This is a very silly suggestion. There's absolutely no sense in spending the extra money required to build these monuments to paranoid fantasy. The vast majority of cases of sexual abuse and kidnapping are perpretrated by relatives and friends: people who are known and trusted by the victims. They are already inside the walls.

Spending exorbitant amounts to protect from a rare and sensationalized threat, as if constantly under siege from marauding hordes of rapists and pillagers, points to a delusional mind (or a failed state).

The thing about science, Floyd, is that unlike many other bodies of knowledge it is not necessarily beholden to the authoritative opinions of its elders. It is a fallible, revisable enterprise that works specifically *because* the inductive process is in itself never certain. That's how improvements sneak in.

That's why airplanes fly and satelites orbit and we get to have this conversation over the internet. No other systematic body of human knowledge has ever proved so powerful both at explanation and technological creation.

A common argument is that the leading scientific minds of time x believed wrong thing y. Therefore, leading scientists today are wrong about z. (Sometimes one boldly adds the non sequitur corrolary: therefore my religious belief abc is true.)

Darwin might've believed all kinds of things we think are quite incorrect now, including key facts about how evolution and speciation occur. But that has absolutely nothing to do with the plausibility of evolution as it currently stands. Darwin could've believed in unicorns or eugenics. It's irrelevant.