1/ I started to read this and before I was halfway done, I smelled bullshit. Note that he does not say "directly under Stonehenge". He says "directly under the Stonehenge World Heritage Site." My nares flared.https://twitter.com/Celtic_Films/status/1321727940564979713 …
-
1:51Show this thread -
2/ We are urged to "save" Stonehenge. Because the evil ... I dunno ... bad people obviously want to destroy it, with a tunnel DIRECTLY UNDER IT. but ... what is the Stonehenge "world heritage site" "SITE"
how big is the SITE?
Google took 2 seconds to tell me:pic.twitter.com/cbXnM3sB8B
1 reply 0 retweets 19 likesShow this thread -
3/ Let's re-read the original sentence. > They're putting a $3 billion dollar tunnel for an expressway highway directly under the Stonehenge World Heritage Site. What purpose does the word "directly" serve here? Yes, a tunnel is, by definition "under". But DIRECTLY under?
3 replies 0 retweets 17 likesShow this thread -
4/ And, actually, wait. Why are these terrible people proposing a tunnel in the first place? Do they want to ruin Stonehenge? <google> Oh, odd, it's actually a proposal to IMPROVE the Stonehenge site by removing an unsightly EXISTING highway that runs 400 feet away
2 replies 1 retweet 25 likesShow this thread -
5/ Apparently this project has been underway (well, in the paperwork stage) for a quarter of a century, and the activists have already weighed in a dozen times and gotten significant concessions. What do they want now? No tunnel? No! A LONGER tunnel.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stonehenge_road_tunnel …
1 reply 0 retweets 16 likesShow this thread -
6/ Anyway, the whole marketing of the controversy is stupid full of lies. Thanks, I hate it.
6 replies 0 retweets 30 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @MorlockP
From what I’ve heard the controversy is primarily about how the tunnel would destroy potential archaeological sites in the area. But that disruption is a price any conventional road or other construction has to pay one way or another
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
Read the Wikipedia page. The "anti" tunnel people want a LONGER tunnel.
-
-
Replying to @MorlockP
As if Neolithic and other remains just vanish outside the borders of the specified world heritage site zone that a longer tunnel would circumnavigate, lmao
0 replies 0 retweets 2 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.