Should we be more afraid of giants abusing steroids or the cloning programme he's revealed?
Just to be clear - is this the Leeanderthal Man as a Bulk Hogan / Kitten Kong hybrid?
If so, I'll happily retweet as a question.
At the moment Reform afaics are being men-of-two-halves (like a walnut). Well-behaved and somewhat productive in Parliament, goons outside - for example Tice shit stirring the Manchester Airport incident before anything was clear.
Rachel Reeves to delay flagship hospital and road-building projects Stonehenge tunnel and the Lower Thames Crossing could be under threat following an ‘audit’ of the Government’s economic inheritance
Stonehenge Tunnel Delayed? That does it. May it never be glad confident morning again for them.
Afternoon everyone!
For me delaying or indeed abandoning, the Stonehenge Tunnel would be a good thing. Stonehenge needs a bypass, well away from it. There’s probably all sorts of historical relics close to the site.
Indeed. Only the most stupid of Governments (and I am looking at both Labour and the Tories) could have come up with a series of plans that involved damaging a world heritage site so severely there were threats its status would be revoked.
Get a sensible bypass plan in place that doesn't cut into the World Heritage site and get it built.
I know this is your field, but I both agree and disagree with this. There is part of me that suspects that this whole project is an English Heritage-led scheme to "reconnect Stonehenge to the ancient landscape". Sorry, I meant an English Heritage-led scheme to "prevent plebs from seeing Stonehenge from the road, and turn Stonehenge into even more of a disappointing tourist trap."
On the other hand, the entire landscape around Stonehenge has been fairly well trashed by man in the last few hundred years. Go back a hundred years, and there was an airfield right next to it. I don't think the currently-planned road scheme will cause anywhere near as much damage as some claim. Archaeologists themselves seem fairly split on it.
Just build a bloody road, as Richard says. A tunnel is just daft; we're no longer living in a world of zero interest rates where our government borrowing was substantially below 100% of GDP.
The other issue is that Stonehenge Tunnel is ready to go with various enabling works underway already.
Change it and you have a decade of planning, design, legal challenges, equality impact assessments and about £300 million to pay for it before you turn a spade.
This is one that I would not mind being gummed up and going nowhere for a decade or three, so crass is it.
In what way is it crass?
Not imo a carefully thought-through answer. And also a Twilight of the Tories (June 2023) attempt to save their backsides.
Heard on the radio today and had to check it - Every US presidential/vice presidential election since 1976 has involved a Bush, Clinton or Biden and that run nearly continued. Who knows it might continue to do so after this lapse. I had to check Chelsea was old enough and Hunter might need a decent publicist and I have no idea about the Bush dynasty.
Also, every successful GOP presidential ticket since and not including 1928 has featured Nixon, a Bush, or Trump.
Every major-party US presidential ticket - winning OR losing - since 1796* has featured at least one (and usually two) White men.
About 99.46% sure that Kamala Harris will NOT break with this tradition,
* 1789 and 1792 also featured White male candidates but NO party tickets.
Am I the only one who'd build it straight through Stonehenge?
Probably.
As it stands it virtually does go straight through Stonehenge. Any canning of this scheme means it will for another generation at least.
You only have to go to Hindhead to see the difference a tunnel makes.
Mind you, there is a valid argument to move the Stones. The A303 (aka Harroway) is tens of thousands of years older. They were probably only put there in the first place as it was near a prehistoric "crossroads" with the North to South "Gold Road"
Heard on the radio today and had to check it - Every US presidential/vice presidential election since 1976 has involved a Bush, Clinton or Biden and that run nearly continued. Who knows it might continue to do so after this lapse. I had to check Chelsea was old enough and Hunter might need a decent publicist and I have no idea about the Bush dynasty.
Also, every successful GOP presidential ticket since and not including 1928 has featured Nixon, a Bush, or Trump.
Every major-party US presidential ticket - winning OR losing - since 1796* has featured at least one (and usually two) White men.
About 99.46% sure that Kamala Harris will NOT break with this tradition,
* 1789 and 1792 also featured White male candidates but NO party tickets.
On a point of order:
In 1796 you didn't have tickets. They came in from 1804.
Am I the only one who'd build it straight through Stonehenge?
I always felt a bridge over Stonehenge was the best option.
Well the pillars are there already. You could move them to the new Flyover that will be built on the Amesbury bypass which would save a few bob on concrete pillars and lintels.
NEW: A Tory MP says Priti Patel “is the Brat candidate" in the Tory leadership election
Boris Johnson is reportedly supporting her privately, with MPs across the party seeing her as both loyal and the candidate who can bring unity
#Priti4Leader
The Unity (Mitford) Candidate.
If Priti is the brat candidate, that presumably makes Kemi the spat candidate, Tughendat the prat candidate, Jenrick the rat candidate, Cleverly the twat candidate and Mel Stride the fat candidate.
Am I the only one who'd build it straight through Stonehenge?
Probably.
As it stands it virtually does go straight through Stonehenge. Any canning of this scheme means it will for another generation at least.
You only have to go to Hindhead to see the difference a tunnel makes.
Mind you, there is a valid argument to move the Stones. The A303 (aka Harroway) is tens of thousands of years older. They were probably only put there in the first place as it was near a prehistoric "crossroads" with the North to South "Gold Road"
Don’t they have to be shifted anyway when the clocks change for BST?
On topic, I can't help but be reminded of the claim that the great Tom Lehrer, one of the best satarists of all time, that “Political satire became obsolete when Henry Kissinger was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.”
35 years before Obama was awarded it.
And decades after Theodore Roosevelt was awarded HIS Nobel Peace Prize, for his efforts in aiding the White imperialists of Czarist Russia versus the non-White imperialists of Japan, at the Portsmouth (New NOT old Hampshire) peace conference that ended the Russo-Japanese War.
Rachel Reeves to delay flagship hospital and road-building projects Stonehenge tunnel and the Lower Thames Crossing could be under threat following an ‘audit’ of the Government’s economic inheritance
Stonehenge Tunnel Delayed? That does it. May it never be glad confident morning again for them.
Afternoon everyone!
For me delaying or indeed abandoning, the Stonehenge Tunnel would be a good thing. Stonehenge needs a bypass, well away from it. There’s probably all sorts of historical relics close to the site.
Indeed. Only the most stupid of Governments (and I am looking at both Labour and the Tories) could have come up with a series of plans that involved damaging a world heritage site so severely there were threats its status would be revoked.
Get a sensible bypass plan in place that doesn't cut into the World Heritage site and get it built.
I know this is your field, but I both agree and disagree with this. There is part of me that suspects that this whole project is an English Heritage-led scheme to "reconnect Stonehenge to the ancient landscape". Sorry, I meant an English Heritage-led scheme to "prevent plebs from seeing Stonehenge from the road, and turn Stonehenge into even more of a disappointing tourist trap."
On the other hand, the entire landscape around Stonehenge has been fairly well trashed by man in the last few hundred years. Go back a hundred years, and there was an airfield right next to it. I don't think the currently-planned road scheme will cause anywhere near as much damage as some claim. Archaeologists themselves seem fairly split on it.
Just build a bloody road, as Richard says. A tunnel is just daft; we're no longer living in a world of zero interest rates where our government borrowing was substantially below 100% of GDP.
The other issue is that Stonehenge Tunnel is ready to go with various enabling works underway already.
Change it and you have a decade of planning, design, legal challenges, equality impact assessments and about £300 million to pay for it before you turn a spade.
It's too expensive - and it's too close to Stonehenge - I'm more than happy for it to be delayed and redesigned..
Have you seen where the A303 is currently?
Just get it done ffs.
I'm not sold on a tunnel over some other option, but I think people have a poor understanding of what was there and is there now when picturing it.
NEW: A Tory MP says Priti Patel “is the Brat candidate" in the Tory leadership election
Boris Johnson is reportedly supporting her privately, with MPs across the party seeing her as both loyal and the candidate who can bring unity
#Priti4Leader
The Unity (Mitford) Candidate.
If Priti is the brat candidate, that presumably makes Kemi the spat candidate, Tughendat the prat candidate, Jenrick the rat candidate, Cleverly the twat candidate and Mel Stride the fat candidate.
Unity Mitford was more than a brat - she was a Nazi brat.
Heard on the radio today and had to check it - Every US presidential/vice presidential election since 1976 has involved a Bush, Clinton or Biden and that run nearly continued. Who knows it might continue to do so after this lapse. I had to check Chelsea was old enough and Hunter might need a decent publicist and I have no idea about the Bush dynasty.
Also, every successful GOP presidential ticket since and not including 1928 has featured Nixon, a Bush, or Trump.
Every major-party US presidential ticket - winning OR losing - since 1796* has featured at least one (and usually two) White men.
About 99.46% sure that Kamala Harris will NOT break with this tradition,
* 1789 and 1792 also featured White male candidates but NO party tickets.
On a point of order:
In 1796 you didn't have tickets. They came in from 1804.
That's when the constitutional change separating electoral college voting for POTUS and VP.
HOWEVER, there WERE party tickets, Federalist versus Republican (or Democratic-Republican if you prefer) in 1796 and 1800,
Anyway, someone else who likes the Putinist 'no need to worry you little heads about democracy' line.
Acyn @Acyn Trump: You have to get out and vote. You won’t have to do it anymore. Four years, it will be fixed, it will be fine. You won’t have to vote anymore.. In four years, you won’t have to vote again.
What's unbelievable is that people interpret such remarks as signalling a plan for a dictatorship.
When a 'normal' politician says something like "Never again will...", the implication is exactly the same but it doesn't cause any hysteria about the end of democracy.
Examples of things that are "exactly the same" as "it will be fixed... you won't have to vote again" please, or you're talking bollocks again
There are countless examples of legislation designed to tie the hands of future governments and lock in a particular direction of travel.
I'm sure, but they are not examples of politicians telling people "you won't have to vote again"
You aren't stupid, so please so stop being so disingenuous.
Of course you can interpret Trump's remarks in different ways. Maybe he meant "I'm not going to be on the ballot again so there's no point voting"
I don't see any other way of interpreting it than that there won't be any more elections if he wins this one - except perhaps to say that Trump is now so crazy that everything he says is meaningless.
What is it with sports directors for tv who think we want to see nice shots of Paris or the crowd rather than the actual sport - especially as it comes to the end……
Paid the £3.99 for Discovery+/Eurosport as I remember the BBC's choice of events during Tokyo was often waffle about some prospect rather than showing anything
Rachel Reeves to delay flagship hospital and road-building projects Stonehenge tunnel and the Lower Thames Crossing could be under threat following an ‘audit’ of the Government’s economic inheritance
Stonehenge Tunnel Delayed? That does it. May it never be glad confident morning again for them.
Afternoon everyone!
For me delaying or indeed abandoning, the Stonehenge Tunnel would be a good thing. Stonehenge needs a bypass, well away from it. There’s probably all sorts of historical relics close to the site.
Indeed. Only the most stupid of Governments (and I am looking at both Labour and the Tories) could have come up with a series of plans that involved damaging a world heritage site so severely there were threats its status would be revoked.
Get a sensible bypass plan in place that doesn't cut into the World Heritage site and get it built.
I know this is your field, but I both agree and disagree with this. There is part of me that suspects that this whole project is an English Heritage-led scheme to "reconnect Stonehenge to the ancient landscape". Sorry, I meant an English Heritage-led scheme to "prevent plebs from seeing Stonehenge from the road, and turn Stonehenge into even more of a disappointing tourist trap."
On the other hand, the entire landscape around Stonehenge has been fairly well trashed by man in the last few hundred years. Go back a hundred years, and there was an airfield right next to it. I don't think the currently-planned road scheme will cause anywhere near as much damage as some claim. Archaeologists themselves seem fairly split on it.
Sadly that is simply not true. It is already causing issues for Blick Mead which I mentioned earlier and which is probably one of the most important sites in Southern Britain for the last century or more.
Also I would have to say that you need to distinguish between those archaeologists who are actually interested in the archaeology and those who are just interested in mitigation - an industry that has developed over the last 20 years or so and which involves large 'archaeological' companies hiring themselves out to developers on the basis that they will make sure the cost of any legally required archaeological work is kept to an absolute minimum and that any archaeology that is there will preferably 'go away' under their investigations.
What is it with sports directors for tv who think we want to see nice shots of Paris or the crowd rather than the actual sport - especially as it comes to the end……
Paid the £3.99 for Discovery+/Eurosport as I remember the BBC's choice of events during Tokyo was often waffle about some prospect rather than showing anything
To be fair it wasn’t the BBc who were doing the stupid directing - it’s whoever directs for the Olympic association. Sadly it looked like they had been told to keep producing a French tourism film for French vanity and forgetting it’s about the sports and the athletes not La Gloire of France.
So we had an exciting finish to the time trial and instead of seeing the competitors when they could have slipped at any time on the wet track with the final straights and corners we got aerial views of Parisian landmark buildings with no sign of the cycling.
Similar has happened with international tournaments where they are so busy showing the crowd and replays instead of showing the actual live match.
NEW: A Tory MP says Priti Patel “is the Brat candidate" in the Tory leadership election
Boris Johnson is reportedly supporting her privately, with MPs across the party seeing her as both loyal and the candidate who can bring unity
Whichever Tory MP called her “the Brat candidate” needs to go away and hide their head in shame for the absolute cringe. Not only has “the Brat candidate” already been used about Kamala Harris, but by the actual creator of the “Brat” movement, Charlie xCX.
Today is the first time I had ever come across it, in relation to Harris.
It sounds really dumb.
Charli told the BBC's Sidetracked podcast that brat is a concept that represents a person who might have "a pack of cigs, a Bic lighter and a strappy white top with no bra".
It has been deemed by some pop critics as a rejection of the "clean girl" aesthetic popularised on TikTok, which spurned a groomed ideal of femininity, and instead embraces more hedonistic and rebellious attitudes. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cqqlgq7k374o
It is utter bollox by a deranged halfwit. Idiots are easily taken in by these fcukwitted moronic twats.
Am I the only one who'd build it straight through Stonehenge?
Probably.
As it stands it virtually does go straight through Stonehenge. Any canning of this scheme means it will for another generation at least.
You only have to go to Hindhead to see the difference a tunnel makes.
Mind you, there is a valid argument to move the Stones. The A303 (aka Harroway) is tens of thousands of years older. They were probably only put there in the first place as it was near a prehistoric "crossroads" with the North to South "Gold Road"
More utter bollox, next you will be saying they can put up plastic copies somewhere else
Rachel Reeves to delay flagship hospital and road-building projects Stonehenge tunnel and the Lower Thames Crossing could be under threat following an ‘audit’ of the Government’s economic inheritance
Stonehenge Tunnel Delayed? That does it. May it never be glad confident morning again for them.
Afternoon everyone!
For me delaying or indeed abandoning, the Stonehenge Tunnel would be a good thing. Stonehenge needs a bypass, well away from it. There’s probably all sorts of historical relics close to the site.
Indeed. Only the most stupid of Governments (and I am looking at both Labour and the Tories) could have come up with a series of plans that involved damaging a world heritage site so severely there were threats its status would be revoked.
Get a sensible bypass plan in place that doesn't cut into the World Heritage site and get it built.
That bird flew away when they made the A303 the Trunk Road instead of the A30 in roughly 1958 and spent the next sixty years rebuilding it as a high speed dual expressway for most of the next 30 miles either side - except for a short bit at Stonehenge (and benighted Winterbourne Stoke).
If they can this no alternative will happen for a generation as a major project from scratch will be needed and Tories will do a 2015 in a swaythe of the SW in 2029.
I disagree. It is entirely possible to develop a sensible plan for a new dual carriageway that does not impinge onb the World Heritage Site. It is lack of will and local opposition that prevents it.
The only thing going about this current project is it is not the stupid cut and cover version that was originally planned. But it is entirely possible to either extend the tunnel, placing the entrances away from sensitive archaological sites (like Blick Mead which, whilst not as spectacular as Stonehenge is probably more important in terms of actual archaeology than the stones) or to build a proper bypass further away.
It may be 'entirely possible', but at what cost? It's already a mahoosively expensive scheme.
Which bring us to perhaps the central question: how much is archaeology 'worth'?
(I'm not saying I have an asnwer.)
To be honest if they had come up with a proper scheme in the first place it would already be done and would have cost no where near as much as it has done/will do.
And I would suggest that, whilst there is a price that can be put on all archaeology, just as there is a price that can be put on human lives when deciding on road improvements, we have already pretty much said that the Stonehenge area is priceless by designating it as a World Heritage site. There is, as far as I know, no higher status that can be awarded.
'Priceless' ?
English Heritage say quite the opposite, considering how much they charge for access to a poor visitor experience...
But in all seriousness: the road currently runs close by it. I really find it hard to believe that removing the road from the landscape is going to destroy the area around Stonehenge from a World Heritage POV. The removal of the other road, that ran nearer (*) to Stonehenge (in fact, right by it) enhanced the landscape, did it not.
And as I said in my other post: it's surprising how much the area has been altered in recent centuries. Not just the airfield, either. If you look at that link I gave earlier, and move the slider, you can see just how much the stones themselves have changed, with many being re-erected within living memory. I'm always bemused that these 'renovations' are seen as acceptable, and the stones should be taken down to how they were before...
(*) And, of course, had EH rubbing their hands with glee...
You do realise that the scheme involves them destroying parts of the World Heritage site because they are putting the entrances to the tunnel inside the boundaries? And anyone who thinks this just about the stones really doesn't understand the area. Funnily enough the stones are not even the important bit - just the visible bit. The 'Henge' in Stonehenge is the earthworks which the stones sit within.
This is all part of a much larger and extremely important archeological landscape - connected with Durrington Walls to the East and with the two adjacent cursus monuments.
The point is that there are solutions which will protect the World Heritage site (which is much bigger than the immediate henge) whilst still allowing the upgrade of the road. The trouble is that previous governments were just not interested in anything other than the bare minimum they could get away with. Hence the continual retreat they have had to undertake every time someone points out how stupid their plans were.
Rachel Reeves to delay flagship hospital and road-building projects Stonehenge tunnel and the Lower Thames Crossing could be under threat following an ‘audit’ of the Government’s economic inheritance
Stonehenge Tunnel Delayed? That does it. May it never be glad confident morning again for them.
Afternoon everyone!
For me delaying or indeed abandoning, the Stonehenge Tunnel would be a good thing. Stonehenge needs a bypass, well away from it. There’s probably all sorts of historical relics close to the site.
Indeed. Only the most stupid of Governments (and I am looking at both Labour and the Tories) could have come up with a series of plans that involved damaging a world heritage site so severely there were threats its status would be revoked.
Get a sensible bypass plan in place that doesn't cut into the World Heritage site and get it built.
That bird flew away when they made the A303 the Trunk Road instead of the A30 in roughly 1958 and spent the next sixty years rebuilding it as a high speed dual expressway for most of the next 30 miles either side - except for a short bit at Stonehenge (and benighted Winterbourne Stoke).
If they can this no alternative will happen for a generation as a major project from scratch will be needed and Tories will do a 2015 in a swaythe of the SW in 2029.
I disagree. It is entirely possible to develop a sensible plan for a new dual carriageway that does not impinge onb the World Heritage Site. It is lack of will and local opposition that prevents it.
The only thing going about this current project is it is not the stupid cut and cover version that was originally planned. But it is entirely possible to either extend the tunnel, placing the entrances away from sensitive archaological sites (like Blick Mead which, whilst not as spectacular as Stonehenge is probably more important in terms of actual archaeology than the stones) or to build a proper bypass further away.
It may be 'entirely possible', but at what cost? It's already a mahoosively expensive scheme.
Which bring us to perhaps the central question: how much is archaeology 'worth'?
(I'm not saying I have an asnwer.)
To be honest if they had come up with a proper scheme in the first place it would already be done and would have cost no where near as much as it has done/will do.
And I would suggest that, whilst there is a price that can be put on all archaeology, just as there is a price that can be put on human lives when deciding on road improvements, we have already pretty much said that the Stonehenge area is priceless by designating it as a World Heritage site. There is, as far as I know, no higher status that can be awarded.
'Priceless' ?
English Heritage say quite the opposite, considering how much they charge for access to a poor visitor experience...
But in all seriousness: the road currently runs close by it. I really find it hard to believe that removing the road from the landscape is going to destroy the area around Stonehenge from a World Heritage POV. The removal of the other road, that ran nearer (*) to Stonehenge (in fact, right by it) enhanced the landscape, did it not.
And as I said in my other post: it's surprising how much the area has been altered in recent centuries. Not just the airfield, either. If you look at that link I gave earlier, and move the slider, you can see just how much the stones themselves have changed, with many being re-erected within living memory. I'm always bemused that these 'renovations' are seen as acceptable, and the stones should be taken down to how they were before...
(*) And, of course, had EH rubbing their hands with glee...
You do realise that the scheme involves them destroying parts of the World Heritage site because they are putting the entrances to the tunnel inside the boundaries? And anyone who thinks this just about the stones really doesn't understand the area. Funnily enough the stones are not even the important bit - just the visible bit. The 'Henge' in Stonehenge is the earthworks which the stones sit within.
This is all part of a much larger and extremely important archeological landscape - connected with Durrington Walls to the East and with the two adjacent cursus monuments.
The point is that there are solutions which will protect the World Heritage site (which is much bigger than the immediate henge) whilst still allowing the upgrade of the road. The trouble is that previous governments were just not interested in anything other than the bare minimum they could get away with. Hence the continual retreat they have had to undertake every time someone points out how stupid their plans were.
What would be your plan for getting a dual-carriageway A303 past the site?
Am I the only one who'd build it straight through Stonehenge?
Probably.
As it stands it virtually does go straight through Stonehenge. Any canning of this scheme means it will for another generation at least.
You only have to go to Hindhead to see the difference a tunnel makes.
Mind you, there is a valid argument to move the Stones. The A303 (aka Harroway) is tens of thousands of years older. They were probably only put there in the first place as it was near a prehistoric "crossroads" with the North to South "Gold Road"
More utter bollox, next you will be saying they can put up plastic copies somewhere else
Rachel Reeves to delay flagship hospital and road-building projects Stonehenge tunnel and the Lower Thames Crossing could be under threat following an ‘audit’ of the Government’s economic inheritance
If this means that balancing the books is being prioritised, then good.
I think that questioning everything that the Tories threw at the wall in the last two years in the hope that something would stick is probably a good thing. They went fairly loopy - not just Fruit Loop Liz - and think there is logic in treating it as decisions made by a committee of mad men in a lunatic asylum.
In the process they were willing to burn down even many of their own achievements for a short-term political possible-benefit.
On the two schemes mentioned in the Telegraph, I wonder about others. The Hammersmith Bridge Meccano Set project will be interesting. I don't see RR authorising the £200m (iirc) that the local Boroughs who own the bridge have been demanding. My immediate idea for that one would be to take it out of the road network (with adjustments to the next bridges either way), and have a word with the Bridge House Estates trust.
Meanwhile Mr Toyodo is sitting in Japan eating Popcorn.
"Over the last few days, it has become clear that the EV industry is on the brink of collapse. Hundreds of billions of euros, dollars and pounds have been pumped into this industry by political leaders and the subsidy junkies that surround them"
Meanwhile Mr Toyodo is sitting in Japan eating Popcorn.
"Over the last few days, it has become clear that the EV industry is on the brink of collapse. Hundreds of billions of euros, dollars and pounds have been pumped into this industry by political leaders and the subsidy junkies that surround them"
"Paris 2024 Olympics: Organisers respond to offended reactions to opening ceremony One scene viewed as an interpretation of Leonardo da Vinci's The Last Supper, featuring drag artists, has drawn criticism from some Christians - including Italy's deputy prime minister Matteo Salvini who branded it insulting and "sleazy"."
Rachel Reeves to delay flagship hospital and road-building projects Stonehenge tunnel and the Lower Thames Crossing could be under threat following an ‘audit’ of the Government’s economic inheritance
Stonehenge Tunnel Delayed? That does it. May it never be glad confident morning again for them.
Afternoon everyone!
For me delaying or indeed abandoning, the Stonehenge Tunnel would be a good thing. Stonehenge needs a bypass, well away from it. There’s probably all sorts of historical relics close to the site.
Indeed. Only the most stupid of Governments (and I am looking at both Labour and the Tories) could have come up with a series of plans that involved damaging a world heritage site so severely there were threats its status would be revoked.
Get a sensible bypass plan in place that doesn't cut into the World Heritage site and get it built.
That bird flew away when they made the A303 the Trunk Road instead of the A30 in roughly 1958 and spent the next sixty years rebuilding it as a high speed dual expressway for most of the next 30 miles either side - except for a short bit at Stonehenge (and benighted Winterbourne Stoke).
If they can this no alternative will happen for a generation as a major project from scratch will be needed and Tories will do a 2015 in a swaythe of the SW in 2029.
I disagree. It is entirely possible to develop a sensible plan for a new dual carriageway that does not impinge onb the World Heritage Site. It is lack of will and local opposition that prevents it.
The only thing going about this current project is it is not the stupid cut and cover version that was originally planned. But it is entirely possible to either extend the tunnel, placing the entrances away from sensitive archaological sites (like Blick Mead which, whilst not as spectacular as Stonehenge is probably more important in terms of actual archaeology than the stones) or to build a proper bypass further away.
It may be 'entirely possible', but at what cost? It's already a mahoosively expensive scheme.
Which bring us to perhaps the central question: how much is archaeology 'worth'?
(I'm not saying I have an asnwer.)
To be honest if they had come up with a proper scheme in the first place it would already be done and would have cost no where near as much as it has done/will do.
And I would suggest that, whilst there is a price that can be put on all archaeology, just as there is a price that can be put on human lives when deciding on road improvements, we have already pretty much said that the Stonehenge area is priceless by designating it as a World Heritage site. There is, as far as I know, no higher status that can be awarded.
'Priceless' ?
English Heritage say quite the opposite, considering how much they charge for access to a poor visitor experience...
But in all seriousness: the road currently runs close by it. I really find it hard to believe that removing the road from the landscape is going to destroy the area around Stonehenge from a World Heritage POV. The removal of the other road, that ran nearer (*) to Stonehenge (in fact, right by it) enhanced the landscape, did it not.
And as I said in my other post: it's surprising how much the area has been altered in recent centuries. Not just the airfield, either. If you look at that link I gave earlier, and move the slider, you can see just how much the stones themselves have changed, with many being re-erected within living memory. I'm always bemused that these 'renovations' are seen as acceptable, and the stones should be taken down to how they were before...
(*) And, of course, had EH rubbing their hands with glee...
You do realise that the scheme involves them destroying parts of the World Heritage site because they are putting the entrances to the tunnel inside the boundaries?
Its a compromise. Albeit one tbat is very generous with taxpayers money to restore tranquility to a chunk of Salisbury plain with an interesting history.
As for UN designating it a World Heritage Site, what that corrupt stinking pile of manure call a bit of Salisbury Plain or anywhere else is of no interest to me.
Meanwhile Mr Toyodo is sitting in Japan eating Popcorn.
"Over the last few days, it has become clear that the EV industry is on the brink of collapse. Hundreds of billions of euros, dollars and pounds have been pumped into this industry by political leaders and the subsidy junkies that surround them"
Rachel Reeves to delay flagship hospital and road-building projects Stonehenge tunnel and the Lower Thames Crossing could be under threat following an ‘audit’ of the Government’s economic inheritance
Stonehenge Tunnel Delayed? That does it. May it never be glad confident morning again for them.
Afternoon everyone!
For me delaying or indeed abandoning, the Stonehenge Tunnel would be a good thing. Stonehenge needs a bypass, well away from it. There’s probably all sorts of historical relics close to the site.
Indeed. Only the most stupid of Governments (and I am looking at both Labour and the Tories) could have come up with a series of plans that involved damaging a world heritage site so severely there were threats its status would be revoked.
Get a sensible bypass plan in place that doesn't cut into the World Heritage site and get it built.
That bird flew away when they made the A303 the Trunk Road instead of the A30 in roughly 1958 and spent the next sixty years rebuilding it as a high speed dual expressway for most of the next 30 miles either side - except for a short bit at Stonehenge (and benighted Winterbourne Stoke).
If they can this no alternative will happen for a generation as a major project from scratch will be needed and Tories will do a 2015 in a swaythe of the SW in 2029.
I disagree. It is entirely possible to develop a sensible plan for a new dual carriageway that does not impinge onb the World Heritage Site. It is lack of will and local opposition that prevents it.
The only thing going about this current project is it is not the stupid cut and cover version that was originally planned. But it is entirely possible to either extend the tunnel, placing the entrances away from sensitive archaological sites (like Blick Mead which, whilst not as spectacular as Stonehenge is probably more important in terms of actual archaeology than the stones) or to build a proper bypass further away.
It may be 'entirely possible', but at what cost? It's already a mahoosively expensive scheme.
Which bring us to perhaps the central question: how much is archaeology 'worth'?
(I'm not saying I have an asnwer.)
To be honest if they had come up with a proper scheme in the first place it would already be done and would have cost no where near as much as it has done/will do.
And I would suggest that, whilst there is a price that can be put on all archaeology, just as there is a price that can be put on human lives when deciding on road improvements, we have already pretty much said that the Stonehenge area is priceless by designating it as a World Heritage site. There is, as far as I know, no higher status that can be awarded.
'Priceless' ?
English Heritage say quite the opposite, considering how much they charge for access to a poor visitor experience...
But in all seriousness: the road currently runs close by it. I really find it hard to believe that removing the road from the landscape is going to destroy the area around Stonehenge from a World Heritage POV. The removal of the other road, that ran nearer (*) to Stonehenge (in fact, right by it) enhanced the landscape, did it not.
And as I said in my other post: it's surprising how much the area has been altered in recent centuries. Not just the airfield, either. If you look at that link I gave earlier, and move the slider, you can see just how much the stones themselves have changed, with many being re-erected within living memory. I'm always bemused that these 'renovations' are seen as acceptable, and the stones should be taken down to how they were before...
(*) And, of course, had EH rubbing their hands with glee...
You do realise that the scheme involves them destroying parts of the World Heritage site because they are putting the entrances to the tunnel inside the boundaries? And anyone who thinks this just about the stones really doesn't understand the area. Funnily enough the stones are not even the important bit - just the visible bit. The 'Henge' in Stonehenge is the earthworks which the stones sit within.
This is all part of a much larger and extremely important archeological landscape - connected with Durrington Walls to the East and with the two adjacent cursus monuments.
The point is that there are solutions which will protect the World Heritage site (which is much bigger than the immediate henge) whilst still allowing the upgrade of the road. The trouble is that previous governments were just not interested in anything other than the bare minimum they could get away with. Hence the continual retreat they have had to undertake every time someone points out how stupid their plans were.
Yes, I do realise it is a much larger site than just the stones.
So let me ask you a question: why should the existing road run right through the middle of this 'precious' landscape? If the landscape matters that much, then surely that road is an egregious desecration?
Which actually partially agrees with you (and me!) about the landscape, but says:
"What is at risk is archaeology preserved within the wider landscape setting of the monument and within the wider World Heritage Site. Any intervention must be undertaken to a very high standard under our obligations to UNESCO, the Valletta convention, and to the National Planning Policy Framework.
With the right level of resources, teams of experienced, professional archaeologists would mitigate the impact of the project to a very high standard. This work is already underway and its scope is guided by both the independent A303 Scientific Committee and the planning conditions currently in place. We would like to see the work of that committee - led by Sir Barry Cunliffe and ensuring the highest standards of any necessary mitigation programme - elevated in the public eye. We would also like to see the experience and professionalism of the hundreds of archaeologists who would undertake the work similarly celebrated and supported."
Rachel Reeves to delay flagship hospital and road-building projects Stonehenge tunnel and the Lower Thames Crossing could be under threat following an ‘audit’ of the Government’s economic inheritance
Stonehenge Tunnel Delayed? That does it. May it never be glad confident morning again for them.
Afternoon everyone!
For me delaying or indeed abandoning, the Stonehenge Tunnel would be a good thing. Stonehenge needs a bypass, well away from it. There’s probably all sorts of historical relics close to the site.
Indeed. Only the most stupid of Governments (and I am looking at both Labour and the Tories) could have come up with a series of plans that involved damaging a world heritage site so severely there were threats its status would be revoked.
Get a sensible bypass plan in place that doesn't cut into the World Heritage site and get it built.
That bird flew away when they made the A303 the Trunk Road instead of the A30 in roughly 1958 and spent the next sixty years rebuilding it as a high speed dual expressway for most of the next 30 miles either side - except for a short bit at Stonehenge (and benighted Winterbourne Stoke).
If they can this no alternative will happen for a generation as a major project from scratch will be needed and Tories will do a 2015 in a swaythe of the SW in 2029.
I disagree. It is entirely possible to develop a sensible plan for a new dual carriageway that does not impinge onb the World Heritage Site. It is lack of will and local opposition that prevents it.
The only thing going about this current project is it is not the stupid cut and cover version that was originally planned. But it is entirely possible to either extend the tunnel, placing the entrances away from sensitive archaological sites (like Blick Mead which, whilst not as spectacular as Stonehenge is probably more important in terms of actual archaeology than the stones) or to build a proper bypass further away.
It may be 'entirely possible', but at what cost? It's already a mahoosively expensive scheme.
Which bring us to perhaps the central question: how much is archaeology 'worth'?
(I'm not saying I have an asnwer.)
To be honest if they had come up with a proper scheme in the first place it would already be done and would have cost no where near as much as it has done/will do.
And I would suggest that, whilst there is a price that can be put on all archaeology, just as there is a price that can be put on human lives when deciding on road improvements, we have already pretty much said that the Stonehenge area is priceless by designating it as a World Heritage site. There is, as far as I know, no higher status that can be awarded.
'Priceless' ?
English Heritage say quite the opposite, considering how much they charge for access to a poor visitor experience...
But in all seriousness: the road currently runs close by it. I really find it hard to believe that removing the road from the landscape is going to destroy the area around Stonehenge from a World Heritage POV. The removal of the other road, that ran nearer (*) to Stonehenge (in fact, right by it) enhanced the landscape, did it not.
And as I said in my other post: it's surprising how much the area has been altered in recent centuries. Not just the airfield, either. If you look at that link I gave earlier, and move the slider, you can see just how much the stones themselves have changed, with many being re-erected within living memory. I'm always bemused that these 'renovations' are seen as acceptable, and the stones should be taken down to how they were before...
(*) And, of course, had EH rubbing their hands with glee...
You do realise that the scheme involves them destroying parts of the World Heritage site because they are putting the entrances to the tunnel inside the boundaries?
Its a compromise. Albeit one tbat is very generous with taxpayers money to restore tranquility to a chunk of Salisbury plain with an interesting history.
As for UN designating it a World Heritage Site, what that corrupt stinking pile of manure call a bit of Salisbury Plain or anywhere else is of no interest to me.
"As for UN designating it a World Heritage Site, what that corrupt stinking pile of manure call a bit of Salisbury Plain or anywhere else is of no interest to me."
You are in the MINORITY with this viewpoint, even among those skeptical of the UN.
Indeed, makes you come across as even more off-base than usual. Speaking as a fellow weirdo!
Meanwhile Mr Toyodo is sitting in Japan eating Popcorn.
"Over the last few days, it has become clear that the EV industry is on the brink of collapse. Hundreds of billions of euros, dollars and pounds have been pumped into this industry by political leaders and the subsidy junkies that surround them"
Does that mean we can pick up electric vehicles dead cheap?
Probably, whether you will to be able to repair and service them cheaply is another matter entirely.
The only “collapse” is the predictable limit to the number of people prepared to pay Mercedes S class prices for a car. So expensive EV sales are relatively flat. No collapse.
As opposed to cheaper EVs which are selling like hotcakes.
There is a limited number of people prepared to spend £50k+ on a new car. Crazy, isn’t it.
"Paris 2024 Olympics: Organisers respond to offended reactions to opening ceremony One scene viewed as an interpretation of Leonardo da Vinci's The Last Supper, featuring drag artists, has drawn criticism from some Christians - including Italy's deputy prime minister Matteo Salvini who branded it insulting and "sleazy"."
Meanwhile Mr Toyodo is sitting in Japan eating Popcorn.
"Over the last few days, it has become clear that the EV industry is on the brink of collapse. Hundreds of billions of euros, dollars and pounds have been pumped into this industry by political leaders and the subsidy junkies that surround them"
Does that mean we can pick up electric vehicles dead cheap?
Probably, whether you will to be able to repair and service them cheaply is another matter entirely.
The only “collapse” is the predictable limit to the number of people prepared to pay Mercedes S class prices for a car. So expensive EV sales are relatively flat. No collapse.
As opposed to cheaper EVs which are selling like hotcakes.
There is a limited number of people prepared to spend £50k+ on a new car. Crazy, isn’t it.
I don't know about this data, which specifies 'cars', but I've read elsewhere that 'electric vehicles' in some stats can include not just what we would call cars, but electric mopeds and scooters as well.
Rachel Reeves to delay flagship hospital and road-building projects Stonehenge tunnel and the Lower Thames Crossing could be under threat following an ‘audit’ of the Government’s economic inheritance
Stonehenge Tunnel Delayed? That does it. May it never be glad confident morning again for them.
Afternoon everyone!
For me delaying or indeed abandoning, the Stonehenge Tunnel would be a good thing. Stonehenge needs a bypass, well away from it. There’s probably all sorts of historical relics close to the site.
Indeed. Only the most stupid of Governments (and I am looking at both Labour and the Tories) could have come up with a series of plans that involved damaging a world heritage site so severely there were threats its status would be revoked.
Get a sensible bypass plan in place that doesn't cut into the World Heritage site and get it built.
I know this is your field, but I both agree and disagree with this. There is part of me that suspects that this whole project is an English Heritage-led scheme to "reconnect Stonehenge to the ancient landscape". Sorry, I meant an English Heritage-led scheme to "prevent plebs from seeing Stonehenge from the road, and turn Stonehenge into even more of a disappointing tourist trap."
On the other hand, the entire landscape around Stonehenge has been fairly well trashed by man in the last few hundred years. Go back a hundred years, and there was an airfield right next to it. I don't think the currently-planned road scheme will cause anywhere near as much damage as some claim. Archaeologists themselves seem fairly split on it.
Tom Tugendhat was labelled as the 'centrist' or 'liberal' or my favourite 'one nation' Tory but here he is standing up for the Jews at a general election hustings in a way one would normally only associate with hard right culture warriors.
'Hard-right culture warriors stand up for the Jews'?
Have you read any 20th century history?
Post-war Soviet Revisionism rather than history per se.
We've allowed a specific narrative to take hold, but contemporary Western reporting of the rise of Nazism didn't generally describe it as hard or far right. Or 'right' at all. Totalitarian, Nationalistic, Fascist - it was described in many ways but not really as a position on a Left-Right spectrum.
In the years they followed it became very important for the Eastern Bloc to distance and differentiate their own brand of Authoritarianism by othering the defeated regime. Communism was already accepted as far left, so it was convenient to forge a narrative where Nazism was the opposite, and therefore 'far right', conflating that side with evil and their own with good.
It was reductive, simplistic and absolutely fucking bollocks of course, but it stuck.
History being written by the winners is nothing new, but it's interesting to see how the terminology gets retconned and how different the tone of contemporaneous accounts frequently is.
Any examples of these contemporary accounts? Hitler was supported by the right in Germany and abroad, outlawed persecuted and murdered leftwingers in Germany etc. It's news to me that calling the Nazis far right is just an invention of soviet revisionism
Hitler was a contemporary socialist. A nationalist socialist but a socialist nonetheless.
Yes Hitler murdered leftwingers in Germany. He also murdered Jews, centrists, right wingers and anyone else who could be a threat to his regime or didn't tow the line sufficiently.
Soviet Russia and Maoist China and the Khmer Rouge also murdered a lot of leftwingers too.
The violence between branches of leftwingers whether it be between Bolsheviks and Trots or anyone else is nothing new.
The phrase "tankie" dates bank to the Soviets sending tanks to murder left wingers rising up in Hungary.
If killing leftwingers makes you far right, then Joseph Stalin must be far right too with the amount of leftwing blood he had on his hands.
Hitler wasn't a socialist.
The rest of your post is equally moronic.
So do you dispute this ?
“Soviet Russia and Maoist China and the Khmer Rouge also murdered a lot of leftwingers too”
This place is idyllic. If @BlancheLivermore is reading I recommend it for a long walking holiday. A branch of the St James Way comes through here - down from Le Puy all the way through l’Aveyron. Looks like it passes multiple gorgeous villages and valleys
Tho maybe avoid it in late July August when it might hit 39C
Rachel Reeves to delay flagship hospital and road-building projects Stonehenge tunnel and the Lower Thames Crossing could be under threat following an ‘audit’ of the Government’s economic inheritance
Stonehenge Tunnel Delayed? That does it. May it never be glad confident morning again for them.
Afternoon everyone!
For me delaying or indeed abandoning, the Stonehenge Tunnel would be a good thing. Stonehenge needs a bypass, well away from it. There’s probably all sorts of historical relics close to the site.
Indeed. Only the most stupid of Governments (and I am looking at both Labour and the Tories) could have come up with a series of plans that involved damaging a world heritage site so severely there were threats its status would be revoked.
Get a sensible bypass plan in place that doesn't cut into the World Heritage site and get it built.
I know this is your field, but I both agree and disagree with this. There is part of me that suspects that this whole project is an English Heritage-led scheme to "reconnect Stonehenge to the ancient landscape". Sorry, I meant an English Heritage-led scheme to "prevent plebs from seeing Stonehenge from the road, and turn Stonehenge into even more of a disappointing tourist trap."
On the other hand, the entire landscape around Stonehenge has been fairly well trashed by man in the last few hundred years. Go back a hundred years, and there was an airfield right next to it. I don't think the currently-planned road scheme will cause anywhere near as much damage as some claim. Archaeologists themselves seem fairly split on it.
The airfield was a First World War landing ground - hardly anything other than grass runways, tented hangars and Nissen huts.
There's a picture-slider in the link I posted above. If you look in the top-left corner, it actually shows the airfield. And I'd argue when anti-tunnel archaeologists talk about things like flints, even those structure would have moved, damaged and destroyed artefacts and context.
Meanwhile Mr Toyodo is sitting in Japan eating Popcorn.
"Over the last few days, it has become clear that the EV industry is on the brink of collapse. Hundreds of billions of euros, dollars and pounds have been pumped into this industry by political leaders and the subsidy junkies that surround them"
Does that mean we can pick up electric vehicles dead cheap?
Probably, whether you will to be able to repair and service them cheaply is another matter entirely.
The only “collapse” is the predictable limit to the number of people prepared to pay Mercedes S class prices for a car. So expensive EV sales are relatively flat. No collapse.
As opposed to cheaper EVs which are selling like hotcakes.
There is a limited number of people prepared to spend £50k+ on a new car. Crazy, isn’t it.
I don't know about this data, which specifies 'cars', but I've read elsewhere that 'electric vehicles' in some stats can include not just what we would call cars, but electric mopeds and scooters as well.
The numbers track the reality, if you go through the various brands. What has happened is that sales of a number of brands have reduced in the early part of this year.
"BREAKING: Hezbollah directly struck a playground in the Israeli Druze town of Majdal Shams, gravely injuring over 28 people people, and killing 9 children. Israeli first responders are currently searching the area. More information to come. "
"BREAKING: Hezbollah directly struck a playground in the Israeli Druze town of Majdal Shams, gravely injuring over 28 people people, and killing 9 children. Israeli first responders are currently searching the area. More information to come. "
Rachel Reeves to delay flagship hospital and road-building projects Stonehenge tunnel and the Lower Thames Crossing could be under threat following an ‘audit’ of the Government’s economic inheritance
Stonehenge Tunnel Delayed? That does it. May it never be glad confident morning again for them.
Afternoon everyone!
For me delaying or indeed abandoning, the Stonehenge Tunnel would be a good thing. Stonehenge needs a bypass, well away from it. There’s probably all sorts of historical relics close to the site.
Indeed. Only the most stupid of Governments (and I am looking at both Labour and the Tories) could have come up with a series of plans that involved damaging a world heritage site so severely there were threats its status would be revoked.
Get a sensible bypass plan in place that doesn't cut into the World Heritage site and get it built.
I know this is your field, but I both agree and disagree with this. There is part of me that suspects that this whole project is an English Heritage-led scheme to "reconnect Stonehenge to the ancient landscape". Sorry, I meant an English Heritage-led scheme to "prevent plebs from seeing Stonehenge from the road, and turn Stonehenge into even more of a disappointing tourist trap."
On the other hand, the entire landscape around Stonehenge has been fairly well trashed by man in the last few hundred years. Go back a hundred years, and there was an airfield right next to it. I don't think the currently-planned road scheme will cause anywhere near as much damage as some claim. Archaeologists themselves seem fairly split on it.
The airfield was a First World War landing ground - hardly anything other than grass runways, tented hangars and Nissen huts.
There is also the slight matter of the Army messing with the stones in the '50s and concreting in some of the ones that had fallen over to put them back up.
Rachel Reeves to delay flagship hospital and road-building projects Stonehenge tunnel and the Lower Thames Crossing could be under threat following an ‘audit’ of the Government’s economic inheritance
Stonehenge Tunnel Delayed? That does it. May it never be glad confident morning again for them.
Afternoon everyone!
For me delaying or indeed abandoning, the Stonehenge Tunnel would be a good thing. Stonehenge needs a bypass, well away from it. There’s probably all sorts of historical relics close to the site.
Indeed. Only the most stupid of Governments (and I am looking at both Labour and the Tories) could have come up with a series of plans that involved damaging a world heritage site so severely there were threats its status would be revoked.
Get a sensible bypass plan in place that doesn't cut into the World Heritage site and get it built.
I know this is your field, but I both agree and disagree with this. There is part of me that suspects that this whole project is an English Heritage-led scheme to "reconnect Stonehenge to the ancient landscape". Sorry, I meant an English Heritage-led scheme to "prevent plebs from seeing Stonehenge from the road, and turn Stonehenge into even more of a disappointing tourist trap."
On the other hand, the entire landscape around Stonehenge has been fairly well trashed by man in the last few hundred years. Go back a hundred years, and there was an airfield right next to it. I don't think the currently-planned road scheme will cause anywhere near as much damage as some claim. Archaeologists themselves seem fairly split on it.
The airfield was a First World War landing ground - hardly anything other than grass runways, tented hangars and Nissen huts.
There is also the slight matter of the Army messing with the stones in the '50s and concreting in some of the ones that had fallen over to put them back up.
Rachel Reeves to delay flagship hospital and road-building projects Stonehenge tunnel and the Lower Thames Crossing could be under threat following an ‘audit’ of the Government’s economic inheritance
Stonehenge Tunnel Delayed? That does it. May it never be glad confident morning again for them.
Afternoon everyone!
For me delaying or indeed abandoning, the Stonehenge Tunnel would be a good thing. Stonehenge needs a bypass, well away from it. There’s probably all sorts of historical relics close to the site.
Indeed. Only the most stupid of Governments (and I am looking at both Labour and the Tories) could have come up with a series of plans that involved damaging a world heritage site so severely there were threats its status would be revoked.
Get a sensible bypass plan in place that doesn't cut into the World Heritage site and get it built.
I know this is your field, but I both agree and disagree with this. There is part of me that suspects that this whole project is an English Heritage-led scheme to "reconnect Stonehenge to the ancient landscape". Sorry, I meant an English Heritage-led scheme to "prevent plebs from seeing Stonehenge from the road, and turn Stonehenge into even more of a disappointing tourist trap."
On the other hand, the entire landscape around Stonehenge has been fairly well trashed by man in the last few hundred years. Go back a hundred years, and there was an airfield right next to it. I don't think the currently-planned road scheme will cause anywhere near as much damage as some claim. Archaeologists themselves seem fairly split on it.
The airfield was a First World War landing ground - hardly anything other than grass runways, tented hangars and Nissen huts.
There's a picture-slider in the link I posted above. If you look in the top-left corner, it actually shows the airfield. And I'd argue when anti-tunnel archaeologists talk about things like flints, even those structure would have moved, damaged and destroyed artefacts and context.
Sure, but those airfields had a trivial presence compared with the 1930s onward designs. No runway, no runway electric lighting cables, and so on and so forth.
Rachel Reeves to delay flagship hospital and road-building projects Stonehenge tunnel and the Lower Thames Crossing could be under threat following an ‘audit’ of the Government’s economic inheritance
Stonehenge Tunnel Delayed? That does it. May it never be glad confident morning again for them.
Afternoon everyone!
For me delaying or indeed abandoning, the Stonehenge Tunnel would be a good thing. Stonehenge needs a bypass, well away from it. There’s probably all sorts of historical relics close to the site.
Indeed. Only the most stupid of Governments (and I am looking at both Labour and the Tories) could have come up with a series of plans that involved damaging a world heritage site so severely there were threats its status would be revoked.
Get a sensible bypass plan in place that doesn't cut into the World Heritage site and get it built.
I know this is your field, but I both agree and disagree with this. There is part of me that suspects that this whole project is an English Heritage-led scheme to "reconnect Stonehenge to the ancient landscape". Sorry, I meant an English Heritage-led scheme to "prevent plebs from seeing Stonehenge from the road, and turn Stonehenge into even more of a disappointing tourist trap."
On the other hand, the entire landscape around Stonehenge has been fairly well trashed by man in the last few hundred years. Go back a hundred years, and there was an airfield right next to it. I don't think the currently-planned road scheme will cause anywhere near as much damage as some claim. Archaeologists themselves seem fairly split on it.
The airfield was a First World War landing ground - hardly anything other than grass runways, tented hangars and Nissen huts.
There's a picture-slider in the link I posted above. If you look in the top-left corner, it actually shows the airfield. And I'd argue when anti-tunnel archaeologists talk about things like flints, even those structure would have moved, damaged and destroyed artefacts and context.
Sure, but those airfields had a trivial presence compared with the 1930s onward designs. No runway, no runway electric lighting cables, and so on and so forth.
I'd agree with 'lower', but argue against 'trivial'.
Anyway, someone else who likes the Putinist 'no need to worry you little heads about democracy' line.
Acyn @Acyn Trump: You have to get out and vote. You won’t have to do it anymore. Four years, it will be fixed, it will be fine. You won’t have to vote anymore.. In four years, you won’t have to vote again.
Trump is constitutionally barred from running for a 3rd term so as far as he is concerned if he wins in November his second term will sort out the remaining problems in the US
"BREAKING: Hezbollah directly struck a playground in the Israeli Druze town of Majdal Shams, gravely injuring over 28 people people, and killing 9 children. Israeli first responders are currently searching the area. More information to come. "
Am I the only one who'd build it straight through Stonehenge?
Probably.
As it stands it virtually does go straight through Stonehenge. Any canning of this scheme means it will for another generation at least.
You only have to go to Hindhead to see the difference a tunnel makes.
Mind you, there is a valid argument to move the Stones. The A303 (aka Harroway) is tens of thousands of years older. They were probably only put there in the first place as it was near a prehistoric "crossroads" with the North to South "Gold Road"
Don’t they have to be shifted anyway when the clocks change for BST?
I think they predate it and use UDT, or Universal Druid Time. The French of course use TUD, for temps universel des druides, because they're awkward. I'm sure there's an ISO for it.
PART 1: DEFINING CAPITALISM AND SOCIALISM Mainstream economists agree with the distinction between capitalism and socialism. There are four broad types
The four broad types of economic systems are: capitalist market, capitalist planned, socialist market, socialist planned
Capitalism is defined as private ownership of means of production for profit
State capitalism involves state influence on economy. It is not recognized as socialism
Socialism is defined as workers collectively owning means of production for use
The Nazis used state capitalism with private ownership and planned allocation. This is not socialist
Hitler used the term "socialism" to attract voter support in the early 1930s.
Social scientist Mary Van Kleek referred to Hitler's economy as a competitive capitalism system that used "national socialism" as a cloak.
Initially, "national socialism" preached the overthrow of capitalism, but Hitler ended up drawing support from capitalists and the middle class.
Programs proposed by the Nazis before coming to power were not socialist in the economic sense but were a means to attract mass support.
So the cheap mass market holidays for workers, cheap cars, improved working conditions and benefits targeting workers weren't socialistic - because they were a means to attract mass support?
The Nazi's also used economic planning and price controls to try and reduce (or even eliminate) market forces in the economy.
PART 5: NAZI ECONOMIC POLICIES PRESERVED CAPITALISM
Economist Maxine Sweezy (sp?) highlighted that the German economy under Nazi Germany was a controlled capitalist economy.
Historians Fitzpatrick and Moses noted that private property and freedom of contract were maintained under the Nazis.
Private companies continued to operate according to their expectations, with the state authorities tolerating and even bowing to their actions.
The Nazi government allowed private capitalists to run their companies without interference, except for a few exceptions.
Scholars Jackson and Davis argued that while the banking sector was heavily controlled, it was not socialist nationalization.
Spanish economist Bell concluded that the Nazi government in 1930s Germany implemented a wide-scale privatization policy, selling public ownership in state-owned businesses and transferring some public services to the private sector, mainly to organizations within the Nazi party.
So the cheap mass market holidays for workers, cheap cars, improved working conditions and benefits targeting workers weren't socialistic - because they were a means to attract mass support?
Rachel Reeves to delay flagship hospital and road-building projects Stonehenge tunnel and the Lower Thames Crossing could be under threat following an ‘audit’ of the Government’s economic inheritance
Stonehenge Tunnel Delayed? That does it. May it never be glad confident morning again for them.
Afternoon everyone!
For me delaying or indeed abandoning, the Stonehenge Tunnel would be a good thing. Stonehenge needs a bypass, well away from it. There’s probably all sorts of historical relics close to the site.
Indeed. Only the most stupid of Governments (and I am looking at both Labour and the Tories) could have come up with a series of plans that involved damaging a world heritage site so severely there were threats its status would be revoked.
Get a sensible bypass plan in place that doesn't cut into the World Heritage site and get it built.
That bird flew away when they made the A303 the Trunk Road instead of the A30 in roughly 1958 and spent the next sixty years rebuilding it as a high speed dual expressway for most of the next 30 miles either side - except for a short bit at Stonehenge (and benighted Winterbourne Stoke).
If they can this no alternative will happen for a generation as a major project from scratch will be needed and Tories will do a 2015 in a swaythe of the SW in 2029.
I disagree. It is entirely possible to develop a sensible plan for a new dual carriageway that does not impinge onb the World Heritage Site. It is lack of will and local opposition that prevents it.
The only thing going about this current project is it is not the stupid cut and cover version that was originally planned. But it is entirely possible to either extend the tunnel, placing the entrances away from sensitive archaological sites (like Blick Mead which, whilst not as spectacular as Stonehenge is probably more important in terms of actual archaeology than the stones) or to build a proper bypass further away.
It may be 'entirely possible', but at what cost? It's already a mahoosively expensive scheme.
Which bring us to perhaps the central question: how much is archaeology 'worth'?
(I'm not saying I have an asnwer.)
To be honest if they had come up with a proper scheme in the first place it would already be done and would have cost no where near as much as it has done/will do.
And I would suggest that, whilst there is a price that can be put on all archaeology, just as there is a price that can be put on human lives when deciding on road improvements, we have already pretty much said that the Stonehenge area is priceless by designating it as a World Heritage site. There is, as far as I know, no higher status that can be awarded.
'Priceless' ?
English Heritage say quite the opposite, considering how much they charge for access to a poor visitor experience...
But in all seriousness: the road currently runs close by it. I really find it hard to believe that removing the road from the landscape is going to destroy the area around Stonehenge from a World Heritage POV. The removal of the other road, that ran nearer (*) to Stonehenge (in fact, right by it) enhanced the landscape, did it not.
And as I said in my other post: it's surprising how much the area has been altered in recent centuries. Not just the airfield, either. If you look at that link I gave earlier, and move the slider, you can see just how much the stones themselves have changed, with many being re-erected within living memory. I'm always bemused that these 'renovations' are seen as acceptable, and the stones should be taken down to how they were before...
(*) And, of course, had EH rubbing their hands with glee...
You do realise that the scheme involves them destroying parts of the World Heritage site because they are putting the entrances to the tunnel inside the boundaries?
Its a compromise. Albeit one tbat is very generous with taxpayers money to restore tranquility to a chunk of Salisbury plain with an interesting history.
As for UN designating it a World Heritage Site, what that corrupt stinking pile of manure call a bit of Salisbury Plain or anywhere else is of no interest to me.
That is because frankly you are an extremist lunatic. As your post proves.
To be clear, where is the picture originally posted??
It's on that Twitter thing. People post things from it on here occasionally. It'll never catch on
Glib - the poster looks like a Muslim commentator, suggesting the image is second hand, so my question was more where he had taken the picture from to post on twitter, since it is not formally a retweet as such.
Comments
If so, I'll happily retweet as a question.
At the moment Reform afaics are being men-of-two-halves (like a walnut). Well-behaved and somewhat productive in Parliament, goons outside - for example Tice shit stirring the Manchester Airport incident before anything was clear.
I'm not sure of that will work for them.
About 99.46% sure that Kamala Harris will NOT break with this tradition,
* 1789 and 1792 also featured White male candidates but NO party tickets.
You only have to go to Hindhead to see the difference a tunnel makes.
Mind you, there is a valid argument to move the Stones. The A303 (aka Harroway) is tens of thousands of years older. They were probably only put there in the first place as it was near a prehistoric "crossroads" with the North to South "Gold Road"
In 1796 you didn't have tickets. They came in from 1804.
Harris 2.56
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.176878927
HOWEVER, there WERE party tickets, Federalist versus Republican (or Democratic-Republican if you prefer) in 1796 and 1800,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1796_United_States_presidential_election
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1800_United_States_presidential_election
Also I would have to say that you need to distinguish between those archaeologists who are actually interested in the archaeology and those who are just interested in mitigation - an industry that has developed over the last 20 years or so and which involves large 'archaeological' companies hiring themselves out to developers on the basis that they will make sure the cost of any legally required archaeological work is kept to an absolute minimum and that any archaeology that is there will preferably 'go away' under their investigations.
So we had an exciting finish to the time trial and instead of seeing the competitors when they could have slipped at any time on the wet track with the final straights and corners we got aerial views of Parisian landmark buildings with no sign of the cycling.
Similar has happened with international tournaments where they are so busy showing the crowd and replays instead of showing the actual live match.
Time to head for the high hills of the Auvergne
This is all part of a much larger and extremely important archeological landscape - connected with Durrington Walls to the East and with the two adjacent cursus monuments.
The point is that there are solutions which will protect the World Heritage site (which is much bigger than the immediate henge) whilst still allowing the upgrade of the road. The trouble is that previous governments were just not interested in anything other than the bare minimum they could get away with. Hence the continual retreat they have had to undertake every time someone points out how stupid their plans were.
In the process they were willing to burn down even many of their own achievements for a short-term political possible-benefit.
On the two schemes mentioned in the Telegraph, I wonder about others. The Hammersmith Bridge Meccano Set project will be interesting. I don't see RR authorising the £200m (iirc) that the local Boroughs who own the bridge have been demanding. My immediate idea for that one would be to take it out of the road network (with adjustments to the next bridges either way), and have a word with the Bridge House Estates trust.
Many schemes need to be similarly re-evaluated.
"Over the last few days, it has become clear that the EV industry is on the brink of collapse. Hundreds of billions of euros, dollars and pounds have been pumped into this industry by political leaders and the subsidy junkies that surround them"
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/07/27/heads-should-roll-over-the-electric-car-fiasco/
One scene viewed as an interpretation of Leonardo da Vinci's The Last Supper, featuring drag artists, has drawn criticism from some Christians - including Italy's deputy prime minister Matteo Salvini who branded it insulting and "sleazy"."
https://news.sky.com/story/paris-2024-olympics-organisers-respond-to-offended-reactions-to-opening-ceremony-13185771
As for UN designating it a World Heritage Site, what that corrupt stinking pile of manure call a bit of Salisbury Plain or anywhere else is of no interest to me.
So let me ask you a question: why should the existing road run right through the middle of this 'precious' landscape? If the landscape matters that much, then surely that road is an egregious desecration?
I'm actually on the fence over this: it is just that I've seen archaeologists argue both sides. As an example: https://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/news/24008032.archaeologists-sign-letter-unite-stonehenge-tunnel-debate/ .
Which actually partially agrees with you (and me!) about the landscape, but says:
"What is at risk is archaeology preserved within the wider landscape setting of the monument and within the wider World Heritage Site. Any intervention must be undertaken to a very high standard under our obligations to UNESCO, the Valletta convention, and to the National Planning Policy Framework.
With the right level of resources, teams of experienced, professional archaeologists would mitigate the impact of the project to a very high standard. This work is already underway and its scope is guided by both the independent A303 Scientific Committee and the planning conditions currently in place. We would like to see the work of that committee - led by Sir Barry Cunliffe and ensuring the highest standards of any necessary mitigation programme - elevated in the public eye. We would also like to see the experience and professionalism of the hundreds of archaeologists who would undertake the work similarly celebrated and supported."
You are in the MINORITY with this viewpoint, even among those skeptical of the UN.
Indeed, makes you come across as even more off-base than usual. Speaking as a fellow weirdo!
As opposed to cheaper EVs which are selling like hotcakes.
There is a limited number of people prepared to spend £50k+ on a new car. Crazy, isn’t it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matteo_Salvini
“Soviet Russia and Maoist China and the Khmer Rouge also murdered a lot of leftwingers too”
Tho maybe avoid it in late July August when it might hit 39C
"BREAKING: Hezbollah directly struck a playground in the Israeli Druze town of Majdal Shams, gravely injuring over 28 people people, and killing 9 children. Israeli first responders are currently searching the area. More information to come. "
https://x.com/HenMazzig/status/1817236379098591519?t=-eHKubll78O9eWyOaLK8CQ&s=19
If you’ve got nothing interesting, witty, intelligent or insightful to say - and you never ever ever do - don’t say it
NEW THREAD
https://www.english-heritage.org.uk/visit/inspire-me/blog/blog-posts/excavation-restoration-stonehenge-1950s-60s/
I just wish you would stop your troll nonsense if it means pretending you don't see racism when it's blindingly obvious.
Cleverly and Petel tied for second with 3 each, Tugendhat and Badenoch joint 3rd with 2 each.
Braverman and Stride look to go out at the first hurdle with 0 MPs backing them at present
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1eXBJ7cVfNYj0pR-39kzFep4LWoIWcb47DBQ347LoNOY/edit?gid=0#gid=0
"Were the Nazis socialists?",
veritas et caritas, 2022, see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=boNgEMOA0SE
And yes, there will be an AI summary
veritas et caritas, 2022, see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=boNgEMOA0SE
PART 1: DEFINING CAPITALISM AND SOCIALISM
Mainstream economists agree with the distinction between capitalism and socialism. There are four broad types
- The four broad types of economic systems are: capitalist market, capitalist planned, socialist market, socialist planned
- Capitalism is defined as private ownership of means of production for profit
- State capitalism involves state influence on economy. It is not recognized as socialism
- Socialism is defined as workers collectively owning means of production for use
The Nazis used state capitalism with private ownership and planned allocation. This is not socialistveritas et caritas, 2022, see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=boNgEMOA0SE
PART 2: WHY WAS IT CALLED "NATIONAL SOCIALISM"?
veritas et caritas, 2022, see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=boNgEMOA0SE
PART 3: FAILURE OF EARLY NAZI "SOCIALISTS"
- Prior to 1932, the Nazi party had some socialist sympathetic members, but they were ineffective and eventually sidelined, expelled, or executed.
- Gotfreed Feder was anti-capitalist, though not a Marxist, and was ignored once Hitler came into power.
- Ferdinand Zimmerman started as a social conservative and anti-capitalist, but later returned to capitalism.
- Gregor Strasser, a Nazi official, initially suggested nationalizing the economy, but his views were rejected by Hitler.
In 1934, Strasser and others sympathetic to socialism were executed.veritas et caritas, 2022, see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=boNgEMOA0SE
PART 4: NAZIS WERE HISTORICALLY IDENTIFIED AS CAPITALIST
The Nazi's also used economic planning and price controls to try and reduce (or even eliminate) market forces in the economy.
veritas et caritas, 2022, see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=boNgEMOA0SE
PART 5: NAZI ECONOMIC POLICIES PRESERVED CAPITALISM
Isn't that basically the British aviation industry in the 1950s?