Littlestone wrote: You mean like a bunch of rocks ripped from the earth and then dumped in the middle of a location of outstanding natural beauty? ;)
Perhaps you are referring to the collection of stones that form Stonehenge. Or the four and a half thousand year-old mound we call Silbury. Or Perhaps you are even referring to the Pyramids or to the Uffington White Horse? With respect, those things, and others like them, are examples of mankind's harmony with the earth - not something 'dumped' in the middle of a location of outstanding natural beauty.
To equate the tat of plastic dolls, rotting bananas, crystals and tea candles left at our ancient and sacred places with the beauty of the earth and some of the finest statements that man has made upon it is... well, a little tatty to say the least.
I'm exaggerating in order to emphasise the point. "Litter" is a subjective term.
Reply | with quote | Posted by Mustard 26th June 2007ce 20:03 |
Ancient sites: Protect or Use? (Mirla, Jun 25, 2007, 15:18)- Re: Ancient sites: Protect or Use? (tiompan, Jun 25, 2007, 16:30)
- Re: Ancient sites: Protect or Use? (Hob, Jun 25, 2007, 17:18)
- Re: Ancient sites: Protect or Use? (Mirla, Jun 26, 2007, 11:26)
- Re: Ancient sites: Protect or Use? (goffik, Jun 26, 2007, 14:45)
- Re: Ancient sites: Protect or Use? (Paulus, Jun 26, 2007, 23:14)
- Re: Ancient sites: Protect or Use? (tomwatts, Jun 27, 2007, 14:57)
- Re: Ancient sites: Protect or Use? (Paulus, Jun 27, 2007, 21:24)
- Re: Ancient sites: Protect or Use? (FourWinds, Jun 28, 2007, 05:51)
- Re: Ancient sites: Protect or Use? (goffik, Jun 28, 2007, 06:07)
- Re: Ancient sites: Protect or Use? (ocifant, Jun 28, 2007, 06:30)
- Re: Ancient sites: Protect or Use? (tuesday, Jun 28, 2007, 08:41)
- Re: Ancient sites: Protect or Use? (Mustard, Jun 29, 2007, 18:04)
- New Code (nigelswift, Jun 28, 2007, 11:52)
- Re: Ancient sites: Protect or Use? (Mirla, Jun 29, 2007, 15:27)
- Re: Ancient sites: Protect or Use? (Vybik Jon, Sep 17, 2012, 14:26)
|
|