the South and waded through many swamps (I loved to fish and frog gig in them. My wife thinks I'm nuts). However, maybe its just me, but I don't picture the Garden of Eden being a big swamp or wetland.

Trees? Yes. Vegetation? Yes. Rich agricultural farmland? Yes. Lakes and rivers? Yes. Flooded cyprus trees with Spanish moss, skeeters, gators and cottonmouths ? Not so sure about that. However, a Cajun or Floridian may think its paradise. Of course, I have to admit catching some largemouth bass in places like this and thought it was heaven on earth, but I wouldn't want to live there.

[Carry_Okie]

I don't have time for the answer you would like, but here goes:

Who specifically?

Those advocating banning DDT: Chiefly, the Environmental Defense Fund and EPA Administrator William Ruckleshaus.

And what details do you have to explain why they did this? What clearly motivated them, and what may have been additional motivations?

That would seem to me redundant. There are two indications, one by subtraction, the other anecdotal (and ugly).

Ruckleshaus convened a scientific panel under Judge Sweeney to study the merit of banning DDT. The Judge submitted a 9,000 page report of his findings on DDT:

• Neither DDT nor its breakdown products are carcinogenic,
• Neither DDT nor its breakdown products are mutagenic,
• No credible evidence was found that supported the allegation that DDT or its breakdown products caused egg shell thinning or toxicity to marine life.

Ruckleshaus overruled the good judge and banned DDT anyway.

There was clearly no real environmental motive for banning DDT. There are numerous possible motives on the part of EDF's financial supporters, from preventing third world development to maintain cheap access to minerals, pesticide companies wishing to market organophosphates, political interests in maintaining third whirled dependency upon American food and financial aid, deepening the control of the IMF, to third world population control. It is my opinion that the latter was the overriding motive.

When confronted with the evidence and the 270,000,000 cases of malaria and the millions of lives lost every year to infections that could have been prevented, Dr. Charles Wurster, chief scientist of the Environmental Defense Fund (and not at all qualified by specialty for his position) is quoted to have stated, "this was as good a way for getting rid of (overpopulation) as any".

The quote has not been authenticated, although it has been published numerous times. Neither Dr. Wurster nor the notoriously litigious EDF has sued a publisher of the quote.

Finally, how did they pull it off?

I'm not sure what you mean by this question, politically or legally? Under what authority, you might ask?

Politically, the case is obvious: control of the media buzz. Legally I believe the commerce clause, NEPA, and (IIRC) the Clean Water Act are cited for the Secretary's authority on such matters, but that is all from very deep memory off the top of my head.

[Avoiding_Sulla]

When confronted with the evidence and the 270,000,000 cases of malaria and the millions of lives lost every year to infections that could have been prevented [by the use of DDT], Dr. Charles Wurster, chief scientist of the Environmental Defense Fund (and not at all qualified by specialty for his position) is quoted to have stated, "this was as good a way for getting rid of (overpopulation) as any".

Well that quote qualifies it for the Death Cultivation Bumplist anyway. It goes well with the verified quote by Jacques Cousteau that's already there. DDT Delirium is there too. Remember that? Did the Senate ratify the Stockholm treaty?

[Mo1]

---

	Donate Here By Secure Server Or mail checks to FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794 or you can use PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com
STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD-

[thetruckster]

Moccasins can scare you. Aggressive little boogers. Generally, they run off when you shoot at them. I agree, they do keep things interesting. I've had many "Oh, sh*t!!" moments, but they have never been enough to keep me and my .22 out of our East Texas swamps and bogs. What's left of them.

[ZULU]

The area should be restored.

But Eden was in Ethiopia where the first hominids evolved, not in Sumeria.

[SunkenCiv]

Just adding this to the GGG catalog, not sending a general distribution. An interesting discussion on the location of the Biblical Garden of Eden.

Please FREEPMAIL me if you want on, off, or alter the "Gods, Graves, Glyphs" PING list --
Archaeology/Anthropology/Ancient Cultures/Artifacts/Antiquities, etc.
The GGG Digest -- Gods, Graves, Glyphs (alpha order)

[varon]

Remember,Saddam is a baathist,not a Republican.

You're darn tootin' he is and as such when he decided to do something (destroy the swamp) he didn't let up until the job was done. The Republicans, on the other hand, are not know for their stick-to-it-ness.