BBC Brasil: 04/08/2006 – 19h20
Dia: 4 de agosto de 2006
Descoberta uma dupla de planetas errantes, sem estrela-mãe, que giram ao redor deles mesmos
Folha Online: 04/08/2006 – 12h02
Astrônomos observam dupla de planetas errantes pela 1ª vez
Astrônomos do Observatório Europeu Austral, localizado no Chile, anunciaram a descoberta de uma dupla de planetas errantes (sem estrela-mãe) que giram ao redor deles mesmos e que vagam livremente pelo espaço. Esta é a primeira vez que se observam dois corpos celestes unidos pela gravidade de “planetas flutuantes livres” (“free floating planets”, em inglês). O maior corpo celeste, com uma massa sete vezes maior do que a de Júpiter, foi detectado a cerca de 400 anos-luz de nosso sistema solar. O fato extraordinário é que ele não gira em volta de uma estrela, mas em torno de outro corpo frio com o dobro de sua massa. Ray Jayawardhana, da Universidade de Toronto, e Valentin Ivanov, do Observatório Europeu Austral, publicarão a descoberta na “Science Express”, site da revista “Science” (cont.)
Israel caiu na armadilha da guerrilha e guerrilheiros quase nunca são derrotados
BBC Brasil: 04/08/2006 – 09h26
Leia repercussão internacional sobre o conflito no Líbano
Uma reportagem publicada nesta sexta-feira no diário britânico Financial Times enxerga o conflito no Líbano como sintoma de uma política equivocada dos Estados Unidos para o Oriente Médio. O artigo compara o cenário otimista de março de 2005 – quando milhares de libaneses saíram às ruas pedindo o fim da influência Síria no Líbano – com a imagem “radicalmente transformada” de julho de 2006 (…) Um ano depois, o conflito no Líbano, a chegada ao poder do Hamas nos territórios palestinos, a escalada da violência no Iraque e a reversão da tendência à democracia no Egito alimentam uma conclusão pessimista do jornal. “Há um ano, florescia a visão da Casa Branca de que a democracia estava se disseminando. Hoje tudo está morto.” (…) O pessimismo e a crítica à política externa da grande potência são compartilhados pelos diários The Independent, de Londres, e Libération, de Paris. O jornal londrino estampa em sua capa um jogo de liga-pontos, com fotos do Afeganistão, Iraque, territórios palestinos, Israel e Líbano, e ironiza uma frase do primeiro-ministro britânico Blair: “é hora de ligar os pontos corretamente ao redor do mundo”, disse o premiê. Com uma capa também forte, o jornal francês estampa um soldado israelense dentro de um tanque de guerra, e titula: “Terra queimada”. Em editorial, o “Libération” questiona a maneira como a diplomacia internacional vem conduzindo as negociações para a crise. “O fato de estas negociações ocorrerem enquanto os canhões ainda soam constitui um fracasso inicial do que ninguém mais se atreve a chamar de ‘comunidade internacional’.” Para o alemão Der Tagesspiegel, Israel “tinha de reagir”, mas “caiu numa armadilha de guerrilhas”. “A história nos ensina que guerrilheiros quase nunca são derrotados…” (…) O israelense Haaretz lamenta que o conflito no Líbano tenha tirado a atenção de Israel para a resolução sobre o Irã aprovada no Conselho de Segurança da ONU no início da semana (cont.)
Tem gente incomodada com Finkelstein e Silberman
Tem gente incomodada com Finkelstein e Silberman por causa do livro sobre Davi e Salomão
Old Testament dispute continues. Was King David Judaism’s King Arthur?
Some scholars are busily debunking the Bible’s account of the great King David, asking: Was he really all that great? Was he largely legendary, Judaism’s version of Britain’s legendary King Arthur or totally fictional?
These matters are crucial not only for Jews but for Christians, since Jesus’ biblical identity as the messiah stems from David’s family line.
Skepticism about the Hebrew Bible’s history was promoted to popular audiences in “The Bible Unearthed” (2001) by Tel Aviv University archaeologist Israel Finkelstein and Neil Asher Silberman. Their most recent book focuses on “David and Solomon” (Free Press).
Though some scholars claimed David never existed, in 1993 archaeologists discovered a stone inscription from 835 B.C. that mentions “the house of David.” The authors say that established the existence of a dynastic founder named David and that shortly after his 10th-century era a line of kings “traced their legitimacy back to David.”
However, Finkelstein considers the Bible seriously distorted propaganda. He treats David as a minor bandit chieftain and Jerusalem as a hamlet, not an imperial capital. Supposedly, biblical authors concocted the grander David centuries afterward. The book also implies that his successor, Solomon, didn’t build the Temple.
Finkelstein notes that archaeologists haven’t found monumental buildings from David’s era in Jerusalem. He dismisses links of David and Solomon with buildings unearthed at biblical Megiddo and Hazor. Ordinary readers might not grasp that this depends upon a disputed “low chronology” which would shift dates a century, just after these kings.
In the July-August issue of Biblical Archaeology Review, Michael Coogan of Stonehill College, editor of The New Oxford Annotated Bible, contends that Finkelstein and Silberman “move from the hypothetical to the improbable to the absurd.”
Finkelstein’s revised chronology is “not accepted by the majority of archaeologists and biblical scholars,” Coogan asserts, citing four scholarly anthologies from the past three years.
Coogan also thinks “David and Solomon” downplays the significance of the Amarna tablets, which include correspondence to Egypt’s pharaoh from a 14th-century Jerusalem king. Even if archaeological remains at Jerusalem are lacking, he writes, the tablets indicate that long before David, Jerusalem was the region’s chief city-state, with a court and sophisticated scribes.
Discovery of ancient remains in Jerusalem is problematic due to the repeated reconstruction throughout the centuries and the modern inaccessibility of many sites.
Nonetheless, perhaps David’s palace has been found. So claims Israeli archaeologist Eilat Mazar. Finkelstein denies this, claiming Mazar inaccurately dated pottery from the site. “Here, for the time being, matters rest,” summarizes Hillel Halkin in the July-August Commentary magazine.
Jerusalem feuds aside, skepticism about David seems to be countered by recent discoveries in the biblical land of Edom (present-day southwest Jordan), also described in Biblical Archaeology Review by field experts Thomas Levy and Mohammad Najjar. Levy is a University of California, San Diego, archaeologist and Najjar directs excavations for Jordan’s Department of Antiquities.
According to the Hebrew Bible, Edom had kings before Israel (Genesis 36:31), barred Moses’ wandering Israelites (Numbers 20:14-21) and later warred with King David (2 Samuel 8:13-14, 1 Kings 11:15-16).
Until now, many scholars have said that’s all bogus because there was no archaeological evidence for a state in Edom until long after David’s day. Finkelstein and Silberman typified such skepticism in “Bible Unearthed,” which said Edom achieved kingship and statehood only in the seventh century B.C.
But Levy and Najjar say lack of evidence is never conclusive, and in this case previous archaeologists dug in the wrong place. They’ve now excavated a major fortress that — to their surprise — is dated by radiocarbon tests in David’s era. An adjacent copper mill goes back another one to two centuries, closer to Moses’ time.
Biblical references have gained “new plausibility,” they conclude.
Fonte: Richard N. Ostling – The Associated Press: Aug 4, 2006