Brendon’s original contention, which you attempted to disprove, was:

And yet somehow London and Paris made it without a skyline full of tall buildings.

(emphasis added)

One swallow does not a spring make, and one (or even two!) tallish buildings does not translate to “a skyline full of tall buildings.” So you’ve failed, my friend.

Back under your bridge. And take your straw man with you.

Note how New York City is conspicuously left out of this discussion…”

You seem to have explained why in #37.

You really should do your research before we enter into a discussion. It might do you some good.

1. London: London has Big Ben, one of tallest freestanding clocktowers in the world.

Paris: Paris has the Eiffel Tower.

Rome, as one of the posters mentioned earlier, has buildings that, upon completion, were some of tallest of their day–St Peter’s Basillica is a prime example.

So you’ve failed, my friend. This returns the conversation to my original thesis: Skyscrapers are indicative of a country’s rising economic and technological profile.

I look forward to our future conversations.

Note how New York City is conspicuously left out of this discussion…

In the US, skyscrapers seem more like targets these days.

I thought that idea pretty much went out the window–and fell 88 stories to its death–when the Petronas towers were built in Malaysia, a country with a relatively small economy.

I live in Korea. I’m a resident and taxpayer. Limited voting rights at the moment, but the situation is improving. Therefore, according to your logic, I guess the onus is on me to address issues here and do my best to improve the situation. Not that your opinions about what I should deem important and how I should act are worth a pitcher of spit.

I seem to recall having central heating and air throughout my career as a student, so an individual unit breaking down would not have meant students - in particular younger students - suffering in extreme cold or heat. Addressing such a problem is more important to me than obsessing over phallic symbols. To each his/her own.

And numerous Korean contractors are very much involved in its construction.

Rome includes plenty of historic buildings, such as the nearly 400-foot-high St. Peter’s Basilica, that were of dizzying heights when they were built.

Robert, what is Paris most famous landmark? You guessed it. It’s the Eiffel tower. So you’re wrong. Paris at least did not “make it” without tall buildings.

First of all, you’re responding to Brendon Carr, not Robert.

Second, he cited two of the world’s great cities as examples (not an exhaustive list) to illustrate that tall buildings do not a great city make. You “disproved” (not really, but I’ll be charitable) one of his examples. London still stands, and just for kicks I’ll add Rome to take the place of the “fallen” Paris. Oops. The “ridiculous” claim still stands.

I’m new to this site. I think I’ll have some fun here.

Suuuuuuuure you are. You know an awful lot about your fellow posters for a newcomer.

But again, even giving you the benefit of the doubt on that point… get back under your bridge, troll.