[heavyhaulerss]

damn champ.. lmao. :lol:

[Crackaces]

Originally Posted by mf2004champ

There's never been an overpass that has collapsed because of tanker exploding in the the history of the interstate system. How does gasoline melt an overpass!?

This overpass must have been demolished, a controlled demolition. But why? Who could have rigged the overpass with exposives and get a patsy tanker truck driver?

The CA overpass disaster might be linked directly to the oil companies. Think.... having those freeways gridlocked, all those cars, trucks idling, burning fuel. Mmmmmmm. Burn that oil. And it gives an excuse to increase fuel prices.

Actually not true ... 8) Atlanta had a tanker take out an overpass on the I-285. Same effect .. hot fire causes the overpass to collapse.

Here is my take ...

The Mayor of San Francisco reads about this accident and the horrible effect on the daily commute. Knowing this and his recent push for rapid transit and bicycles (just the day before the accident he sponsors a bike protest where bicycles blocked the daily commute), he riggs up an accident on the I-580/I-80 interchange.

Backing this up further .. all rapid transit is free .. until the freeway is fixed. My bet is once the public is using public transit .. the prices will go up .. way up ...

That is my conspiricy ... :P

[Orangetxguy]

Originally Posted by jmilici

And fozzy, I'm not going either way on this but it is a fact that the fire in the WTC was not hot enough (regardless of what Fox news told you) to completely melt the steel. At it's hottest the fire barely reached 1000 Deg. cel. and only burned for a short while. The fire did however play a role in the collapse, but was not the cause of it.

The fire from the tanker was a lot hotter and burned a lot longer, hence the melted steel and the terrible mess that was made.

My mind is open enough as well as I respect others enough to never ridicule another for haveing differing opinions from that of my own, no matter how outlandish it might be. I think you remark as well as heavyhaulerss remark was uncalled for and contributed absolutely nothing to this thread.

And heavyhaulerss, when it comes to politics, everything starts out as a conspiracy, weather good or bad. Just look at Nixon and Watergate.

My appologies to all for hijacking the thread.

I'm trying to wrap my mind around the fact that JetA doesn't burn as hot as gasoline. What makes you think that the fires in WTC didn't reach 2700 degrees?
If anything, with the wind-tunnel effect created by the elavation of the fire sucking oxygen UP the elavator shafts, it got hotter. Those planes were each carrying over 7800 gallons of fuel for their cross country flights....which was why those planes were chosen for the attacks.
I've seen to many petroleum fires, to not understand how hot they get.

[the doctor]

a few days ago i was watching a movie.... armageddon with bruce willis

while as they were strapping themselves into the shuttle 1 guy turns and goes, " do you realize we are sitting ontop of 5 million gallons of fuel, and sitting inside a machine with 340000 moving parts built by the lowest bidder, and if 1 thing goes wrong we go boom"

hmmm, 7000 gallons of gasoline ( remember not many things as explosive, and volitile) a truck at high speed driving on a uneven surface, and the truck has what a good guess would be 4000 moving parts, (outta 30000)