There are only two ways to get from one place to another.
You can fly to the other, or you can go by train.
It’s not easy.
And as a result, there’s been a lot of debate about the best way to tour Europe and North America.
The first of these options is to fly.
But it’s a bit like flying a helicopter: you have to learn how to fly a helicopter and then practice flying it for a few weeks before you can actually go on the ground.
And there are many different approaches to this, depending on what you want to see.
What are the pros and cons of taking a train?
The obvious pros are that it’s cheap, and you can take your train to other places.
Cons are that you can’t see the sights, and if you get stuck on a busy railway line you may end up with a bloody accident.
But is this the way to go?
There are two main camps.
One camp argues that trains are a great way to visit other countries and to explore a new place.
A second camp, however, argues that taking trains is just too much hassle, and argues that you should take the bus instead.
There’s a third camp of people who think that trains will always be better.
So what are the main pros and the cons of getting on a train first?
If you want the best of both worlds, a train is the way of the future.
On the other hand, if you want a train to be a luxury, and want to tour other countries without having to worry about the weather, a bus is the best option.
This article originally appeared on The New Scientist.