Slate: Trump’s wall would hurt wildlife and halt science at the border.
Let’s put this to bed once and for all. There will be no wall. Perhaps an invigorated fence, but there will be no wall. A wall vs. a fence requires much more material. How much more? I believe I’ve posted before - concrete calculators are available on the web. An 18’ high by 4’ thick by 1 mile long chunk of wall would be ~14,000 cubic yards of concrete. The entire border is 1,520 miles. That’s nearly 80 million cubic yards of concrete, longer than the Great Wall of China (built of brick-faced rammed earth). That wall didn’t keep out the hordes either.
The fact that Slate or any other media source is reporting on ‘the wall’ as if it is a serious consideration, is a breach of journalistic ethics if you ask me. As a joke only. A piece of idiotic tomfoolery.
But this is how media sources keep clickthroughs maxed, and make the contest more of a horserace (as I projected months ago).
[#ignoretrump. Thistles can’t grow where roses do. Use it - point to cat photos if you want. Anything but the blowhard.]
Comments:
There are no comments at this time for this entry.
Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.
Next entry: PS Mag: How the Recent Shootings in Dallas and Baton Rouge Will Impact Law and Order Policing. >>
