NWO bridge- A concept design., page 1
Pages:
ATS Members have flagged this thread 1 times
Topic started on 23-12-2007 @ 07:19 AM by jedimiller
This might sound like a radical idea. But take a look at this image.


New World Order Bridge.
QuickImageHosting.com...


Now, think about this, a bridge that connects the US to Europe. With 10 lanes each way. Sounds good doesn't it? just another one of my radical ideas to change the way we think and challenge the airline industries to think about being fair and safe. I don't fly, and I'd rather drive. It's safer, and that will bring in more tourists to America. It can be built in 10 years, safe and secure. Who thinks this could actually work? and would you drive to Europe if you had the opportunity? I sure as hell would. Gas stops at certain points, rest stops and restaurants along the way.


reply posted on 24-12-2007 @ 11:47 AM by Beachcoma
Ah... you mean something like this:



Note the various bridges crossing the Atlantic.

The Borg -- The Ultimate NWO


reply posted on 24-12-2007 @ 03:39 PM by korai
reply to post by jedimiller



yea Lol. what a design. pasting the 2D image of a bridge over that. well i have to point something out. about the bridge. lets say the speed limit is kept around 70-90 mph. or even 100, then how long do you think its gonna take to cross? 3 days, five days? a week/? and i think its possible the least plausable bridge ever suggested.

if you think about the way you could have the bridge suspended, it would either use supports from the ocean bottom, or float, but then what about the big waves? and how many petrol stations would you need, then the little fact of how do THE BOATS go past it? I mean, man you must be either really stupid, or taking the piss.

I think it better you get over your fears of flying, than suggest propostrous, mountrously implausible ideas over the internet.


reply posted on 25-12-2007 @ 06:20 AM by anti72
reply to post by korai



yes.hard but true.
nonsense.

theres too much crap and disinfo posted here.sorry.


reply posted on 25-12-2007 @ 06:32 AM by Hyacinth
Wouldn't this be a lot easier:

Russia - USA tunnel

I remember hearing many years ago of rumours of a tunnel from the US to the UK, but I really don't see how this would be possible either!!! As for the bridge idea, come on, really????


reply posted on 25-12-2007 @ 06:46 AM by TheoOne
reply to post by jedimiller



I don't think making that bridge would happen.

Why? Because I believe the storms and earthquakes, all kinds of environment changes and weather could easily damage the long bridge like that. Then it would easily get divided and sink into the ocean. Plus, it would cost thousands and thousands of lives of drivers and travellers.

As for Russia - USA tunnel, it may be possible since it isn't a far distance from alaska to rus

[edit on 25-12-2007 by TheoOne]



reply posted on 30-12-2007 @ 05:03 PM by TheHypnoToad
Originally posted by jedimiller

I don't fly, and I'd rather drive. It's safer . . . .



I disagree. It seems every single day I hear something on the news about at least one car accident, but it is not all that often that I hear about aircraft crashing.

Here's an article I found that explores this:
www.piercelaw.edu...

As for your original thought about how people might prefer to travel on this bridge rather than fly... Not me! I would rather have a couple of drinks and sleep through a long flight than drive that distance. By the time you got to Europe, you would have used up several days of your vacation time already. Not to mention the nightmare that traffic would be. Every driven through Houston at rush hour? That's the closest thing I could think of to your ten-lane bridge scenario. No thank you!! Imagine if there's a wreck? That many people slowing down to look would be awful.

Also, how would you handle the fact that people in the US and people in Europe tend not to drive on the same side of the road? On this bridge, which side would be the "correct" side?

Lastly, you mentioned that with a train system, you would rather be above water than below, because then you could at least swim to safety. The rail system would have to be built kind of high above the water to keep it from being washed out by waves. If you were able to swim anywhere, it would be to a support that I doubt you could hold onto, let alone climb.

I'll just take my chances with air travel, and hope that if my plane goes down, the whole thing is over with quickly.

Interesting idea, but I am not buying. I do absolutely love the picture of the bridge, though!
Pages:     ^^TOP^^



I finally solved a great mystery! I think I see now...
  Posted 18 days ago with 72 member flags
Finally! MSM Coverage - Legal Challenges to Fed - The End is Near
  Posted 17 days ago with 48 member flags
You Westerners Are Deluded
  Posted 18 days ago with 30 member flags
‘Barcode everyone at birth’
  Posted 3 days ago with 20 member flags
Pentagon Source Alludes to Martial Law Around July 1st, 2012
  Posted 2 days ago with 18 member flags
FBI Seize Email server, then return it
  Posted 15 days ago with 16 member flags