Danny

Another week another Grudge Match, and once again, because of Pat’s admitted laziness, I am left writing the “point” side of the argument.  He did pick the topic though, so I guess I’ll cut him a little slack.  Not too much though, because I still have to crush him with my devastating powers of reason.

Planes vs. trains then.  It’s hardly a difficult decision if we simply take the “coolness” factor into account.  I mean, sure, trains are great big hulking pieces of metal that are perfectly adequate for getting you from A to B, assuming someone has laid tracks between said points.  Planes rule the skies, and while I suppose that you could say that you need a runway from which to take-off or land, that’s not completely true, is it?

Think about it this way, when mankind invents a new method of transportation, what’s the first thing we want to do with it?  That’s right, we want to race it against similar methods of transportation.  Racing planes is awesome, but racing trains is a little bit more difficult, and a lot less exciting.

In action movies, do you ever see someone being chased down by a train?  No.  You see people on trains fighting, sure, but that’s really not as exciting as having a plane dive-bomb the heroes. Picture it; guns blazing, undercarriage narrowly missing them as they fly just overhead and then crash into something causing a massive explosion.  Awesome, right?

Consider the toy situation too.  Which is more fun, an RC train that runs round and round the same track over and over until you get bored of simply holding the “go” button, or an RC plane that you can use to decapitate your friends?  Exactly, decapitations always win.

Sure, Pat will try to argue that with the rising price of oil, no one can afford to fly anywhere anymore, and that’s a valid point.  But it doesn’t detract from the fact that planes are just inherently cooler than almost all other forms of transportation.

ppemberton

Have you ever noticed that movies that involve trains are fun while movies that involve planes are terrifying?

“The Polar Express” – remember that? Kid gets on a train, hangs out with computer animated-Tom Hanks dude, and meets Santa?

Fun, right?

Whom do you meet on “Con Air”? I’ll give you a hint: Not Santa. Unless, of course, Santa is an escaped murderer, which --  last I checked -- he is not.

 “A Hard Days Night” featured the happy-go-lucky Beatles on the railways.

“United 93”? Now there’s one to brighten your mood.

See what I’m getting at here? Trains are all about fun, while planes are all about certain death.

I could go on about why planes are scary, but let’s just say that if a train suddenly stops moving, no one will get hurt.

But back to fun. Several years ago, I took a round-trip train trip from Chicago to Los Angeles, and it was a hoot.

First of all, no, I wasn’t in a hurry. And, no, I didn’t take the train because I was too chicken to fly.

A wee bit chicken, perhaps.

But the REAL reason I took the train – not the wee bit chicken one -- is because I wanted to see the country. Sure, I’d lived in the U.S. all my life. But I’d never really seen it, you know what I mean?

On the train, I sat down, a bag of Twizzlers, several of my best cassette tapes and a book nearby, as the country rolled past me. I saw the mountains of Colorado, the deserts of Nevada and the plains of Kansas.

Okay, the plains were a little boring. But it made me realize how much land is out there.

Sure, when you’re on a plane, you see stuff. But you have to stretch your neck to look through a tiny hole, offering a view of, well . . .

Clouds, mostly.

Where’s the soul there?

Oh, and by the way, planes are killing the earth. Did I tell you that?

So, I’ll just have to pass on the urgency of planes for now. Instead, I’ll just take my time on the good ‘ole train.

And live.*

* If I should die in a train wreck, please disregard.