Talk:2127: Panama Canal
Can any English majors verify if 'we would had to modify it' in the Title text is grammatically ok or not? It sounds like it should be 'we would have had to modify it' or 'we would've had to...', but I could be wrong or maybe it was intentional? Stickfigurefan (talk) 18:45, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
- Pretty sure it is just a missing word and yes I think "have" is the missing word so we would have had to modify it was the intention. Maybe it will be corrected, the comic has only been up 20 minutes now. --Kynde (talk) 18:53, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
- But as written, you can split the title text exactly in half (at the the space after "would", and including the final period). "Have" doesn't work--the two halves aren't even--"halve" works...but then you have to split it as "ha|lve". Elvenivle (talk)
- Hm, there also appears to be another missing word: "...would ['ve/of/have] had to modify it [to] include...". I was hoping there was a joke in the shorter cut--representing the standard Panama palindrome--crossing the longer title text (represented in the vertical canal, leaving an improperly-cut "have", either as 've or "of") but two missing words doesn't seem to fit that hope. Elvenivle (talk)
- The title text reads as if Randall was sleepy, drunk, or distracted. The missing words are common typos. 126.96.36.199 02:13, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
- Should it be fixed, to help it make more sense to non-native English speakers? “That Guy from the Netherlands” (talk) 16:58, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
Fun fact: The portion of the Arctic–Antarctic Canal that passes through central Panamá actually runs from south to north (or at least southwest to northeast), rather than from north to south! —TobyBartels (talk) 19:58, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
- The actual Panama Canal runs West to East from the Atlantic to the Pacific. Both are due to the fact that Panama is a bit of an S shape. Cgrimes85 (talk) 00:17, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
- Right, that's the real fun fact. Mine is a fun fact in the alternate universe where Cueball's canal proposal was accepted. But I'm pleased that both of these can be seen on Randall's maps, if you look closely. —TobyBartels (talk) 02:57, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
- Not permanently. The Pacific plate is rotating counterclockwise, so Baja will someday be off the coast of California instead of off the coast of Mexico (the boundary between the Pacific plate and North American plates runs through the Gulf of California and the San Andreas fault). This motion may straighten Panama... or tear it apart into two disconnected pieces (making a canal unnecessary).188.8.131.52 18:49, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
My proposal for the Suez Canal was for it to run from the Cape of Good Hope to Cape Dezhnev via Nepal and Tibet... 184.108.40.206 21:17, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
- Would you opt for tunnel through Himalayas? Note that Himalayas are still rising by more than 1 cm per year, so you would need to compensate in your maintenance plans. -- Hkmaly (talk) 23:51, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
- Would it connect to the proposed bridge to Alaska?
- Yes! Aqueduct over the Bering Strait, then straight across Alaska to connect to Cueball's canal. And I was thinking of using multiple canal inclined planes and boat lifts to get over the Himalayas. The Everest base camps need a canal to bring in supplies from South America (there would be a tunnel under Everest, obviously). 220.127.116.11 14:08, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
Wot no Palindromes 18.104.22.168 00:53, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
I propose a canal between Tierra del Fuego and The Cape of Good Hope. US$1.000.000.000 and I keep the difference if the project is completed under-budget. These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For (talk) 06:03, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
There is also the issue that the proposed canal would go though at least a dozen countries. Political problems in any of the countries would probably result in it closing. Remember that the United States was so afraid of losing access to the Gulf of Mexico via the Mississippi that they paid for the Louisiana purchase. 02:58, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
Quick note: The Falkirk Wheel is not a canal crossing a canal, it is a boat lift which replaced a series of locks. It is part of the Union canal, near its junction with the Forth & Clyde canal, but there is no canal crossing. 22.214.171.124 09:08, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
I vote we burn up the remainder of our fossil fuels ASAP, so the greenhouse effect will ensure that the artic ice melts and the alternative canal becomes viable. 126.96.36.199 09:32, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
If we change the path a little we can use the Mississippi River for a while.
Why does the title text say "...modify it include an aqueduct..."? I don't think "it include" is grammatically correct.