New 7 Wonders vs. Ancient 7 Wonders

From the Article at National Geographic:

The contest was organized by the New7Wonders Foundation—the brainchild of Swiss filmmaker and museum curator Bernard Weber—in order to “protect humankind’s heritage across the globe.” The foundation says the poll attracted almost a hundred million votes.

Yet the competition has proved controversial, drawing criticism from the United Nations’ cultural organization UNESCO, which administers the World Heritage sites program (pictures of the newest World Heritage sites).

“This initiative cannot, in any significant and sustainable manner, contribute to the preservation of sites elected by [the] public,” UNESCO said in a statement.

read more | digg story

New wonders should, in fact, be new.

Space Station Alpha, for example, would be a new wonder; or perhaps the Petronas Towers in Kuala Lumpur. Of the seven, only one of them was constructed in the modern age, and it’s just a very large ancient religious symbol in Brazil. Not exactly the kind of wonders that I would think of as ‘new’.

Check out these other wonders:

7 Underground Wonders
7 Underwater Wonders
7 Abandoned Wonders part I
7 Abandoned Wonders part II

Every one of them more impressive than the 7 new wonders that were voted on.

Author: RAnthony

I'm a freethinking, unapologetic liberal. I'm a former CAD guru with an architectural fetish. I'm a happily married father. I'm also a disabled Meniere's sufferer.

Attacks on arguments offered are appreciated and awaited. Attacks on the author will be deleted.

%d bloggers like this: