"Mike Pellatt" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 8 Sep 2003 20:15:44 +0100, IMM
wrote:

"Mike Pellatt" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 8 Sep 2003 19:03:50 +0100, IMM
wrote:

[ snip ]

BTW, only 7,5% of the UK is built on,
rural and urban inc' gardens.

But around 50% of the UK cannot be built
on due to its topography.....

???? 50% Do you mean the UK? The UK is a very flat. Have you ever
driven
around it or flown over it?

Yes. The answer, in two words, is Scotland and Wales. They aren't quite
so flat.

House van still be built on the vast majority of the land, even national
parks.

In particular Scotland, which has a far greater land area then
you might imagine.

[ snip further points that are not relevant to the one I am
arguing ]

You don't have an argument. You said that 50% of the UK "cannot" be built
on, which is total stupidity. Taking your argument Switzerland would not
exist.

You said "around 50% of the UK cannot be built on due to its topography".
What facts do you have to support this deep faith.



---
--

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.507 / Virus Database: 304 - Release Date: 04/08/2003