<<<Some people in assam feel strongly against implementation of RIL in Assam 
and they have good reasons for it. That shouldn't stop RIL for the areas 
where it makes sense.>>>

I don't feel strongly against RIL.
Sounds  flippant but they are already connected--through the Sea.
mm



>From: Chan Mahanta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: Dilip/Dil Deka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [email protected]
>CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: [Assam] OUR RIVER ISLANDS ARE GONE!!
>Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2005 09:48:11 -0500
>
>>Has the president ever said it is all of RIL that has to be implemented? I 
>>have >not seen such a statement.
>
>
>**** And *I* haven't seen anything in which the the pres. has said anything 
>to CLARIFY that he is merely promoting RIL SELECTIVELY.
>
>There is also a good reason for it however: Because the concept of RIL does 
>not stand a chance of justification, even to its most ignorant supporters, 
>without the Brahmaputra waters; as was very clearly and persuasively 
>pointed out by Prof. Bandopadhyay of IIM-Kolkata , who undertook one of the 
>most exhaustive study of the proposal, at Guwahati sometime back.
>
>
>>But I cannot accept that no change should be made to what nature has 
>> >established for us -------.
>
>
>**** In the absence of context, such truisms mean little, if anything at 
>all.
>Particularly when it is floated in the context of such outrageous proposals 
>as RIL.
>
>
>And for those devotees of RIL mythology, I paste below something, that  
>might be of interest--from Riverlink Digest# 545, and hopefully the math 
>will help where ordinary reasoning fails:
>
>
>Message: 1
>
>    From: "S.G. Vombatkere" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re: Flood and Droughts
>
>Dear Friends,
># Further to Dinesh ji's (as usual, illuminating) note, anybody who thinks 
>that interlinking rivers (ILR) can solve Bihar's flood flow of 50,000 
>cumecs in Ganga by removing 1,000 cumecs by means of a canal, wears rose 
>coloured spectacles or lives in a fool's paradise. This year, with drought 
>in Bihar when they usually have fl;ood, the situation is bad and will get 
>worse when the dry season begins. Is it at all likely that Biharis will 
>entertain the idea of parting with 1,000 cumecs in the dry season when 
>Ganga flows at about 5,000 cumecs and they themselves need the water?
># Yet this ILR idea appears to have ignited the imagination of people like 
>our President Kalam who has been vigorously advocating it with the aim of 
>solving flood and drought at the same time by inter-basin mass transfer of 
>water. When we met him on 20 April 2005, he had said that "my people in 
>Assam" and "my people in Bihar" suffer every year from flood, and he is 
>very much concerned with the problem. But he was not at all receptive to 
>the logic of the argument that a canal cannot relieve flood more than about 
>2% and that too only downstream of the canal.
># The current disaster due to floods in Mumbai is because water does not 
>drain away, and that in turn is because of artificial structures like roads 
>and railways (without adequate cross drainage), and encroachments in 
>waterways, and "reclaiming" of low-lying areas for constructions. {The word 
>"reclaiming" is incorrect because it was not with people earlier - it is 
>actually land grabbed from nature.}
># Interlinking rivers (ILR) will create canals that will directly obstruct 
>the natural drainage of the land and cause waterlogging. With unusually 
>heavy rainfall, there will be disastrous flooding like in Mumbai or in 
>Gujarat. One does not require a college education to understand these 
>simple things ... even a school child will see the illogic of ILR and 
>understand the cause of the disaster due to flooding. But then, without 
>being "unparliamentary", suffice it to say that some are born blind, some 
>become blind and some are made blind. Each of us needs to decide into which 
>category we fit.
>Sudhir Vombatkere
>
>
>  
>***************************************************************************
>
>
>
>At 10:05 PM -0700 9/11/05, Dilip/Dil Deka wrote:
>>If one wants to draw a distinction between science and engineering, Dr. 
>>Kalam is not a scientist but an engineer by training. He may be an expert 
>>in rocketry but does that make him an expert in RIL? In the details it 
>>does not. But in concepts, it does not matter whether he did his doctorate 
>>in rocket engineering or in hydraulics. There are aspects of RIL that will 
>>be good for some regions in India. I agree everything that is proposed in 
>>RIL may not be good for all of India.
>>Some people in assam feel strongly against implementation of RIL in Assam 
>>and they have good reasons for it. That shouldn't stop RIL for the areas 
>>where it makes sense.
>>
>>Has the president ever said it is all of RIL that has to be implemented? I 
>>have not seen such a statement.
>>
>>The arrangement of the earth in terms of hills and rivers is not the 
>>ultimate in design, it just happened due to natural forces. To change the 
>>arrangement is not a crime as some make it appear. Definitely care must be 
>>taken to rearrange what has been there for millenia. But I cannot accept 
>>that no change should be made to what nature has established for us. With 
>>an attitude of no change, life for human beings on this earth would be 
>>impossible. Should crude oil be processed into the hydrocarbons and 
>>plastics that we need in modern life or should we let crude oil remain in 
>>the ground because processing impacts the environment?
>>
>>Dilip Deka
>>
>>
>>"Alpana B. Sarangapani" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>Excuse me for butting in here, C'da.
>>
>>  >India's top self-appointed "scientist", APJ Kalam, from his bully 
>>pulpit at Hastinapur has >ignored/brushed aside
>>
>>"self-appointed" scientist? Isn't Dr. Kalam a recognized, well known 
>>scientist?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>From: Chan Mahanta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>To: "Barua25" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "mc mahant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>CC: [email protected]
>>Subject: Re: [Assam] OUR RIVER ISLANDS ARE GONE!!
>>Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2005 22:46:33 -0500
>>
>>blockquote, dl, ul, ol, li {padding-top:0;padding-bottom:0;}
>>Rajen:
>>
>>Two things to note:
>>
>>1: Do you keep tab on all that appears in Assam Net? If you do, how did 
>>you miss what I posted?
>>
>>2:Who is this  "--- scientific co community" comprised of, and is capable 
>>of passing verdicts?
>>
>>India's top self-appointed "scientist", APJ Kalam, from his bully pulpit 
>>at Hastinapur has ignored/brushed aside the Indian scientific community's 
>>opposition to Riverlinking. So who is the 'scientific community' that you 
>>put your faith in? The people who know about rivers, hydrology, geology 
>>and the environment, or a rocket engineer, or who-have-you?
>>
>>c
>>


>_______________________________________________
>assam mailing list
>[email protected]
>http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org



_______________________________________________
assam mailing list
[email protected]
http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org

Reply via email to