New 7 Wonders are announced today!!!

[SimRabbit 48]

Today is a very special date, not only for those who are getting married today

But not only that, today the New 7 Wonders of the World will be announced at Portugal.

What's your prediction? Toughts? 

Website

[Easy Bakes 253]

three gorges dam should be added.

Looks like a scam though.

[jayman68 1]

A bit of a disgrace really. It seems to me that the tourism ministries of the world have gotten together to boost their bottom lines with this. All packaged up with advertising and tickets. A sad commentary on our times.

[thetryer 0]

Well i like the natural wonders more myself. Maybe carved out? Or jus sh*t thats really old. Like temples or pyramids w/e

[Tommy_Vercetti3 3]

You're kidding me right? Why does everyone must change things that are already good.. Besides, who came up with this idea anyway? Should be slapped. Sorry I just hate when things are changed after they have been the same for a long time.

[ilikehotdogsalot 311]

looking at the list, i'm pretty sure the pyramids, machu pichu, the panthenon, great wall of china and the other older buildings will win. i don't think that the new [100 years old or less] will win though [ie: sydney opera house, christ the redemmer]. 

edit: fixed double post

[Zelgadis 638]

Call it what you will. Big fat waste of time. Popularity contest. Whatever, this should never have been done. But... For some inexplicable reason, people around the world like lists. Top ten this, seven wonders that. Every time I see a list, I wonder, "According to whom?" Ah, but this one was done under the almighty guise of "democracy," so it must be right... *rolls eyes*

Whew, that's enough sarcasm for one day.

ISF

[patriots_1228 51]

hmmmm i find tony parker and eva longorias wedding more interesting

ill stick with the old wonders

[Dark_Jedi06 13]

Here are the winners:

Chichén Itzá, Mexico

Christ Redeemer, Brazil

The Great Wall, China

Machu Picchu, Peru

Petra, Jordan

The Roman Colloseum, Italy

The Taj Mahal, India

What a load of crap. I think I'll stick with the Colossus at Rhodes over some silly statue of Jesus. This whole thing was a farce and completely baseless, with people with no understanding of the monuments themselves just voting for them because of some misguided patriotism or because they like the way they look.

[patriots_1228 51]

personally i think the statue of Jesus is gangsta.

[IDS2 3,429]

Well I certainly have nothing wrong with those 7...but they're not as special as the first 7.

[ILL Tonkso 1,239]

COol statue, but not really a wonder...

To me a wonder is something that looks so awesome it makes you think, how did they build that?

[Micah 16]

I have nothing against the new list. I actually like all of those monuments or whatever you'd like to call them. But personally, I think we should just stick to the old list.

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

Well, just American Idol, web style.  Things that are that special name themselves.  There are a lot more than sever these days.

[SimRabbit 48]

patriots_1228: gansta or [content] seriously that is a big disrepect to Jesus Christ, calling a statue of him Gangsta

[The_Dalai_Llama 15]

Since most of the old wonders are gone, the concept of a new 7 wonders list is fine... but having a massive web poll to decide? I don't trust the public on this one... it's more of a popularity contest, in my opinion. Plus, to narrow it down to seven seems a bit silly with so many great architectural feats over the centuries. Double it to 14, I say!

The list looks alright to me... except the Great Pyramid of Giza should be automatically on the list since it still stands... none of that "Honorary Candidate" junk. And the Acropolis and Stonehenge got jipped.

The one thing that surprises me is that the lone U.S. entry, the Statue of Liberty, didn't make the cut... I wouldn't have voted for it, but I'm surprised the Americans didn't rig the voting.

[Duke87 1,070]

Originally posted by: SimRabbit patriots_1228: gansta or [content]???? seriously that is a big disrepect to Jesus Christ, calling a statue of him Gangsta

quote>

Depends on how you interperet the statement. "Gangsta", so far as ebonics goes, can be used as a generic synonym for "cool". It would be unusual to refer to a white person as such, but Jesus wasn't white, he was fairly dark skinned. But the church saw fit to westernize his image, so they paled him up in all artwork and whatnot. And as such the misconception that Jesus was white and European-looking runs rampant.

Even such, it was a compliment, not a put down. Besides, he's talking about the statue, not the person it's of. So it wouldn't be an insult to Jesus even if he said it sucked.

--------------------

But yeah, trying to pick out the worlds seven "wonders" is very subjective, since what strikes awe into one person may seem stupid to another. So there is no right list, no matter how much it's debated and voted on.

[JanYpe 17]

Originally posted by: Dark_Jedi06 Here are the winners:

Chichén Itzá, Mexicoquote>

Interesting place, but it's no Hanging Garden. What's up with replacing one pyramid with another?

Christ Redeemer, Brazilquote>

Cool statue, but reinforced concrete from the 20th century is nowhere near as cool as bronze form 280bc.

The Great Wall, Chinaquote>

An ultimately less than useful defensive wall, completed by an empire run by people who worshiped a long dead bureaucrat. Currently known as 'The worlds longest tourist trap'.

Machu Picchu, Peruquote>

Impressive remnant of a dead civilisation. Cool addition, even if the place was only used for less than a century.

Petra, Jordanquote>

Can't argue with this one. A city hewn out of solid rock just kicks butt.

The Roman Colloseum, Italyquote>

Mixed feelings. It is an icon, and a very fine building. It shows off Roman engineering knowhow. But the Basilica of Maxentius and Constantine is at least as impressive in terms of scale. And the legacy of basilicas is at least as big as that of the Flavian Amphitheatre. What about the Pantheon, with its concrete dome?

The Taj Mahal, India

quote>

Another mausoleum. Suppose it's cool, if you're into over-romanticizing someones grave.

I don't trust the public on this one...quote>

This just reinforces my feeling that you really can't trust the general public with anything, besides coming up with popularity contests.

[offgreen 1]

If these are "new" shouldn't they be new, like 20 century plus new? Some of these are contemporariness of the original greek wonders, or at least ancient to say the least. I guess it really doesn't matter since no one even knows the original wonders to begin with.

[Joe 90 358]

Originally posted by: offgreen If these are "new" shouldn't they be new, like 20 century plus new? Some of these are contemporariness of the original greek wonders, or at least ancient to say the least. I guess it really doesn't matter since no one even knows the original wonders to begin with.quote>

 

At the time the 'old' wonders were listed, they were the seven most wonderous man-made structures in existence, not the seven newest. 

To me, the wonders should be:

a) awesome to look at - not awesome as in cool, but awesome as in inspiring awe; and

b) leave you wondering how the people who built it actually did it. 

Since we've largely gone out of the monument industry, and building large structures has become so routine (and so devoid of any artistry), I can't think of anything since the industrial revolution that properly fits the bill.

My thoughts on the 'new' seven:

- The Great Pyramid at Giza should be one of the seven. The fact it would then be one of the ancient and modern wonders should be a testament to its longevity.

- Chichén Itzá is along the same lines as the Pyramid complex at Giza. It's not as old, but still an incredible accomplishment so I have no problem with it being there.

- Petra and Macchu Pichu were both great cities built in pretty inhospitible places. The fact they were even viable for as long as their people lasted is impressive in itself, let alone the fact that one was carved out of a cliff, and the other out of a mountain top.

- The Great Wall of China may not have been terribly effective, but it remains one of the most impressive structures ever built. 

- For me, the Colosseum and the Taj Mahal are a step below the five above, and I'd go so far as to group them with the likes of the Acropolis, Stonehenge, and Angkor as a kind of 'second tier' wonder. The Taj's inclusion looks like a nod to the Mausoleum at Halicarnassus.

- Christ Redeemer is a great monument, but to me it doesn't stack up against the others. It's not even the biggest statue in the world! Where is The Motherland anyway? It's also the only electee based on an active religion, which leads me to think that it benefited from a little extra 'community support'. I even saw some comments from some guy in Portugal who was "outraged" that there were no catholic cathedrals included in the seven! I guess you can't please everyone...

It's still a decent list, but I don't think there are seven properly wonderous wonders around.

[Easy Bakes 253]

I suppose they didnt include Crazy Horse Monument since it isnt done yet.

[offgreen 1]

"At the time the 'old' wonders were listed, they were the seven most wonderous man-made structures in existence, not the seven newest."

Well, no. There were plenty of ancient sites like the Great Wall, and one in N. America that where never on that list. They weren't the 7 oldest either, whats your point? What qualifies as wonderous?

In the end this is all subjective an means nothing but I few more hits on some guys website.

[Joe 90 358]

The Seven Wonders of the Ancient World were seven great monuments that existed at that time from the world the ancient greeks knew - primarily the eastern Mediterranean and Mesopotamia.

These 'new' Wonders are seven great monuments that exist now from the world we know - all of it. This is why I think the Great Pyramid should be in the new list too.

Age has nothing to do with it - except a massive edifice built by a technologically inferior civilisation hundreds or thousands of years ago is more amazing than a larger, modern version. Given the choice between Christ the Redeemer and the Colossus of Rhodes, I'd go see the Colossus.

I've also given my thoughts above as to what I at least consider 'wonderous'.

But you're right, it was a tourist trap back then, and it's still a tourist trap now.

[commanderkai 38]

I disagree with the new wonders list. The Taj Mahal and the Christ the Redeemer statue, albeit amazing and beautiful, are not Wonders as I see them. Of course I would LOVE to see all the Wonders from the old list, however six were lost in the wake of history, and sadly will never return. However the original list was narrow minded to the area in which the Greeks knew, which is fair, but the man made Wonders of Asia and the Americas were left off the list, and we will never know what these societies have really made if their impressive accomplishments did not survive. I find that saddening, but at least we have historical records of the Colossus and the Great Lighthouse for us to remember.

[confused04 14]

I have a problem with just Seven Wonders? Why can't we just keep adding to the wonders list. We don't have the "Seven Historical Sites of the US". We just have a historical society that keeps track of all the historical buildings. If we want to talk about engineering, there was nothing in tribute to the advent of skyscrapers. That to me is an important engineering feat that revolutionized how we lived yet there were no "wonderous skyscrapers" I also would like to have seen ONE North American wonder. This list just insinuates that we can't build anything. Not only can we build things, but we've built so much in a span of about 450 years. Yet the only thing that I know of making the list for voting was the Statue of Liberty... hardly a wonder. So many sites in the US could have been called a wonder. And Canada has its fair share of wonders as well starting with ... what, I don't know... the tallest free standing structure in the world (for now).

[Gozer_Jep 0]

why should there be a north american building on the list? it's not about nationalism or something, but just about beautiful buildings, or buildings that were difficult to make with the knowledges of the time.

[manman99 2]

the 7 wonders shouldnt be chosen by popular vote, they should be chosen on what type of impact they made on the world hence, the Pyramids of Giza, The Colesseum, Empire State Building, Eiffel Tower, Great Wall of China, Three Gorges Dam, and the Golden Gate Bridge.

[Barbarossa 51]

Some are okay, but a lot of them should not have even been considered. That is what you get for having dingleberries vote for them. Wasn't it Hungary that held the vote to name a bridge and it was Chuck Norris for a long time, and then Stephen Colbert usurped it? That's poll voting for you.

The Taj Mahal, the statue of Jesus, and the coliseum are not that special. They never were, except for their appearance. I have no issue with the Great Wall... it can be seen from space and that is pretty neat.

I think there were definitely other candidates that deserved far more recognition... the Pyramids, for one. To me, the 7 Wonders MUST BE OLD. As in old, old, old, old, old.

Barbarossa

[confused04 14]

Originally posted by: Gozer_Jep why should there be a north american building on the list? it's not about nationalism or something, but just about beautiful buildings, or buildings that were difficult to make with the knowledges of the time.quote>

Why shouldn't there be? North America lacks anything beautiful? Lacks ingenuity? No marvels? PLEASE! That makes the list somewhat B.S. I mean, not to say that those currently on the list are not "neat", "cool", "sexy" or marvels in their own right, but not a single marvel from NA? Seems kinda wrong. I'm sorry, I just don't think that Rio's statue is that impressive, neat looking, or for that matter, aesthetically pleasing.  I realize that is my taste, but surely, there are SOME things in the US that are better than that statue or the Statue of Liberty.  Surely Canada has a right to put the CN tower on the list.  This list in itself just reminds me of Eurovision... politics disguised as a non-partisan contest. Britain didn't lose Eurovision because they sucked, they lost because of pure politics and this is nothing more.  If they had the more than seven, perhaps the list would be better....

But on that note, I'll return to my unremarkable, uncreative, unimaginative country I call home...

[Hanson784 165]

I agree why stop at seven? Why not just keep adding to the list? Although, it could get out of hand with people voting for their house or something like that.

I have some mixed feelings though about some of the structures on the list. It's all relative and just a matter of opinion so I won't take it too seriously.