Eumaeus atala

(Florida, 11/11/23)

Halo Timeline - Divergence

With Microsoft effectively shitting the bed in regards to the franchise, I’ve felt a need to dig deeper into the divergent timeline I work with for Joshua’s universes where he doesn’t get thrown into another universe, specifically, the “Halo Universe 2561-2592″ AU listed on my verses post.

As a starting point, in this timeline there was no Created uprising. Cortana is dead and stays dead, as do any rampant shards or copies of her, and the UNSC continues to reclaim it’s pre-War colonies ravaged by the defunct and shattered Covenant. This is effectively the Happy Ending Timeline for the UNSC.

By 2561, the portal to the Ark was re-established and the Spirit of Fire rescued, brought back to Earth, and her crew free to continue their service or retire with honors.

The UNSC Navy continues to rebuild, becoming the dominant force in the known galaxy, but never quite getting bored. The Covenant had hundreds, if not thousands, of ships before the Great Schism and believing that the entire Covenant navy was wiped out by the end of the war is wishful thinking. Rogue splinter groups like the Storm Covenant still keep the UNSC occupied, but they’re nowhere near threatening humanity the same way they were during the War. Previously destroyed or phased out ships found new life as reverse-engineered Covenant and Forerunner technology made wartime designs viable again, with larger ships like battleships and carriers being reintroduced in numbers rivaling the days of Operation: TREBUCHET.

Human rebels still exist, but their numbers were decimated during and after the Covenant War. Whether it’s the New Insurrection or the New Colonial Alliance, they fight for a cause that barely exists with whatever equipment they can scavenge from old battlefields or buy off of Jackal smugglers, but their days of holding fleet actions against the UNSC died during the Covenant War.

Spartan Operations eventually expands into The Spartan Corps, going from a few hundred during the Requiem Campaign to well into the thousands by the end of the 2560s. Despite this, ODSTs are still as ubiquitous on UNSC ships as sailors are, and not every naval vessel can house the equipment needed to keep a permanent Spartan detachment aboard.

ONI continues to be the sneaky bastards they always have been, with Admiral Osman bringing the organization into a golden age as the compromises of the Covenant War were swept under the rug and disavowed. With their reputation mostly intact and anyone who needed to disappear being thoroughly scrubbed from existence, post-war black ops continued, just with technological supremacy not seen during the fight against the Covenant.

Most UNSC worlds became melting pots as the decades got on, specifically with Sangheili wanting to distance themselves from their past service to the false Prophets and Kig-Yar embracing their more mercantile nature without the restraints of the Covenant theocracy. However, non-human populations still make up only a fraction of the population as humanity went through a massive baby boom starting in 2553. _____________ In regards to Captain Joshua-077, his naval career would continue as he slowly spent more time on the bridge than in the field. Project: MIDSUMMER NIGHT would end in 2565 with command of the Gettysburg being handed over fully to NAVCOM from ONI, and Joshua would say goodbye to the storied vessel and her crew the following year. With the joint operations of the Gettysburg behind him, Spartan-077 would assume command of the UNSC Midway, one of the Navy’s recently re-introduced Orion-class assault carriers, and would eventually plant his flag aboard her upon being promoted to Rear Admiral in 2572, becoming the second Spartan to attain the rank. Despite being a flag officer, Rear Admiral Cain would often wear his armor on the bridge both out of habit and as a “just in case” measure should the bridge depressurize or lose life support.

Multiple new cryptic species of bilby, and a case of mistaken identity among bandicoots leading to an accidental introduction:

Even after the catastrophic debacle of introducing non-native cane toads, European rabbits, foxes, dromedary camels, feral cats, and invasive invertebrates, Australian settler institutions are cursed with mistakes which unleash invasive animals even when attempting the well-meaning reintroduction of native species.

Some new research from 2018 revealed an alarming mistake in ecological management. Basically, you’ve got this cute little bilby from the remote far western coast near Shark Bay which was transported by scientists thousands of kilometers and now has a big strong population just chilling near Adelaide. Bilbies, or bandicoots, are understood to be important to maintaining healthy soils, especially in Mediterranean chaparral zone and the other climatically mild and temperate regions of the coast of southern Australia (ranging between Perth through Adelaide to the Melbourne area, and including Tasmania), so there is popular celebration of the reintroduction of bandicoots to environments which they historically inhabited before European agriculture and invasive species led to local extinction of many bandicoots. The western barred bandicoot (Perameles bougainville) went extinct across almost all of its range and disappeared from native habitats on the mainland after European invasion, but a few populations survived on extremely remote islands off the coast of Shark Bay in on the far western coast of Western Australia. Intending to help rehabilitate native soils and plant communities, Australian settler ecologists then took some bandicoots from Shark Bay islands and “reintroduced” the western barred bandicoot over 3000 kilometers away at the Arid Recovery Reserve, near Lake Torrens area north of Adelaide. This was done because settler scientists thought that this bandicoot species had historically lived across much of southern Australia. Uh oh: It turns out that this western barred bandicoot lineage was historically only native to a small portion of the western coast of Australia near Shark Bay far, far away and was never native to the Adelaide or Lake Torrens area, because what was assumed to be the “western barred bandicoot” was actually 5 different cryptic species. 4 of these species are now extinct. The only living member of this bandicoot lineage remains only at Shark Bay. But now, these Shark Bay bandicoots are living north of Adelaide, where a couple thousand of them live at Arid Recovery Reserve.

A western barred bandicoot from the coastal Western Australia population at the islands of Bernier and Dorre:

Kenny Travouillon, the lead researcher who reported the cryptic species and new understanding of bandicoot biodiversity, was featured recently in this report from Western Australian Museum, February 2018:

“For example, many people will have seen the Quenda (Isoodon obesulus fusciventer), a bandicoot familiar to Perth backyards. For more than 150 years the Quenda had been thought to be a subspecies of the Southern Brown Bandicoot (Isoodon obesulus) from the east coast of Australia, when in fact our research shows that it is a distinct species and more closely related to the Golden Bandicoot (Isoodon auratus) endemic to WA and found on Barrow Island and throughout the Kimberley.”

“We also re-evaluated the Western Barred Bandicoot (Perameles bougainville), a species now only found on islands near Shark Bay, and we found that it is in fact a complex of five distinct species. Four of these species had been named in the 1800s, but we described a new species from the Nullarbor region, the Butterfly Bandicoot or Nullarbor Barred Bandicoot (Perameles papillon). This is a new species that went extinct between 1920 and 1960, as a result of feral carnivores spreading west,” he said.

Four of the eight bandicoots that once lived in in WA are now extinct: the Pig-footed Bandicoot (Chaeropus ecaudatus), the Desert Bandicoot (Perameles eremiana), the Marl Bandicoot (Perameles myosuros) and the Butterfly Bandicoot (Perameles papillon). The four that remain are the Quenda (Isoodon fusciventer, previously known as the Southern Brown Bandicoot), Northern Brown Bandicoot (Isoodon macrourus), Golden Bandicoot (Isoodon auratus), and the Little Marl (Perameles bougainville), which was previously known as the Western Barred Bandicoot. [End of excerpt.]

Here’s a story on how the confusion has resulted in a non-native bandicoot species being reintroduced where it didn’t belong:

An endangered Australian bandicoot that was reintroduced to the Australian mainland is now believed to be one of five distinct species, and researchers say it may have been a mistake to introduce it to South Australia.

Scientists working for the Western Australian Museum have published research that concludes that what has been known as the western barred bandicoot is in fact five distinct species – four of which had become extinct by the 1940s as a result of agriculture and introduced predators. The species were closely related but occurred in different parts of Australia.

In the 2000s, western barred bandicoots that had survived on the arid Bernier and Dorre islands off Western Australia were reintroduced to the mainland, including to a predator-proof reserve in outback South Australia. But the new study shows the surviving species that was translocated to that part of the country would never have occurred there previously. Lead researcher Dr Kenny Travouillon made the findings after analysing skulls and DNA from tissue from specimens held in collections in Paris and London.He said the research, which was published in Zootaxa, came to the conclusion that the western barred bandicoot was the only remaining species of the five.

The species that has been reintroduced around Australia would have originally occurred only in parts of Western Australia. “On the mainland, that species should have only been in WA along the coast from Shark Bay to Onslow,” he said. “They should never have been brought to South Australia, but that decision was made from the old research.” Dr Kath Tuft, the general manager of the Arid Recovery Reserve in South Australia, said there were now as many as 2,000 western barred bandicoots at the reserve. She said what had been considered a reintroduction of the species was now technically an introduction. [End of excerpt.]

-----

Important distinction: There is another celebrated - and more successful - bandicoot reintroduction project involving a different species.

The eastern barred bandicoot (Perameles gunnii) lives on Tasmania and on the mainland in southern Victoria near Melbourne. The population that once inhabited mainland ecosystems almost went entirely extinct, but there are multiple successful reintroduction sites in Victoria and a captive breeding program.

The species also lives on Tasmania, but here are the reintroduction sites on the mainland near Melbourne [map from the species recovery plan, State Government Victoria]:

This bandicoot species does belong in mainland southern Australia.

INTELLIGENT DESIGN THEORY AND CORONAVIRUS

CORONAVIRUS IN CREATION Does The Recent Coronavirus Outbreak Support Evolution? by Robert Carter  

  There is a new virus sweeping the world. Most people are calling it ‘coronavirus’. It was first noticed in Wuhan, China and is already popping up in multiple countries. Many people have died. What are we supposed to think about it? Do viruses support evolution? Can we explain them in a creation context? Can this be part of the ‘very good’ creation? Hold onto your hats, for I am about to turn what you think about viruses on its head.   Most Viruses Are Beneficial It comes as a shock to many people when they hear it, but most viruses are good for you. Have you heard that there are as many bacteria in and on your body as there are cells in your body? That is true. But it is also true that you have more viruses in your gut than you have bacteria! In fact, the viral population (called the ‘virome’1) plays an important role in regulating the number and types of bacteria in your body.2 Without them, we might be rapidly consumed by the hungry little bacteria that live in our intestines. Have you ever gone swimming in the ocean? Then you were swimming in a highly concentrated bacterial soup. There are lots of bacteria in ocean water, with many different species. But, as in your gut, there are more viruses than bacteria and they probably play a role in maintaining and balancing the bacterial population in oceanic waters. Could we even have fish if there were no viruses? That is an interesting question that some enterprising young scientist might be able to answer one day. Did you know that your cells produce many ofthe same things that viruses are made of? Have you ever gone swimming in a lake? Then you were swimming in a soup of bacteria and viruses. Did that lake have ducks, swans, or geese swimming about? Then you were swimming among influenza viruses. In fact, aquatic waterfowl carry all possible types of the influenza virus, including the ones that do not infect humans. These viruses get introduced to the water as the birds defecate. But the presence of the virus usually does not produce disease in these birds,3 or in you, even though you are getting them in your eyes, ears, and mouth. An evolutionist might say the reason the birds do not (usually) get sick is because the two have been at war with one another for millions of years and they have settled down to a truce, where the virus does not kill the host and the host gives the virus a place to live. From a creation perspective, the influenza virus probably has a beneficial role for the birds, but it is doubtful that anyone has looked for it yet.   Some Viruses Might Have Escaped From the Genome Did you know that your cells produce many of the same things that viruses are made of? We make protein coats, we copy DNA and RNA, we have mechanisms of moving DNA to different parts of the genome, etc. Thus, some viruses might have originated in normal cellular operations.4 The parts are all there, sometimes the parts are assembled into things that almost appear virus-like. All it would take is for a few accidental changes and the assemblage could get out of hand and ‘go viral’.   Some Viruses Might Have Escaped Their Initial Design Constraints Even though they are beautiful, ducks and other aquatic waterfowl carry every known type of influenza But not all viruses are genome-like. Many viruses that produce disease look like they are designed to do what they do. Where did these come from? Well, if a virus exists that is designed to infect the cells of a bacterium, or a mouse, or a person, there are probably checks and balances in that system. If one of those checks fails, the virus might be able to reproduce much faster than it was originally designed to do. This would result in disease. Thus, a ‘beneficial’ virus might be able to turn into a dangerous one. It might just take a few small mutations, like maybe a change in a cellular recognition factor that prevents the host cells from detecting, and therefore regulating, the virus.   Viruses That Jump Species Are Especially Dangerous We can now discuss the coronavirus, a virus that does not belong in humans. Viruses that jump between species are called zoonotics (notice the word ‘zoo’ in that name). We have lots of evidence for zoonotic viruses, including influenza,5 the coronavirus family (this new virus, SARS, and MERS), and HIV (the virus that causes AIDS). All of these cause disease in humans. Some of them have persisted in the human population for a very long time. Happily, however, many new viruses burn themselves out. Viruses will also weaken over time. As they multiply, they pick up mutations and sometimes, those mutations will weaken them to the point where they are no longer transmitted. This is not always the case, though, and some viruses, like HIV or the human cold virus (yet another coronavirus), can continue to propagate despite picking up mutations. It depends on many different factors and no two viruses are alike. The human race has been struck with devastating epidemics throughout its history. Some of those, like the black death, are well characterized (this was caused by a bacterium spread by fleas). Others leave us scratching our heads. All we know is that multiple ancient kingdoms, civilization, and cities suffered through massive episodes of disease and death. Sometimes the records allow us to make an educated guess what caused the disease, but this is not common. The initial creation had no disease (see our Death and Suffering Q&A), yet diseases have risen over the past six thousand years. If they rose once, there is no reason to expect another viral contagion to not appear in the future. This is not a reason to fear, but it should help us to soberly assess our sometimes tenable position on this earth. We have created all sorts of safety nets to prevent the spread of infection and the world is beginning to react more swiftly to emerging threats. Quarantines, hand washing, and vaccinations are all part of that strategy, depending on the severity, the risk, and whether or not we have figured out a way to vaccinate against them. Consider the most recent Ebola outbreak in Africa. We spent many millions of dollars helping those people through that terrible time and a worldwide outbreak was prevented, again. The coronavirus outbreak currently sweeping across China is another example. Mercifully, the death toll (about 2%) is much reduced from the initial estimates (approximately 11%). But a 2% death rate would equate to many millions of people if it got out of control and became as common as, say, the common cold. But the scientific community responded very quickly. In a short time, multiple gene sequences for the virus were completed and posted to public databases and electron microscopes produced pictures of what we were dealing with. The speed of this was unprecedented.   The Future of the Coronavirus Viruses are Part of God’s Created Order. If this virus outbreak follows the course of previous ones, the coronavirus might burn itself out. This is apparently what happened to the human H1N1 influenza virus that swept across the world in 1917, killing millions of people. It lasted for 40 years before disappearing. It was reintroduced from a stored laboratory sample in 1976 and lasted another 33 years before disappearing again during the 2009–2010 swine H1N1 pandemic, which was also not a particularly lethal virus. The later versions did not have the lethal nature as the earlier ones, and the fact that the human H1N1 could not persist in the human population is good evidence that it was undergoing genetic entropy. In fact, the virus was picking up over 14 mutations per year while it was active and more than 10% of its genome had mutated before it went extinct.6 This also matched previously published computer simulations.7 But the coronavirus is not the flu. We also are not certain where or how this virus originated, although it apparently came from bats, perhaps circuitously. Either way, it will have to be treated very carefully and our health care systems must treat it as a serious and immediate threat. We cannot wait decades for genetic entropy to take its toll.   How should we react? Under the creation/curse model, there is no reason to expect new diseases to not emerge. Yet, when one does appear, we should soberly assess the risk and take proper precautions. We should also always be willing to help those in need, knowing that it could always have been us in that situation. Charitable giving, preferably though a Christian aid agency, is always an option. But we should also not let opportunities for sharing the gospel slip through our fingers, and very often, when a person realizes how fragile life actually is, they are more accepting of the hope offered by Jesus Christ.   Conclusions Viruses are part of God’s created order. We can see that many of them play beneficial roles. Yet, we live in a sin-cursed world with much suffering, death, and disease. Some viruses have become dangerous, causing untold suffering across humanity throughout our history. These have forced us to develop innovative strategies to try and keep them in check. God has not promised us long life, nor good health. But He has promised to redeem this sin-cursed world and our disease-wracked bodies and so our hope is not here on this earth anyway. Let us look to Him for hope, for our redemption draws near.     References and notes 1. This is a good summary of the virome, but from an evolutionary source so use with appropriate caution: sciencedirect.com/topics/immunology-and-microbiology/human-virome. 2. Here is a paper from a biblical Creation-Fall perspective about the important function of the mammalian virome: Francis, J.W., Ingle, M., and Wood, T.C., Bacteriophages as beneficial regulators of the mammalian Microbiome, Proc. Int. Conf. Creationism 8:152–157, 2018; creationicc.org. 3. Barber, M.R. et al., Association of RIG-I with innate immunity of ducks to influenza, PNAS 107(13):5913–5918, 2010. 4. Terborg, P., The ‘VIGE-first hypothesis–how easy it is to swap cause and effect, J. Creation 27(3):105–112, 2013. (VIGE = Variation-Inducing Genetic Element) 5. Ma, W., Kahn, R.E., and Richt, J.A., The pig as a mixing vessel for influenza viruses: human and vertinary implications, J. Mol. Genet. Med. 3(1):158–166, 2008. 6. Carter, R.W., and Sanford, J.C., A new look at an old virus: mutation accumulation in the human H1N1 influenza virus since 1918, Theoretical Biology and Medical Modelling 9:42, 2012. 7. Brewer, W., Smith, F.D., and Sanford, J.C., Information loss: potential for accelerating natural genetic attenuation of RNA viruses; in: Marks II, R.J., Behe, M.J., Dembski, W.A., Gordon, B., and Sanford, J.C. (Eds.), Biological Information—New Perspectives, World Scientific, Singapore, pp. 369–384, 2013. Read the full article

Why You Should Stop Hating Aria Montgomery: A PSA.

OUT of the four liars, Aria Montgomery is the one I related the most to. Aria Montgomery is every single one of us - starting with who she was as a teenager up until the most recent episodes. She’s human and I will fight you if you call her selfish like it’s flaw - no one isn’t selfish. It’s called self-preservation - you’d die without it. Anyways, let’s get started on this. 

Aria & Ezra, Ezra & Aria....

Seasons 1-2, Ezria was definitely a favorite ship on the show. However, at the time, I wasn’t even aware of the concept of statutory rape. I mean, I was like 13 I believe? After the Season 4 rather nauseating revelation that Ezra not only actively sought out Aria in the bar while knowing how old she was, he’d previously been involved with her dead best friend. Now, if he’d approached Aria and introduced himself as an author interested in writing a story on her friend’s death, and Aria had agreed as a way to escape the stresses of her parent’s drama as well as to divulge just who alison really was (a fucking horrible person btw, i despise alison dilaurentis with every fiber of my being) -- i believe a more romantic arc would have been spun, all without the cringe-instilling shit they forced on us. 

Now, on why Aria would marry Ezra, even after all he’s done. 

Aria was at the most impressionable age of her life. Her parents’ lives was falling apart, she was being stalked by a god-knows-who who was out to get her and her friends, and she and her friends were still struggling with dealing with the way alison disappeared from their lives. After Alison’s disappearance, Aria’s the character who grew the most and become her own person, and as soon as Alison and her shit got reintroduced back into her life, all she’s built over a whole year was shattered -- she sought out the one person who gave her the sense of the person she was, and that was Ezra. 

I’m not saying Ezra is a saint - no, he’s an asshole, and him getting shot for Aria and the girls doesn’t amend to his sins. But again, over the course of her high school life, Ezra may have the been only sane constant in Aria’s life. I won’t say it’s love that drove her to accept an eternal life with Ezra. But it’s a desire for a semblance of safety and stability. It’s a self-defense mechanism that a lot of population is open to doing. You can’t blame her for accepting to be with someone who’d tricked her like that - especially when he’s actively been trying to redeem himself since then. 

When A.D. threatened to send Ezra to jail - Aria’s self-defense mechanism was to of course comply. It was a no brainer to her, and it would be a no brainer to all of us. She didn’t do it so that she and Ezra could get married, and she did not do it because she was afraid Ezra would find out about the report. If anything, Ezra deserves to be target practice for Aria’s self-defense classes and that would still not be enough to make up for what he’s done (Because everyone said that Aria was stupid for helping A.D. when Ezra knew about the report to begin with, but that���s not why Aria did this.) 

Now, onto the good stuff --

the AriA BetrAyal ReveAl...

Before I begin discussing this, I wanna highlight on why A.D. chose Aria out of all the liars to do her bidding, and why not Spencer or Hanna or Emily (Alison’s not one of the liars she should have stayed dead.)

On the contrary to everyone’s quick jump to conclusion, Aria’s actually the least selfish liar out of all of them. She’s also the most passionate.  And by all of them, I do mean all of them. That being said, at least both Hanna and Spencer have done some shit for A once before, so are we really gonna be judging Aria right now? Over the course of the 7 seasons, we’ve seen Aria lie and keep secrets to protect people she cares about. I don’t have time to recount how many times or occasions Aria’s done this but she always has, while the liars have on one time or another have all betrayed each other at some point. 

What stood out to me the most was Spencer Hasting’s enraged reaction to Aria’s ‘said betrayal’ 

Spencer claims she didn’t hurt anyone by being A. And that is not true --

Spencer didn’t join the A-Team to freaking be a double-agent. She was driven to join after a mental breakdown when she thought Toby was dead. Mona may have told her that Toby was alive, but Spencer was told that Toby would be her reward if she could get the liars at party on friday --- which is why Spencer’s parents throw a party to celebrate her departure from Radley. Spencer joined the team to save Toby, just like Aria joined the Team to save Ezra. She may have turned midway when she finally actually saw him, but so did Aria. So let’s not paint Spencer as a hero and Aria as a betraying bitch - they’ve both done the exact same thing, and the writers are recycling old plots because they have nothing better to do. 

Spencer slipped some of her sleeping pills into Malcolm’s ice cream - I’m not sure why she did this, I don’t know if she was hoping Malcolm would forget what she looked like or not, but that was dangerous. Sleeping pills specifically are dosed for adults. It’s a miracle she didn’t kill him. 

She claims that the A who took Malcolm wanted to get caught - and if she did, she wouldn’t have told Malcolm her name was Alison. She wasn’t trying to get caught. 

Later on, Aria snaps, saying that Malcolm is off-limits. If Spencer really wanted to prove a double-agent status, Aria should have been in on this. Being a double-agent doesn’t count if Spencer’s the only one who knows what she discovers; she should have told Aria. Aria didn’t agree and had to be threatened twice to comply to A.D’s wishes. Spencer didn’t even waste a heartbeat thinking what taking Malcolm could possibly do to Aria.

Last but not least, Spencer’s parents going through a divorce is not Aria’s fault. Spencer is deluding herself to think that her parents even stood a chance, back from the day they found out Jason was Spencer’s brother. But that’s not a point I should mention because everyone agrees with me anyways.

Troian revealed in an interview that Spencer was supposed to be A. Which brings me to a point that, Marlene didn’t even know where she was going with this show after season 2. She just kept adding plots and twisting pasts and creating plot holes to add to the shock factor. 

Now onto the infuriating part of this, Alison Dilaurentis

“So what? It was just a no brainer for you to pick Ezra over us?”

If Alison Dilaurentis was a part of my life, I’d run her over with a truck the first chance I had. 

But Aria hasn’t done that - Despite all the shit that Alison has put Aria through, Aria was the most welcoming and embracing of Alison’s return. Aria’s the one who married Alison, and Aria’s the one who took her back to the sanitarium and promised over and over that everything would be okay. Even after finding out that Charlotte, Alison’s sister, was the reason they’d all gone through what they went through, even when they all should have cut ties with Alison and laughed in her face when she asked them to testify in Charlotte’s behalf, she and the girls didn’t. 

But Alison is also the prime reason why all of this is happening to those girls - so yes, Alison, it would be a no brainer for people to not pick you, you selfish, manipulative, conniving bitch. 

It just honestly made me laugh my ass off when Alison said that - because of all people, Alison would run them all over for her own self-interest. She’s always been like that, surviving like she lived in the jungle, surrounding herself with possible prey if the food ran out. If A.D. had approached any of the girls, I’m sure none of them would have hesitated. Given the current situation, if it’d been Hanna approached by A.D. to do this to save Caleb from some illegal hacking he’s probably done in his past, I can guarantee you that Hanna Marin would have done more that break a crib and plant a phone.  If it’d been Emily to protect Alison, I don’t think I have to say Emily would have sold her own kidney cause she’s already done something akin to that (not joking, that relationship is even more toxic than Ezria. It’s disgusting and everyone who ships Emison needs to do a reality check. It’s bad LGBT representation. It’s bad general romantic relationship representation. It’s sick and twisted and I just can’t.) And Spencer’s already at a fragile mental space, she’d have anything with proper pressure anyways.

If anyone else had said that to Aria I may have conceded, but it had to be Alison Fucking Dilaurentis, Queen of Selfish Bitch Land. 

That last thing I wanna say is that I am HEAVILY disappointed in Spencer, Hanna, and Emily. Mona’s probably one of the few characters with an actual clinical mental disorder diagnosis. Their past with her alone should be enough for them not to trust a word that comes out of her mouth. When Spencer asks for proof and Mona plays a damn recording I was SURPRISED that THAT’S all they needed to believe it was Aria. Aria should have been given the benefit of the doubt, and given a chance to explain. Instead, Mona turned them on Aria and I believe Mona’s done this to forcefully pull the girls apart. I think Mona’s the one who planted the phone in the Brew for Aria, and she’s been the one talking Aria that whole last episode, not A.D. A.D.’s work with Aria ended with the puzzle piece. This was all Mona. 

Mona’s the one who who provided evidence to the police to give Aria an alibi on the night of Charlotte’s murder. After all, we all know Mona is tech savvy, she can do anything. She wanted to drive Aria away and seclude her so that at some point, Aria would lead her to A.D. I think Mona too was blackmailed by A.D. But given her illness, she just couldn’t stand the idea of someone not only stealing the game from her but actually controlling her to do their bidding (Mona’s the body used to create avatAria.)

When the liars froze Aria out, they chose who was going to lose. That’s what the endgame of this whole episode was. To drive one girl apart enough for them to not even consider looping her in on this. And they succeeded, by freezing aria out, the girls chose Aria to be the one to take the blame. And even if Mona did send an alibi to the police, it can be easily refuted. 

What I’m trying to say is shame on them for trusting Mona Vanderwaal. 

This is been a ranting PSA. Please, feel free to send me all the hate and attacking anonymous messages your heart desires, because I’ll delete them all anyways :)

Marine Conservation in an Urban Environment

Often, when we think of marine conservation projects, we think of initiatives carried out in remote parts of the world. In reality, some of the most important marine conservation programs take place in an urban environment where the damage done by human activity is most severe. Here we’ll take a look at three marine conservation projects currently taking place in some of the world’s busiest waterways.

Oyster restoration, Bronx River estuary, New York

In the past, oysters were abundant in the New York/New Jersey harbor. They constituted a major resource for both natives and early settlers. Because of over-exploitation and rocketing estuarine pollution after the Industrial Revolution, oysters that once numbered in the billions have almost completely disappeared. Today, the Oyster Research Restoration Project, run by the Hudson River Foundation, is attempting to reintroduce the beleaguered oyster to New York’s waterways. In June 2013, a coalition of more than 30 different organizations, including the Hudson River Foundation, the Bronx River Alliance and NYC Parks, began an oyster restoration project in the Bronx River estuary at Soundview Park.

The organizations began by depositing 125 cubic yards of clamshells in the river around existing rock outcroppings. These were intended to provide a substrate for a new oyster colony, and in the process, created the largest expanse of sub-tidal habitat in the lower Hudson River estuary. Several months later, the coalition added 100,000 oyster larvae (also known as spat-on-shell) to the reef to kick-start the colony’s growth. No one will farm these oysters for food or for their pearls. Instead, they will improve the water’s quality, as each oyster filters up to 50 gallons every day. The oyster reef will also serve as a foundation for the recovery of other estuarine species, by providing fish and invertebrates with natural shelter.

The Soundview Park reef is just one part of a comprehensive restoration plan. Further goals include the successful installation of 20 acres of oyster beds by 2020. The oyster reefs, both in the Bronx and in other areas of the New York/New Jersey harbor, are also intended to provide protection for the coastline by absorbing storm energy.

Seagrass preservation, Sydney Harbor, Australia

As habitats go, seagrass beds are one of the most critical to the health of the marine environment. They support a wide variety of species, some of which use the seagrass as a source of food. Others use the seagrass either as a temporary nursery or a permanent home. Seagrass beds also stabilize ocean sediment. In this way, they help prevent coastal erosion and act as an invaluable sink for carbon dioxide. Historically, seagrass beds were prevalent on the Australian coast, and particularly, in Sydney Harbor. Today, however, declining water quality, dredging activity, and coastal construction have decimated the beds. More than 50 percent of Sydney’s seagrass meadows have disappeared in the last 60 years. Scientists now consider some species of grass, such as the strapweed, endangered.

In Sydney Harbor, researchers from the University of New South Wales and the Sydney Institute of Marine Science are working hard to restore the waterway’s seagrass beds. Research methods include taking sediment samples, performing video transects and fish counts, and making 3D models of the seafloor. Researchers have identified boat moorings as a major cause of seagrass degradation in the harbor. Boats typically moor to a concrete block via a heavy chain. This scours the seagrass and the sensitive sediment below as the boats move with the current and tide. Traditionally, the harbor has been a haven for recreational boaters. The waterway currently hosts 4,850 private moorings as a result.

A solution, in the form of a seagrass-friendly mooring, is at hand. Designed to eliminate the destruction caused by traditional moorings, it won the ABC New Inventors program. The mooring has replaced traditional ones in Manly Cove, where a team of researchers from the University of Technology, Sydney, is currently evaluating its effectiveness.

Harbor porpoise conservation, Thames estuary, United Kingdom

Scientists declared the heavily polluted Thames estuary biologically dead in the 1950s. The river runs through the center of London and is one of the busiest waterways in the world. Since the 1950s, however, it’s experienced a dramatic recovery thanks to a series of extensive restoration projects. It is now so diverse that it provides a home for 120 species of fish including, incredibly, the short-snouted seahorse. A variety of water birds and marine mammals also inhabit the river. Many of these mammals inhabit the tidal reaches of the estuary, and include the harbor seal, the grey seal, and most recently, the harbor porpoise. Previously, evidence of the harbor porpoise in the Thames was purely anecdotal. But in 2015, a coalition of research groups launched the first-ever survey of this species in the estuary.

The harbor porpoise is the U.K.’s smallest cetacean species. It’s under threat in the greater North Sea and Celtic Sea thanks to a variety of factors. These include noise pollution, entanglement and degraded water quality. The existence of this species in the Thames not only proves how much the river has recovered, but also offers potential for more effective conservation as a result. Marine Conservation Research International, the Zoological Society of London and the International Fund for Animal Welfare are the main forces behind the ongoing research of the Thames harbor porpoise population. Together, they are conducting acoustic and visual surveys. They also monitor the waterway’s marine litter, man-made noise and fishing activity.

It is hoped that this project will yield a better understanding of harbor porpoise distribution. Associated outreach programs will also raise awareness of the species’ existence in the estuary. Scientists will use collected data to inform future conservation activities, and to ensure that future urban development along the Thames considers the porpoises’ wellbeing.

The post Marine Conservation in an Urban Environment appeared first on Scuba Diver Life.

from Scuba Diver Life http://ift.tt/2klhvKW

Marine Conservation in an Urban Environment

Often, when we think of marine conservation projects, we think of initiatives carried out in remote parts of the world. In reality, some of the most important marine conservation programs take place in an urban environment where the damage done by human activity is most severe. Here we’ll take a look at three marine conservation projects currently taking place in some of the world’s busiest waterways.

Oyster restoration, Bronx River estuary, New York

In the past, oysters were abundant in the New York/New Jersey harbor. They constituted a major resource for both natives and early settlers. Because of over-exploitation and rocketing estuarine pollution after the Industrial Revolution, oysters that once numbered in the billions have almost completely disappeared. Today, the Oyster Research Restoration Project, run by the Hudson River Foundation, is attempting to reintroduce the beleaguered oyster to New York’s waterways. In June 2013, a coalition of more than 30 different organizations, including the Hudson River Foundation, the Bronx River Alliance and NYC Parks, began an oyster restoration project in the Bronx River estuary at Soundview Park.

The organizations began by depositing 125 cubic yards of clamshells in the river around existing rock outcroppings. These were intended to provide a substrate for a new oyster colony, and in the process, created the largest expanse of sub-tidal habitat in the lower Hudson River estuary. Several months later, the coalition added 100,000 oyster larvae (also known as spat-on-shell) to the reef to kick-start the colony’s growth. No one will farm these oysters for food or for their pearls. Instead, they will improve the water’s quality, as each oyster filters up to 50 gallons every day. The oyster reef will also serve as a foundation for the recovery of other estuarine species, by providing fish and invertebrates with natural shelter.

The Soundview Park reef is just one part of a comprehensive restoration plan. Further goals include the successful installation of 20 acres of oyster beds by 2020. The oyster reefs, both in the Bronx and in other areas of the New York/New Jersey harbor, are also intended to provide protection for the coastline by absorbing storm energy.

Seagrass preservation, Sydney Harbor, Australia

As habitats go, seagrass beds are one of the most critical to the health of the marine environment. They support a wide variety of species, some of which use the seagrass as a source of food. Others use the seagrass either as a temporary nursery or a permanent home. Seagrass beds also stabilize ocean sediment. In this way, they help prevent coastal erosion and act as an invaluable sink for carbon dioxide. Historically, seagrass beds were prevalent on the Australian coast, and particularly, in Sydney Harbor. Today, however, declining water quality, dredging activity, and coastal construction have decimated the beds. More than 50 percent of Sydney’s seagrass meadows have disappeared in the last 60 years. Scientists now consider some species of grass, such as the strapweed, endangered.

In Sydney Harbor, researchers from the University of New South Wales and the Sydney Institute of Marine Science are working hard to restore the waterway’s seagrass beds. Research methods include taking sediment samples, performing video transects and fish counts, and making 3D models of the seafloor. Researchers have identified boat moorings as a major cause of seagrass degradation in the harbor. Boats typically moor to a concrete block via a heavy chain. This scours the seagrass and the sensitive sediment below as the boats move with the current and tide. Traditionally, the harbor has been a haven for recreational boaters. The waterway currently hosts 4,850 private moorings as a result.

A solution, in the form of a seagrass-friendly mooring, is at hand. Designed to eliminate the destruction caused by traditional moorings, it won the ABC New Inventors program. The mooring has replaced traditional ones in Manly Cove, where a team of researchers from the University of Technology, Sydney, is currently evaluating its effectiveness.

Harbor porpoise conservation, Thames estuary, United Kingdom

Scientists declared the heavily polluted Thames estuary biologically dead in the 1950s. The river runs through the center of London and is one of the busiest waterways in the world. Since the 1950s, however, it’s experienced a dramatic recovery thanks to a series of extensive restoration projects. It is now so diverse that it provides a home for 120 species of fish including, incredibly, the short-snouted seahorse. A variety of water birds and marine mammals also inhabit the river. Many of these mammals inhabit the tidal reaches of the estuary, and include the harbor seal, the grey seal, and most recently, the harbor porpoise. Previously, evidence of the harbor porpoise in the Thames was purely anecdotal. But in 2015, a coalition of research groups launched the first-ever survey of this species in the estuary.

The harbor porpoise is the U.K.’s smallest cetacean species. It’s under threat in the greater North Sea and Celtic Sea thanks to a variety of factors. These include noise pollution, entanglement and degraded water quality. The existence of this species in the Thames not only proves how much the river has recovered, but also offers potential for more effective conservation as a result. Marine Conservation Research International, the Zoological Society of London and the International Fund for Animal Welfare are the main forces behind the ongoing research of the Thames harbor porpoise population. Together, they are conducting acoustic and visual surveys. They also monitor the waterway’s marine litter, man-made noise and fishing activity.

It is hoped that this project will yield a better understanding of harbor porpoise distribution. Associated outreach programs will also raise awareness of the species’ existence in the estuary. Scientists will use collected data to inform future conservation activities, and to ensure that future urban development along the Thames considers the porpoises’ wellbeing.

The post Marine Conservation in an Urban Environment appeared first on Scuba Diver Life.

from Scuba Diver Life http://ift.tt/2klhvKW