<p>for people to build bridges over all the seas in the world allowing others to travel on feet from a country to another?</p>
<p>It is possible, but it’s going to take a lot of time, money, and resources. Also, it will need a lot of repairing, especially after natural disasters. So it’s a very inefficient idea(it’s also dangerous to walk on the bridges because of the waves).</p>
<p>that would actually be epically awesome. +1 for creativity, leksas.</p>
<p>While it may be possible, and agreed with diamon153 about all they said, politically, it would be impossible. Do you think the U.S. would want a straight-up bridge from Russia to the U.S.? Imagine the costs of all that unneccessery security and terrorist attacks on these bridges.</p>
<p>You need supports (I think) that are miles deep (to get to the bottom and keep it stable).</p>
<p>It would take FOREVER to drive from NY to England or something… if it takes an airplane 6-8+ hours… it’ll take a car a week+.</p>
<p>No to bridges.</p>
<p>Yes on tunnels! :p</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>As Sarah Palin’s stand-in for the day, I’m afraid I’ll have to disagree. They don’t actually have to reach their destination. Building them is quite enough. 
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes to bone-crushing pressure and a high-likelihood of death as well, I’ll assume.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>you HAD to burst my bubble. D:< 
lol.</p>
<p>Yes on teleporting/apparition! :D</p>
<p>Inefficient and useless imo.</p>
<p>All we have to do is reduce greenhouse gasses enough that we enter a new ice age and the ocean goes down enough to reveal the land bridges. It’ll take a lot of ice to open up Hawaii, though.</p>
<p>Making bridges connecting to other continents is just like asking them to invade your country. They’ll be used more for negative things like killing and transporting soldiers as opposed to travelers. Nobody wants to drive for 3 weeks to get to Portugal, you’ll just get lost at the end. I actually got directions from where I live to Paris, France via car… but I tried it this time and it didn’t work… LOL.</p>
<p>No bridges - ships are way better.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’d drive for three weeks to get to Portugal. They’ve decriminalized marijuana, so all I have to do is pay a teeny-weenie fine. And if I don’t wanna pay, there’s always Denmark. :D</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>One can always purchase a handy-dandy GPS. And I’d trust that they would build the bridge to connect the two coasts. How can you go wrong on a straight line?</p>
<p>Eh, i dunno, I think you’d need like supports in the ocean to hold up the bridge. And I don’t think you can build supports in the ocean o.o</p>
<p>ksarmand, not everything in europe or asia is right there. You have to drive longer, and it just seems tedious. I’d rather go by plane.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I look at my globe EVERY NIGHT, okay? I think I have a good idea where things are. Europe is only a few inches away from where I live. :rolleyes:</p>
<p>And I never said I wouldn’t rather take a plane. In fact, I rather enjoy air travel–who would want to miss out on the experience of vomiting in midair?</p>
<p>^No one. I can imagine it’s a thoroughly enjoyable experience.</p>
<p>On my first plane ride that I actually knew what was fully going on (when I was 7), I puked. Worst experience evar.</p>
<p>thatd be an awesome bridge. imagine the traffic on it though!</p>
<p>“who would want to miss out on the experience of vomiting in midair?”</p>
<p>SO true -_-</p>
<p>my record for puking is 3 times in 1 flight…while we were ascending, experiencing turbulence, & descending :[</p>
<p>other than that, i’m averaging 1 barf-attack/flight.</p>
<p>i hate air-planes/food soso much.</p>