Miss me?

I miss you. I really do. But, sorry, not scribbling anything. Not in the right mood to do so.
Good night. Bye.

Earthquake---->Tsunami--->Nuclear leak.

A full explanation of nuclear power plants in Japan.

What in the hell is going on here?

In the aftermath of the recent earthquake and tsunami in Japan, two nuclear power stations on the east coast of Japan have been experiencing problems. They are the Fukushima Daiichi (“daiichi” means “number one”) and Fukushima Daini (“number two”) sites, operated by the Tokyo Electric Power Company (or TEPCO). Site one has six reactors, and site two has four. The problematic reactors have been #1 and #3 at site one, which are the oldest of the ten.

In short, the earthquake combined with the tsunami have impaired the cooling systems at these reactors, which has made it difficult for TEPCO to shut them down completely. Reactor #1 is now considered safe after crew flooded the reactor with sea water. Reactor #3 is undergoing this process as this is being written (6:00PM CST/11:00PM GST on March 13th).

Can this cause a nuclear explosion?

No. It is physically impossible for a nuclear power station to explode like a nuclear weapon.

Nuclear bombs work by causing a supercritical fission reaction in a very small space in an unbelievably small amount of time. They do this by using precisely-designed explosive charges to combine two subcritical masses of nuclear material so quickly that they bypass the critical stage and go directly to supercritical, and with enough force that the resulting supercritical mass cannot melt or blow itself apart before all of the material is fissioned.

Current nuclear power plants are designed around subcritical masses of radioactive material, which are manipulated into achieving sustained fission through the use of neutron moderators. The heat from this fission is used to convert water to steam, which drives electric generator turbines. (This is a drastic simplification.) They are not capable of achieving supercritical levels; the nuclear fuel would melt before this could occur, and a supercritical reaction is required for an explosion to occur.

Making a nuclear bomb is very difficult, and it is completely impossible for a nuclear reactor to accidentally become a bomb. Secondary systems, like cooling or turbines, can explode due to pressure and stress problems, but these are not nuclear explosions.

Is this a meltdown?

Technically, yes, but not in the way that most people think.

The term “meltdown” is not used within the nuclear industry, because it is insufficiently specific. The popular image of a meltdown is when a nuclear reactor’s fuel core goes out of control and melts its way out of the containment facility. This has not happened and is unlikely to happen.

What has happened in reactor #1 and #3 is a “partial fuel melt”. This means that the fuel core has suffered damage from heat but is still largely intact. No fuel has escaped containment.

How did this happen? Aren’t there safety systems?

When the earthquakes in Japan occurred on March 11th, all ten reactor cores “scrammed”, which means that their control rods were inserted automatically. This shut down the active fission process, and the cores have remained shut down since then.

The problem is that even a scrammed reactor core generates “decay heat”, which requires cooling. When the tsunami arrived shortly after the earthquake, it damaged the external power generators that the sites used to power their cooling systems. This meant that while the cores were shut down, they were still boiling off the water used as coolant.

This caused two further problems. First, the steam caused pressure to build up within the containment vessel. Second, once the water level subsided, parts of the fuel rods were exposed to air, causing the heat to build up more quickly, leading to core damage from the heat.

What are they doing about it?

From the very beginning, TEPCO has had the option to flood the reactor chambers with sea water, which would end the problems immediately. Unfortunately, this also destroys the reactors permanently. Doing so would not only cost TEPCO (and Japanese taxpayers) billions of dollars, but it would make that reactor unavailable for generating electricity during a nationwide disaster. The sea water method is a “last resort” in this sense, but it has always been an option.

To avoid this, TEPCO first took steps to bring the cooling systems back online and to reduce the pressure on the inside of the containment vessel. This involved bringing in external portable generators, repairing damaged systems, and venting steam and gases from inside the containment vessel. These methods worked for reactor #2 at site one; reactors four through six were shut down before for inspection before the earthquake hit.

In the end, TEPCO decided to avoid further risk and flooded reactor #1 with sea water. It is now considered safely under control. Reactor #3 is undergoing this process.

Is a “China Syndrome” meltdown possible?

No, any fuel melt situation at Fukushima will be limited, because the fuel is physically incapable of having a runaway fission reaction. This is due to their light water reactor design.

In a light water reactor, water is used as both a coolant for the fuel core and as a “neutron moderator”. What a neutron moderator does is very technical (you can watch a lecture which includes this information here), but in short, when the neutron moderator is removed, what happens to the fuel core depends on its design.

An LWR has a design with a “negative void coefficient”. This means that if the neutron moderator is removed, the fission reactor will slow and eventually stop. Some other reactor designs (such as the one at Chernobyl) have a “positive void coefficient”, which means that if the moderator is removed, the fission reaction speeds up and becomes self-sustaning.

An LWR design limits the damage caused by a meltdown, because if all of the coolant is boiled away, the fission reaction will not keep going, because the coolant is also the moderator. The core will then only generate decay heat, which while dangerous and strong enough to melt the core, is not nearly as dangerous as an active fission reaction.

The containment vessel at Fukushima should be strong enough to resist breaching even during a decay heat meltdown. The amount of energy that could be produced by decay heat is easily calculated, and it is possible to design a container that will resist it. If it is not, and the core melts its way through the bottom of the vessel, it will end up in a large concrete barrier below the reactor. It is nearly impossible that a fuel melt caused by decay heat would penetrate this barrier. A containment vessel failure like this would result in a massive cleanup job but no leakage of nuclear material into the outside environment.

This is all moot, however, as flooding the reactor with sea water will prevent a fuel melt from progressing. TEPCO has already done this to reactor #1, and is in the process of doing it to #3. If any of the other reactors begin misbehaving, the sea water option will be available for those as well.

What was this about an explosion?

One of the byproducts of reactors like the ones at Fukushima is hydrogen. Normally this gas is vented and burned slowly. Due to the nature of the accident, the vented hydrogen gas was not properly burned as it was released. This led to a build up of hydrogen gas inside the reactor #1 building, but outside the containment vessel.

This gas ignited, causing the top of the largely cosmetic external shell to be blown off. This shell was made of sheet metal on a steel frame and did not require a great deal of force to be destroyed. The reactor itself was not damaged in this explosion, and there were only four minor injuries. This was a conventional chemical reaction and not a nuclear explosion.

You see what happened in this photo. Note that other than losing the sheet metal covering on the top, the reactor building is intact. No containment breach has occurred.



At about 2:30AM GMT on March 14th, a similar explosion occurred at the reactor #3 building. This explosion was not unexpected, as TEPCO had warned that one might occur. The damage is still being assessed but it has been announced that the containment vessel was not breached.

Is there radiation leakage?

The radiation levels outside the plant are higher than usual due to the release of radioactive steam. These levels will go down and return to their normal levels, as no fuel has escaped containment.

Here is a chart showing the effects of various radiation poisoning levels. For perspective, note that this chart starts at 1 Gy, equivalent to 1 Sv; the radiation outside the problematic Fukushima reactors is being measured in micro-Svs per hour. The highest reported levels outside the Fukushima reactors has been around 1000 to 1500 micro-Svs per hour. This means that one would have to stay in this area for four to six weeks, 24 hours a day, without protection in order to experience the lowest level of radiation poisoning, which while unpleasant is not normally fatal. And this level will not stay where it is.

Also note the chart of normal radiation exposure levels from things like medical x-rays and airline flights.

There have also been very minor releases of radioactive reactor byproducts like cesium along with the steam. This material is less radioactive than the typical output of coal power plants. It is significant mainly as an indicator of the state of the reactor core.

I read that there’s a plume of radioactive material heading across the Pacific.

In its current state, the steam blowing east from Japan across the pacific is less dangerous than living in Denver for a year. If it makes it across the ocean, it will be almost undetectable by the time it arrives.

What’s this about fuel rods being exposed to the air?

When the coolant levels inside the reactor get low enough, the tops of the fuel rods will be exposed to the air inside the containment vessel. They have not been exposed to the external atmosphere and the containment vessels are all intact.

Can this end up like Chernobyl?

No, it cannot. for several reasons.

• Chernobyl was designed with a positive void coefficient. This means that when the neutron moderator was removed, the reaction got stronger. The Fukushima reactors have a negative void coefficient, which means that if you remove the neutron moderator, the reaction slows and eventually stops.
  
  
• Chernobyl’s core was built on top of a tank of water. This was meant to cool the core if it melted through the containment vessel. Instead, it caused a tremendous steam explosion which tore the facility apart. The Fukushima reactors do not have this and will therefore not explode like that, even if the core melts through the containment vessel.
  
  
• Chernobyl used graphite as a neutron moderator. Graphite is flammable, and when the reactor exploded, the radioactive graphite burned and ended up in the atmosphere. The Fukushima reactors use water as a neutron moderator, which is obviously not flammable.

The news said this was the worst nuclear power accident since Chernobyl, though.

It’s the only nuclear power plant accident of its type since Chernobyl. It’s easy to be the worst in a sample size of one.

Is this like Three Mile Island?

There are similarities. The final effect on the world is likely to be similar: no deaths, minimal external contamination, and a tremendous PR disaster for the nuclear industry due to bad reporting by the media.

How can I keep up with developments?

The western media has been very bad about reporting this event, due to a combination of sensationalist reporting, ignorance, and the use of inexact or unexplained terminology.

One of the safe sources of information is the TEPCO site, which has been posting press releases on a regular basis. Unfortunately, this site is often unresponsive due to the immense traffic it is receiving.

The important thing to remember is that most of the “experts” appearing on the news are engaging in speculation. Very few of them are restricting themselves to what they can be sure about, and those that are have often been misrepresented.

Where can I find more information about these issues?

Reading:

• Timeline and data sheets for the incident by the Nuclear Energy Institute
• Wikipedia on light water reactors and nuclear weapon design
• The United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s Boiling Water Reactor (BWR) Systems manual - the Fukushima reactors are BWRs, a subset of LWRs
• More about BWRs
• Tokyo Electric Power Company site with press releases - currently hard to reach due to traffic

Video:

• “Physics for Future Presidents” lecture ten, on nuclear weapons and nuclear reactors
• Footage of the hydrogen explosion at reactor #1

70 Ways to Save Money at the Grocery Store

Got this from a blog. Pretty useful, though not all are applicable to students, especially those whoa re staying at campus hostels or just renting rooms somewhere. But most of it are very helpful. I'm copying it here so that I can always have a reference for myself =)

1. Don't buy frozen. It really racks up your bill, and is high in sodium.

2. Don't buy organic. Organic is a bunch of crap anyways, unless you're growing yourself.

3. Buy fruits and Veggies in Season. They will be more expensive if you don't.

4. Eat something before you go!

5. Try to avoid buying hygiene products. They're typically about 30% higher at grocery stores.

6. Write a grocery list and follow it. Don't let your eyes wander.

7. Stick to the isles you need to walk down. Avoid temptation.

8. Bring a calculator along for the ride. Keep in mind the amount you have to spend, and stick to it.

9. Learn to can your own pasta sauce rather than buying it.

10. Keep in mind that the highest priced items are typically at the level you'd be looking at. Always look up, or down. This is a genius marketing tactic-- so fool the stores!

11. Ask yourself "Do I: Need this? or Just want this?".

12. Cook only meals which consist of ingredients. Don't buy that boxed crap.

13. Don't buy bottled water. Buy a filter. Tap water has more tests ran on it than that crap in the bottle.

14. If you have to buy soda, buy 2 liters. Cans get expensive.

15. Buy in large quantity

16. Pay attention to bins with marked down items inside.

17. Keep prices in mind. Look at local news paper specials and compare prices.

18. Don't go to the store at the last minute. Be realistic, you've got SOMETHING you can cook. (if not, eat grilled cheese or pb&j).

19. Frozen May be a better bet

20. Try to grocery shop online 1 to 2 times a month. It will save you money on gas, and lower your grocery spending.

21. Instead of buying sliced cheese at the deli, look at the alternatives in the dairy isle. Its just as good, and half the price.

22. Find the Most Affordable Store

23. Do not buy more, unless you're completely out.

24. Compare prices by looking at how much you're getting per container

25. Buy the stores generic brand

26. Consider going to the farmers market. The produce is cheaper then a grocery store.

27. Get a basket, rather than a cart. If you get a cart for a small purchase, you're more likely to spend more.

28. Start cutting coupons

29. Look for coupons upon entering the store as well, they're typically by the door just waiting for you to grab them!

30. Buy white eggs rather than brown eggs. They're cheaper.

31. Look for savings in the meat isle. There is typically a discount area.

32. Incorporate more pasta into your diet. Pasta is typically $1-2 a box!

33. Keep in mind what store sells what for cheaper. Shop at multiple stores, rather than one-- to insure that you get the most for your money.

34. Stick to three areas, and three areas only: Produce, Meat, and Dairy.

35. Put down the: candy, cookies, and packaged goodies.

36. Buy ice cream from the schwanns man. Its much cheaper, and terribly convenient.

37. Don't buy premade: potato salad, pasta salad, ect. Just make it!

38. Make bread rather than buying it. A bag of flour costs just about as much as a loaf of bread.

39. Learn to grow your own tomatoes and other veggies.

40. Also, learn to grow your own herbs.

41. Do not buy from the bakery. Instead, bake.

42. Keep your health in mind. Fattening Bad for you foods are normally more expensive.

43. Scope out discount stores in your area. In my area we have ALDO & Save A lot. I buy my spices and pasta from big lots!

44. When things are on sale, by in large quantity.

45. Call companies and ask for coupons, discounts, and freebies. You can often get lucky this way. There are a lot of free things out there, people just don't ask.

46. Skim milk is cheaper then higher percentages. It also has a lot less fat.

47. Stick to poultry rather than beef. The prices are cheaper - and its better for you!

48. Don't buy as many drinks. They add up to a significant part of your bill. Stick to water, juice, and milk. Buy just enough to get by.

49. Buy powdered gatorade rather than bottles. You will save substantially.

50. Learn to make meals out of left overs. You won't have to buy as much food in the long run.

51. Buy frozen juice rather than pre-made.

52. Try to Shop alone. Or with someone whose money conscious. Don't shop with those who add to your bill.

53. Buy a Deep Freezer

54. Make your own lunch meat out of roasts and left overs.

55. Cook in large quantity, and freeze for later. Great substitute for frozen meals.

56. Eat more grains. They're inexpensive and make great side dishes.

57. Carefully look over your receipt. We're all human, we all make mistakes. Just don't pay for other peoples.

58. Don't shop just because you're bored.

59. Take inventory. Make sure ahead of time that you actually need what is on your list. Check refrigerator, and pantry.

60. Get store cards. You will save quite a bit with one of those bad boys.

61. Don't buy grated cheese. Instead, grate it yourself.

62. Understand Unit Prices, and compare prices.

63. Check the day old section in the bread isle. The bread is often discounted up to 50%

64. Try to grocery shop as fast as possible.

65. Don't buy ready to eat salads. Buy a head of lettuce instead.

66. Learn to make your own salad dressing. It tastes better, and its fresh.

67. If you must buy from the deli, ask them to cut items very thinly. A little goes a long way, after all!

68. Try not to buy alcohol.

69. Go to stores that price match. All of that change adds up!

70. Instead of buying canned soup, make your own soup. Make a lot, and freeze it for later.

Interesting, eh? And very true. Practiced some of it myself.

To Let It Out

I wanted to blog for quite a long time ago but I didn't want to end up complaining and being very negative. So, I didn't blog.

This too, I want to keep it short, and it will be short.

Problem is, I had plans, not things I wanted to do, but the things I needed to do. Its different. It wasn't working well from the start. And as I feared, its not going on well and I don't have to wait to know its not going to end well too. Disappointed? Yes, with myself. I don't feel regret. Because at least I tried. Maybe I didn't try hard enough. Sometimes I'm clueless. How to do? How to start?

Anyway, I just hope at least what I needed, I will get it. If that's not meant for me, then, please Lord, show me the alternatives. Or maybe He is showing me and I'm not able to see. Too many doubts in me I guess?

Christians and Urban Legends

Another post that is not originally mine, but I find it very interesting and makes me think. And I know I would want to read it again; so I'm posting it out here, on my blog. Have a read.

____________________________________________________________________________________

Christians and Urban Legends

Dennis Bratcher

It never ceases to amaze me how gullible some people are when something they hear fits with a set of prejudices or deeply held opinions. Unfortunately, this seems to apply even more so to Christians especially when it comes to certain theological ideas such as end times speculation, religion and politics, science and religion, or some specific ethical issues such as the role of women in society or the church, abortion, or homosexuality. Sadly, most of these ideas fall into the realm of “folk theology.” That is, there is very little sound theology about them and are mostly a concoction of beliefs drawn from popular imagination, writings, fears, prejudices, and simply what people want to believe for various reasons.

Then, when they hear something that supports any of those ideas, they accept it uncritically. In fact, there are many Christians who either cruise the internet seeking for such material to support their ideas (and there is plenty available on a myriad of agenda websites!) or they are part of a personal communication network whereby they receive such material from friends and acquaintances. And as part of the phenomenon of modern preoccupation with instant communication, they themselves feel compelled to pass it on to others as proof of their ideas. So, folk theology and sometimes outlandish claims about most everything from biblical prophecy to rumors about presidential candidates get passed around by well-meaning Christians as if it were the truth of the matter.

And all of this is done without ever checking any of the facts as to their accuracy, or the origin of the material, or without asking critical questions about whether it is reasonable or even if sound theology lies behind it. In many cases, it would take very little effort at all to do a little fact checking to debunk such material. There are a lot of websites that debunk such rumors and claims that circulate in this manner, collectively called “urban legends” (for example, Snopes). And yet these urban legends and folk theology keep getting passed around among Christians, often with pronouncements of the judgment of God on unbelievers. Such rumor mongering and fear mongering does nothing but make Christians look foolish and undermines the credibility of the church. On a personal level, such implausible reinforcement of sometimes outlandish opinions prevents individual Christians from growing spiritually and actually learning new perspectives beyond their own ideas. These “proofs” of their beliefs only become a way to inoculate them from any other truth.

Of course, as human beings we are all susceptible to filtering things we hear through our own perceptions. No one is totally immune to the phenomenon of selective hearing or reading. But we all have a responsibility, especially as Christians, to strive earnestly to get all the facts, to process all the evidence, and not jump too hastily to conclusions with which we already agree. That means at the very least developing a habit of deferring conclusions until we have had a chance to check facts and think through different aspects of an issue. Most certainly that means refraining from spreading rumors or "information" that we are not sure about simply because it fits with what we already think.

With the war in Iraq and the obsessive, almost rabid, preoccupation with certain aspects of that war in blending politics with theology, the urban legends, especially those that connect current events with biblical prophecy, are growing exponentially. We seem to have forgotten that the same thing happened during the First Gulf War. TV preachers like Jack van Impe, and many others who published a plethora of books, working from spurious facts and flawed biblical interpretation declared almost with glee the beginning of the end times. And yet none, none of what they predicted as unfolding biblical prophecy worked out as they said.

Still, the urban legends persist. They continue to be repeated as proof of the Bible, God, certain theological views, or the righteousness of certain political opinions, without much concern for good biblical interpretation, sound theology, and a little plain old ordinary truthfulness of facts.

For example, the following began as a chain letter and is now circulating via the internet and e-mail. I have seen it quoted on numerous Christian web sites, and repeated in various forms by word of mouth as if everything in it were the truth. Besides some of it simply being false, there are a great many assumptions about God and the Bible at work here that are not sound Christian theology.

IRAQ - VERY INTERESTING - DID YOU KNOW?

1. The garden of Eden was in Iraq
2. Mesopotamia, which is now Iraq, was the cradle of civilization
3. Noah built the ark in Iraq.
4. The Tower of Babel was in Iraq.
5. Abraham was from Ur, which is in Southern Iraq!
6. Isaac's wife Rebekah is from Nahor, which is in Iraq.
7. Jacob met Rachel in Iraq.
8. Jonah preached in Nineveh - which is in Iraq.
9. Assyria, which is in Iraq, conquered the ten tribes of Israel.
10. Amos cried out in Iraq!
11. Babylon, which is in Iraq, destroyed Jerusalem.
12. Daniel was in the lion's den in Iraq!
13. The three Hebrew children were in the fire in Iraq
(Jesus had been in Iraq also as the fourth person in the fiery furnace!)
14. Belshazzar, the King of Babylon saw the "writing on the wall" in Iraq.
15. Nebuchadnezzar, King of Babylon, carried the Jews captive into Iraq.
16. Ezekiel preached in Iraq
17. The wise men were from Iraq.
18. Peter preached in Iraq.
19. The "Empire of Man" in Revelation is called Babylon, which a city in Iraq!

And you have probably seen this one. Israel is the nation most often mentioned in the Bible. But do you know which nation is second? It is Iraq! However, that is not the name that is used in the Bible. The names used in the Bible are Babylon, Land of Shinar, and Mesopotamia. The word Mesopotamia means between the two rivers, more exactly between the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers. The name Iraq, means country with deep roots.

Indeed Iraq is a country with deep roots and is a very significant country in the Bible. No other nation, except Israel, has more history and prophecy associated it than Iraq.

And also... This is something to think about! Since America is typically represented by an eagle. Saddam should have read up on his Muslim passages...

The following verse is from the Koran, (the Islamic Bible)

Koran (9:11) - For it is written that a son of Arabia would awaken a fearsome Eagle. The wrath of the Eagle would be felt throughout the lands of Allah and lo, while some of the people trembled in despair still more rejoiced; for the wrath of the Eagle cleansed the lands of Allah; and there was peace.

(Note the verse number!) Hmmmmmmm?! God Bless you all Amen !

I BETTER NOT HEAR OF ANYONE BREAKING THIS ONE OR SEE DELETED This is a ribbon for soldiers fighting in Iraq. Pass it on to everyone and pray. Something good will happen to you tonight at 11:11 PM. This is not a joke. Someone will either call you or will talk to you online and say that they love you. Do not break this chain. Send this to 13 people in the next 15 minutes. Go.

I find it sad and a little disheartening that people so easily believe stuff like this, let alone that they think it is something about which to be excited or concerned. I am continually amazed that some people take this kind of thing seriously. As the concluding warnings and “promises” indicate, this is nothing more than magical thinking that borders on the pagan. It is certainly not Christian. That renders any truth in the rest of it of no value to Christians. And there is very little truth to any of it. Like The Omega Code and The DaVinci Code, anyone can find “hidden” correspondences between anything if they know where they want to end up before they start. And this does not even deal with the fact that this approach rather badly misunderstands Scripture.

First, we might note that Iraq did not exist as a country before 1932. It was one of the countries created from the breakup of the Ottoman Turkish Empire following WWI. The area that includes much of the Middle East from Turkey to Egypt went under French and British mandate following the war, and was gradually carved into modern countries and sheikdoms largely for administrative and political purposes, and to serve the interests of Western countries.

Here is a more detailed analysis of this particular urban legend as it became blended with a lot of folk theology to illustrate how a few facts can be distorted and twisted when mixed with misinformation, assumption, prejudice, and outright falsehood.

1. The garden of Eden was in Iraq.

False. No one knows where the Garden of Eden was. The Bible nowhere gives a location for it other than “in the East.” Of course, where that is depends on where one starts. From Israel, that could be anywhere from Arabia to China. But since Israel does not yet exist in Genesis 2, there is no guarantee that “east” is from Israel.

Further, this assumes that “east” is a geographical comment. In many cases in the Old Testament, such simple indications of direction or location are far more symbolic than they are geographical. “East” is often a way to speak of threat or failure, and coming "from the East" is a way to talk about hope and possibility. Note that when Adam and Eve are driven from the garden they go to the east. Cain must live in the east as punishment for killing his brother. When Lot separates from Abram, he moves to the east. Abraham sent his other sons (besides Isaac) to the east country. There are other examples that all suggest that “east” is not a geographical location as much as it is a way of talking about failure or promise.

Some have suggested that since Eden is mentioned in Scripture along with the Tigris and Euphrates rivers this clearly locates Eden in Iraq.

2:10 A river flows out of Eden to water the garden, and from there it divides and becomes four branches. 2:11 The name of the first is Pishon; it is the one that flows around the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold; 2:12 and the gold of that land is good; bdellium and onyx stone are there. 2:13 The name of the second river is Gihon; it is the one that flows around the whole land of Cush. 2:14 The name of the third river is Tigris, which flows east of Assyria. And the fourth river is the Euphrates.

Several things need to be noted here.

a) There is only one river in Eden. It is only when it flows out of Eden that it divides and “from there” becomes four rivers. That would suggest, if we are dealing with physical description here, that Eden was described as being located at the head waters of the two rivers, which would place Eden somewhere in the mountains of Armenia or Southern Turkey south or east of the Black Sea.

b) The geographical location for the Tigris is not clear since the Tigris runs through the middle of ancient Assyria, not to its east. It is possible that only the city of Asshur, the 15th century BC capital of ancient Assyria, is meant. But that raises an entirely different problem of chronology since that city would not exist for several thousand years after the setting of the Genesis account.

c) The identity of Pishon is uncertain. Pishon only occurs here in the Old Testament. It is associated with “the land of Havilah” and that area along with Ophir, a near legendary source of gold, is mentioned elsewhere in the Old Testament as being in Arabia (Gen 10:7, 29, 25:18, 1 Sam 15:7, 1 Ch 1:9, 23). That suggests that Pishon may be located generally in the area of Arabia. It may refer to the Persian Gulf, the Red Sea or more narrowly the Gulf of Aqaba or the Gulf of Suez, the River of Egypt (Wadi el-Arish), or some unknown river in Arabia.

d) The identity of Gihon is likewise uncertain. It is mentioned as flowing around the area of Cush. Elsewhere in the Old Testament Cush refers to the area of Northern Africa generally from Ethiopia to eastern Egypt (for example, 2 Chron 16:8, Psa 68:31; in most cases modern English translation of cush is “Ethiopia”). That suggests that Gihon refers to the Nile. In some genealogies, Cush is the father of Nimrod, who is the ancestral founder of Nineveh, the later Assyrian capital. That suggests connections between north Africa and Mesopotamia, at least on the level of relationships between peoples. However, it gives us no geographical information.

e) Large rivers like these do not usually divide; they usually come together to form larger rivers. Some have suggested that this places Eden near the mouth of the four rivers where they empty into the Persian Gulf. This would place Eden somewhere near Bahrain, or on one of the islands in the Persian Gulf.

f) All of this assumes that the description of Eden is to be taken literally and is accurate in its geographical description. That evokes a certain view of Scripture that raises several questions. Why would Eden be described in terms of general geographic landmarks known to the Israelites in 1200 BC when the time setting of the story is many thousands of years earlier? Would that not suggest that the ancient Hebrews and Israelites were describing Eden in terms of locations with which they were already familiar? Is it at least possible that the ancient Israelites did not know ancient Near Eastern geography precisely, so that they were roughly bounding an area rather than giving precise and literal descriptions? How would they know the precise geography, unless we posit a certain theory of biblical inspiration and then use that theory as a basis for interpreting the material rather than using what we actually have in the biblical text from which to work?

g) The best conclusion that we can reach from the evidence is that we have no idea within a thousand miles and two continents what location is being described in Genesis 2. Maybe that is the point of the description, not to locate Eden at all but rather to place it somewhere within the immediate known world of the Ancient Near East.

h) It seems that the description of Eden is intended to locate it generally within a world with which the ancient Israelites were familiar, yet without precision. Since we have no way to identify precisely the location from the description, it seems that any interpretation of the Bible that depends on such precise location is pointless and driven by other agendas than sound biblical interpretation.

2. Mesopotamia, which is now Iraq, was the cradle of civilization!

False, or at least debatable. This was the consensus of early historians, and was taught as the truth in schools until the past few decades. However, recent archaeological and anthropological research now suggest that the first human civilization originated in central Africa in the rift valleys and in northwest Africa in the area of Nigeria. And even if it were true that Mesopotamia is “the cradle of civilization,” I do not see the significance or the relevance to any interpretation of the Bible in relation to modern Iraq.

3. Noah built the ark in Iraq.

False. Nowhere in the biblical account of the flood does it state where the ark was built.

4. The Tower of Babel was in Iraq.

Partly True. The biblical story only talks about the territory of Babel (along with Erech and Accad, from the later Akkadians, 2400 BC) and locates it in the Plain of Shinar (from the ancient Sumerians, 3500-1900 BC), which is roughly the territory between the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers. Those two rivers run from southeastern Turkey and western Syria to the Persian Gulf bordered by Iran and Kuwait, quite a distance. While there is no direct historical link of Babel in Genesis 11 to Babylonia, the city of Erech and the area of Akkad are thought to be located toward the southern end of the Tigris-Euphrates valley. This would place Babel in what in now southern Iraq. However, it could be further to the north. However, the significance of this in this context likewise eludes me.

In any case this neglects the theological dimension of the narrative in Genesis 11, written long after the events described there after Babylon had already become a symbol for chaos and arrogant rejection of God.

5. Abraham was from Ur, which is in Southern Iraq!

Partially True. The ruins of Ur are located in what is now southern Iraq. However, while this was Abraham’s ancestral home, something important in the ancient world, he is often referenced in the biblical narratives as being from Haran in the region of Aram, far to the north in what is now Turkey. Terah took his family and left Ur very early in the biblical narratives. Abraham received his call from God in Genesis 12:4 at Haran. Note that Deuteronomy 26:5 says that “my father” (referring to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob) was “a wandering Aramean.” The city of Ur has only marginal significance in the biblical narratives.

6. Isaac's wife Rebekah is from Nahor, which is in Iraq.

Partially True. First, we need to note that in most of the early patriarchal narratives, people and places are interchangeable. Abraham was from Haran, yet that was also his brother’s name. His other brother was Nahor. This suggests that we cannot make too much of geographical names in the early narratives.

The city itself is not specifically named; it is only given as “the city of Nahor.” The location of this city is unknown. The biblical reference only places it in Aram-naharayim, “Aram of the Two Rivers.” The assumption is that this would be the ancestral home near Ur, but the reference is only to the general area of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. Again, I fail to see any significance to this other than the fact that it was the ancient custom to marry within tribes, which would require returning to the ancestral homeland for a wife. Nothing is made in any of these biblical narratives of any particular significance of the geographical location.

7. Jacob met Rachel in Iraq.

False. Jacob went to the territory of Aram, specifically Paddam-aram, which is the area around Haran in southern Turkey and northern Syria. Laban, Rachael’s father, is specifically said to live in Paddam-aram and is described as an Aramean. This is far to the north of present-day Iraq.

8. Jonah preached in Nineveh - which is in Iraq.

Partially True. Ninevah was the capital of the Assyrian empire in the eighth and seventh centuries BC, which occupied the upper reaches of the Tigris-Euphrates valley, partially in modern Iraq and partially in southern Turkey. The ruins of the city lie near Mosul in far northern Iraq. However, Assyrian territory extended beyond the border of present-day Iraq.

9. Assyria, which is in Iraq, conquered the ten tribes of Israel.

Partially True. Assyria did conquer the northern ten tribes in 721 BC. But as noted above, the Assyrian Empire lay only partially in what is now Iraq, reaching further north than the present boundaries of Iraq.

10. Amos cried out in Iraq!

False. Amos proclaimed his message in the northern kingdom of Israel. There is no mention of him ever visiting any area outside Judah and Israel. There is not even a record of his pronouncing any prophetic word against either Assyria or Babylon.

11. Babylon, which is in Iraq, destroyed Jerusalem. . . .

True but misleading. All of these references to Babylon as being in Iraq are misleading at best. Iraq covers a much larger or different area than did ancient Sumer, Akkad, Assyria, or Babylon. It is virtually meaningless to try to identify any and every mention of Babylon in the Old Testament as being in Iraq, especially since Iraq has only been in existence for 70 years or so, and in some sense is a totally “artificial” country created by the demands of 20th century politics.

12. Daniel was in the lion's den in Iraq!

See #11.

13. The three Hebrew children were in the fire in Iraq

See #11.

(Jesus had been in Iraq also as the fourth person in the fiery furnace!

False. To identify the figure in the furnace as Jesus is anachronistic. There is no Jesus named anywhere in the Old Testament. It is only byinterpretation that we get any references to or about Jesus in the Old Testament, and those are always colored by certain theological slants.

Also, the construction of this verse in Daniel 3:25 in Aramaic does not specifically imply “the son of God.” It is an idiomatic phrase that emphasizes resemblance. Note the NRSV translation: “. . . and the fourth has the appearance of a god.” The implication in this context is that the presence of God was with the three Hebrew men, an important point to make to a king who has presented himself as a god to be worshipped.

14. Belshazzar, the King of Babylon saw the "writing on the wall" in Iraq.

See #11.

15. Nebuchadnezzar, King of Babylon, carried the Jews captive into Iraq.

See #11.

16. Ezekiel preached in Iraq.

See #11. It is not at all clear from the Book of Ezekiel that he is actually in Babylon, although it is likely.

17. The wise men were from Iraq.

False. The biblical text never says where the Magi were from beyond saying that they came “from the East.” See # 1 on the biblical symbolism of "the East."

18. Peter preached in Iraq.

False. There is no mention of Peter visiting this area.

19. The "Empire of Man" described in Revelation is called Babylon, which was a city in Iraq!

See #11.

And you have probably seen this one. Israel is the nation most often mentioned in the Bible. But do you know which nation is second? It is Iraq! However, that is not the name that is used in the Bible. The names used in the Bible are Babylon, Land of Shinar, and Mesopotamia. The word Mesopotamia means between the two rivers, more exactly between the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers. The name Iraq, means country with deep roots.

False. Egypt is mentioned almost three times as often in the Bible as is Babylon. See #11.

Indeed Iraq is a country with deep roots and is a very significant country in the Bible.

False. Iraq is never mentioned in the Bible, so can have no significance. See #11.

No other nation, except Israel, has more history and prophecy associated it than Iraq.

False. As noted, Egypt is mentioned far more often than Babylon. Israel has a far longer history with Egypt than with Babylon, since Babylon did not emerge until the fall of Assyria in 611 BC. In the NT, Babylon has become a symbol to talk about evil, and is used throughout the NT to refer to Rome, not to any country in the Middle East. “Babylon” throughout the Book of Revelation refers to Rome.

And also... This is something to think about! Since America is typically represented by an eagle. Saddam should have read up on his Muslim passages... The following verse is from the Koran, (the Islamic Bible) (Note the verse number!) Hmmmmmmm?! God Bless you all Amen !

Koran (9:11) - For it is written that a son of Arabia would awaken a fearsome Eagle. The wrath of the Eagle would be felt throughout the lands of Allah and lo, while some of the people trembled in despair still more rejoiced; for the wrath of the Eagle cleansed the lands of Allah; and there was peace.

False. This is a total hoax. From Snopes, a web site that debunks hoaxes and urban legends:

Claim: Quranic verse speaks of the "wrath of the Eagle cleansing the lands of Allah."

Status: False.

Example: [Collected on the Internet, 2003]

Quran (9:11) -- For it is written that a son of Arabia would awaken a fearsome Eagle. The wrath of the Eagle would be felt throughout the lands of Allah and lo, while some of the people trembled in despair still more rejoiced; for the wrath of the Eagle cleansed the lands of Allah; and there was peace.

Origins: No, this isn't a legitimate quotation from the Quran (or Koran), the sacred text of Islam. The chapter and verse citation quoted above is a leg-pull, an obvious play on the USA's (the Eagle) launching of military action against Afghanistan and Iraq (the "lands of Allah") in response to the September 11 terrorist attacks on America organized by Osama bin Laden (the "son of Arabia awakening a fearsome eagle"). That the chapter and verse selection match the date of the terrorist attacks (9:11) is another giveaway to the joke.

Depending upon which translation of the Quran one uses, the section corresponding to chapter 9, verse 11 actually reads something like this:

But if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, they are your brethren in faith; and We make the communications clear for a people who know.

This illustrates how strongly held opinions can be mixed with bad biblical interpretation, emotion, and ill-conceived theology to produce something that is essentially fiction. In fact, since it is being presented as a Christian biblical view it is worse than fiction; it is outright propaganda and most of it false at that. What makes that so bad is that too many Christians are not only believing this kind of material but are basing political and ethical responses on it.

All of this calls for much more careful critical evaluation of material that is circulated on the internet or by e-mail as the latest truth about world affairs, political candidates, or ethical issues. At the very least, Christians should approach such material with a large dose of skepticism. A better approach would be to get their basic biblical and theological information from more reputable sources than web sites and e-mail (and that includes this site; it was never intended that this site should provide information apart from the ministry of a church or local congregation).

It might also suggest the need for a great deal of humility in prayer seeking the guidance of God in developing opinions and attitudes, lest we end up doing harm to God and the Kingdom rather than living as a servant of God to others. If we are not careful, we may be spreading more darkness than we are spreading light.

Internet Sites for Hoaxes and Urban Legends:

VMyths: Computer security hysteria http://www.vmyths.com/

Scambusters: Internet Scams, Identity Theft, and Urban Legends http://www.scambusters.org/

Snopes: Urban Legends, Hoaxes, and Rumors http://www.snopes.com/snopes.asp

About.com: Urban Legends http://urbanlegends.about.com