The Texas Triangle , between Houston, Dallas, and San Antonio, contains 75% of Texans.
Why?
What's special about that triangle?
A map of night lights shows that ppl are concentrated in its tips and edge:
• One of its tips is the massive Houston
• Another tip is an uncommon type of city: the couple Dallas–Fort Worth
• Then there's a line of cities between Dallas and San Antonio w/ Austin, Waco...
Why?
What can the satellite tell us?
If you look carefully, you can see a green and grey line running from San Antonio to Dallas. What is it?
The topography can give is a clue: the mountains drop in altitude on a line from San Antonio to Dallas! This fall line transforms the mountains into hills that can be crossed
Sure enough, many of the most important Texan cities are on the fall line of the Edwards Plateau. These form the grey line on the satellite picture.
But why did these cities emerge at these points on that line, and not others?
They're each at the crossing between that fall line and a river:
• San Antonio: San Antonio River
• Austin: Colorado River
• Waco: Brazos River
• Fort Worth and Dallas: Trinity River
This is the same as on the Atlantic Seaboard
And like on the Atlantic Seaboard, there's a road connecting all these Texan cities: the interstate 35.
The enduring value of this route is revealed in its ancient origins, as this very path is probably the same as the ancient Chisholm Cattle Trail
We'll get back to it
The pbm with these rivers is that they're not very navigable. They did bring water and irrigation to their cities—hence why they appeared there—but their transportation utility was limited. Which is why Texas pushed hard to develop its railroads.
The end of the 19th century saw both a huge construction of railroads and the discovery of oil. Both of these finally started the growth of the Texan population
So that's why one edge of the Texas Triangle is so populated. But why is the other tip in Houston? Why not anywhere else on the coast? There are plenty of other successful ports in Texas, even to this day
Normally, you just have one big port per region, because there's benefits in having all the goods go to the same hub.
And natural bays tend to be the place where they emerge, protected from the ocean. But there are several bays in Texas. Why did Houston's bay win?
It didn't
In the 1800s, Houston was not the biggest port in Texas. It was Galveston, established by the Mexicans in 1825
Galveston grew because of its position:
• Great bay
• Close to N Orleans
• As close as possible to the other main TX cities: San Antonio, Dallas, Austin..
And then in 1900, Galveston learned a lesson that other regions had learned through centuries of storms: Galveston was too close to the sea.
It suffered a hurricane that devastated it. The port and industries moved as inland as they could.
That was Houston.
Houston was at the confluence of two navigable bayous, had invested in improving their navigability, and had received one of the earliest railroads on their way to Galveston. It had all the infra it needed and was close to Galveston. Perfect heir.
Hard for other ports to compete
So that's why 75% of Texans live in the Triangle: 1. End of the Edwards Plateau
➡️easier transportation
➡️rivers form
➡️great spot for cities, which follow the fall line: San Antonio, Austin, Waco, Killeen, Fort Worth, Dallas
2. Houston, heir to well-located Galveston
I write threads like this once a week. Here, on California. Follow for more
I'll write soon about why New York is the biggest city on the Atlantic coast.
Some of you mention rainfall. True: there's more rain east of the line—because altitude is lower! We can see the line in the precipitation maps of spring: a rain line passes through the fall line (left)
But it disappears during late summer rainfall times (right)
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Why did 🇮🇱Israel strike 🇮🇷Iran now, and not months or years ago or in the future?
A unique combination of a dozen factors converged to make the moment unique for 🇮🇱Israel: 🧵 1. No Hamas to its southwest 2. No Hezbollah to its north 3. No Assad threat to the northeast
4...
4. No more Syrian army to attack 🇮🇱Israel's planes: As the new forces of HTS took over Syria, Israel bombed all the existing Syrian military. No more fighter jets or surface-to-air missiles to threaten 🇮🇱Israel
5. Ability to fly over Syria to refuel
This is critical, because 🇮🇷Iran is ~600-1000 miles away from 🇮🇱Israel, so 1200-2000 miles round trip
The range of Israel’s stealth F35 is only about 1,350 mi
To operate inside 🇮🇷Iran, 🇮🇱Israel needed refueling over Syria
1. From Feb 2025 to Jun 2025, it increased its amount of enriched uranium by 50% 2. It now had 400kg of highly enriched uranium, enough for 9-10 bombs 3. This is 60% enriched uranium. Fuel only requires 5% enrichment.
4... 🧵
4. It's easy to go from 60% to 90% (weapons grade), it only takes weeks 5. The only country on Earth with such enriched uranium and without a bomb is 🇮🇷Iran 6. The IAEA (nuclear watchdog) found 3 secret nuclear sites
7. When 🇮🇷Iran didn't respond to this accusation, the IAEA censured it 8. 🇮🇷Iran responded to the censoring by saying it would open a 3rd enrichment site in a secret spot
Now that the 🇺🇸US has bombed 3 of 🇮🇷Iran's nuclear sites, where will the war go from here?
It depends on 🇮🇱Israel: 🧵
🇮🇷Iran never wanted the war, and its forces are being decimated. Its ability to send missiles to 🇮🇱Israel is being degraded every day. If it could sign a ceasefire while saving face, it would
Meanwhile, 🇮🇱Israel has kept striking Iran non stop. Its daily airstrikes didn't go down substantially in the first few days. Its ability to keep striking 🇮🇷Iran remains unabated
Can there be an invasion of Iran? Hardly. Two maps explain why, and also why Iran is the way it is today, whether its regime will fall, what other superpowers will do, and in general why Iran is the way it is today
The only truly exposed area is the southwestern corner of Khuzestan, which is a swamp
The biggest superpowers lie to the west, and there the very broad Zagros make it really hard to conquer Iran. The mountain range is tall and wide, making logistics similar to Afghanistan. Very hard.
Iraq learned it the hard way when it tried to attack there in 1980
Listening to the debate, it looks like 🇮🇱Israel & the 🇺🇸US intelligence community disagreed, but that's not really the case!
Both thought Iran was weeks to months away from being able to develop the bomb
So what's the disagreement?
Here are more facts:
• Tehran had just announced a 3rd enrichment site in an undisclosed place
• The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) had recently produced a report censoring Iran for the 1st time in 20y
• It accused Iran of 3 undisclosed nuclear sites
• It claimed Iran had enough enriched uranium for 9-10 nuclear bombs
• All the other countries in the world who have enriched uranium at the same level also have nuclear weapons. Iran is the only country that doesn't have these weapons yet enriches uranium as much
Nuclear is the best source of energy across nearly all the factors that matter. It's the safest, cleanest, densest, most sustainable, geopolitically stable, predictable, dispatchable, and can be cheap.
1. SAFEST
It kills 1000x less than coal
Living close to a nuclear power plant for one year gives you less radiation than eating a banana (graph is logarithmic)
2. CLEANEST
Accounting for all the lifecycle of all energies, it's the one that emits the least CO2