kiujhgbnj

The clever part is that the dome is incredibly light. It thins toward the top, where it is taking less load, and uses empty jars in the concrete to lighten parts. The relatively thick heavy walls are enough to hold it.

Rebar generally reduces the life of concrete - almost all concrete failure is due to water getting into the rebar, creating rust which expands and cracks the concrete.

A lot of the ruins of Greece were damaged by Victorian engineers securing the stones with iron bars to strengthen them

The airlines would demand a 3hour checkin for each train to compete fairly.

In the first millennium there was no airport security and a large number of Viking raids on Britain.

In the second millennium airport security was introduced and many fewer viking raids took place

In this millennium with greatly increased airport security there have been no viking raids on any part of the British isles.

It's a dome - domes are in compression - in compression you don't need rebar

There may be a good reason to avoid using batteries - it takes rather a lot of AAs to move a train

True, but the article implies that "economists all agree on these things, economists are experts - therefore these things are correct"

But the same responses would come from US politicians of both types - would Swedish or French economists have the same views?

finally a way to make Perl easier to read

But can you distinguish between a capital Beta and a Shluse?

But it does suggest that economics is just politics by another name.

A survey of doctors would presumably agree on the function of an organ, a survey of hospital administrators might also agree on the need to cut treatment costs - this doesn't mean the opinions are equally accurate.

Interesting that all economists seem to be pro-business, anti-tax, anti-worker rights. You would almost think that most economists worked at banks or for university business schools.

In other research naval officers believe in a larger navy with lots of ships