Notre Dame (Paris) on fire?



Visited many years ago and despite having no religion the atmosphere was incredible inside. So sad to see a historical landmark go up in flames like this and judging by the pictures there is likely to be little left of it in the morning.

PS I wonder if the insurance policy is covered for acts of God if the property is actually Gods house in the first place? All for suspicious if you ask me
 
SYB_DC said:
I don't think you're understanding the post quite in the way I intended it. Which is fine - lack of clarity in expression is my fault - but I'd have thought my more recent response to you would clear it up. The fact is that most individual people are massively insignificant to the course of humanity. This building isn't. That doesn't mean that one should be explicitly traded for the other. It simply means that some buildings are an achievement of many thousands of people over the years and are more significant than the individual works of any individual.

That said, I shouldn't have posted it in response to the post I did, which made it look like I thought it was ok if someone got hurt in the fire (other than the situation I posted above).
Click to expand...
What does the building derive its significance from? And what does it symbollically represent? Sure, it's aesthetically a beautiful building, but, symbollically, it's difficult to see how it's actually a bad thing that it's burning to the ground.
 
nandos sonic sauce said:
The thread is about a burning building mate. That's what the other poster said. Certain buildings etc. Don't try to derail it somewhere else
Click to expand...

If you're going to go around slinging pejoratives based on your perception of my views, I think it's rather fair for others to examine the basis for yours. Especially since you seem to be having trouble reading.

Thurston said:
What does the building derive its significance from? And what does it symbollically represent? Sure, it's aesthetically a beautiful building, but, symbollically, it's difficult to see how it's actually a bad thing that it's burning to the ground.
Click to expand...

It's far beyond a Catholic church, if that's the insinuation. It's a history of the last ~900 years of France rolled into one building.
 
Horrible how something with such history thats been there for centuries and survived wars can just be destroyed in an afternoon.

Some flats will be built to replace it.
 
SYB_DC said:
I don't think you're understanding the post quite in the way I intended it. Which is fine - lack of clarity in expression is my fault - but I'd have thought my more recent response to you would clear it up. The fact is that most individual people are massively insignificant to the course of humanity. This building isn't. That doesn't mean that one should be explicitly traded for the other. It simply means that some buildings are an achievement of many thousands of people over the years and are more significant than the works of any individual.

That said, I shouldn't have posted it in response to the post I did, which made it look like I thought it was ok if someone got hurt in the fire (other than the situation I posted above).
Click to expand...
There is a lot of waffle in there just to get to a point i'm still not too sure what you mean. So if a building took thousands of workers to build, it's more important than the death of 1 person. Not my cup of tea conversation , so i'll leave you to it
 
nandos sonic sauce said:
There is a lot of waffle in there just to get to a point i'm still not too sure what you mean. So if a building took thousands of workers to build, it's more important than the death of 1 person. Not my cup of tea conversation , so i'll leave you to it
Click to expand...

I really don't think it's that complex. The collective achievements, history, and legacy of many are significant enough that I can see people putting their lives on the line to save them. And if they die in the process, it's not necessarily a tragedy.
 
Thurston said:
What does the building derive its significance from? And what does it symbollically represent? Sure, it's aesthetically a beautiful building, but, symbollically, it's difficult to see how it's actually a bad thing that it's burning to the ground.
Click to expand...

Andrew Neil‏Verified account @afneil 27m27 minutes ago
Among loss after loss in the Notre Dame fire, the wood-timber roof, which has survived since 12/13th centuries, is the greatest loss. Medieval craftsmen built it using 5,000 oak trees. It lasted til tonight.
 
nandos sonic sauce said:
There is a lot of waffle in there just to get to a point i'm still not too sure what you mean. So if a building took thousands of workers to build, it's more important than the death of 1 person. Not my cup of tea conversation , so i'll leave you to it
Click to expand...
So you're not going to watch any matches from the World Cup in Qatar, then (for example)?
 
A French government spokesperson has said "Nothing will remain."

Being virtually inaccessible to fire engines means they can do almost nothing to stop it burning. A major inquiry undoubtedly lies ahead as to how such a landmark could have no plan in place for something like this occuring.
If they knew it would be impossible to access how was a state-of-the-art sprinkler system not installed. Money, obviously, will be the reason. But it would have cost a fraction of the rebuilding costs.
 

Back
Top