Bridge Collapse
 

Bridge Collapse Survivors Tell Their Tales

Amid the collapsed concrete, eyes were immediately drawn to one thing: a yellow school bus.

"We ran up the incline. There was a school bus full of 8- to 14-year-olds and we literally had to carry them off the bridge," said one survivor who was on the I-35 highway in Minneapolis when it collapsed into the Mississippi River.

I didn't read about this until midnight last night...fuck! It's awful...but I was amazed that some people were able to swim to safety. That's why humans kick ass.

:thepain: Hoping warch is ok :thepain: she works next to that bridge! :thepain:

Oh man, me too.

I'm ok. Surreal night though. I was walking across the stone arch bridge- next bridge north of 35 just few minutes after the collapse. We werent sure what was going on. We were walking into downtown because we had Guthrie tickets, and knew of the construction and Twins traffic, so we were just gonna walk.

We crossed over 35 just north of the collapse and noticed southbound was stopped and northbound was empty. We thought it was construction/twins related jam or an accident.

It was clear in a minute that it was big, not just a fire or traffic accident. We couldn't believe what we couldn't see- no span, only the 10th st bridge and it was hard to make sense of the metal and what was road or should be road.... Everyone was just in shock. Surreal.

We weren't really close to the rescues but also couldn't really get back over to the east bank, as we would just tangle in the rescue vehicle stuff which was growing, so after gawking in confusion, continued across and went to the Guthrie. Saw the play in a surreal mode. During intermission the view from the theater windows (right on the river overlook) we could see the whole mess and could start to imagine the toll. We had some somber drinks and stared for a while away from the collapse, towards the lovely skyline.

The emergency response was huge and fast and amazingly organized. That impressed me. They closed the stone arch bridge, so a few hours later we walked back over Hennepin, finally seeing some of the coverage (and returning panicked phone messages) around midnight. Oh, and the almost full moon hung right over the collapse site, glazed a dark red.

Still waiting to see more about the victims. The river rescue staging area is near my workplace.

thanks for the concern guys.

You were the first thing that came to mind when it came on the tube last night. Glad you're OK.

This disaster has had fairly major coverage over here too.

It's amazing that so many have survived. What a miracle.

Demonstrated is a difference between what yesman065 saw and what I saw. That yellow school bus: time to worry about it was long ago when this failure was predictable. Whereas contents of that bus were immediate concern to those on the bridge, instead, the rest of us should be worrying about all school busses.

A bridge fails in America every week. That human created failure typically traceable to top managment - politicians who are responsible for bridge maintenance. NYC's Williamsburg bridge was discovered on the verge of collapse into the East River. Why? During Mayor Lindsay's term back in the 1960s, to make budgets balance, then all future maintenance of that bridge was terminated for something like 25 years. Bean counters want glory - new bridges. They cannot be bothered to maintain what already exists. After all, they are only doing what we want. And many of us care so little as to only read Daily News and not even watch the local gossip TV news.

Many are more worried that news is depressing rather than learn the news to protect that and future yellow school busses.

So are important questions about this bridge. First, as I understand it, an identical bridge sits adjacent. Is it also failing? When was an emergency inspection conducted - and by whom?

Second, this bridge was jammed with bumper to bumper traffic - mostly cars. That means a static load - not a 'heavier' dynamic load - composed of even lighter vehicles. Therefore stresses were not greatest when it collapsed. Furthermore, surface construction was ongoing implying that one lane was closed. Another 20+% reduction in weight.

Rather strange that a collapse would occur under lighter loads. Is the adjacent bridge also under threat of collapse?

Third, Federal inspectors reported serious structural problems in 2005. But MN state inspectors later said that bridge was OK. This discrepancy will be interesting when resolved. For example, PA replaced highway engineers with bean counters - the Chief Engineer now called Chief Manager. Honest facts is what the NHTSB does. They only investigate - no attachment to political special interests. This bridge must be investigated as a crime scene. A responsible reaction is the same that saw Challenger as murder; not an accident. Death due to cost controls - the stifling of product people - should be regarded as murder; not an accident.

Again, these are random thoughts based only in tidbits. For example, if one lane was closed, then was an unbalanced load applied to one side of that bridge causing unusual stresses - a fourth question? Question I don't hear being asked and only based in trivial information heard.

Critical information about that and all other yellow school busses will arrive many days, weeks, or months later. Questions that should cause ears to peek up when answers are being stated in paragraphs lost deep in news reports. Answers that many reporters may completely ignore because they more want to worry about that one yellow school bus and injured people rather than something far more important - *why*.

Week or months later, will we still be interested or will we be more interested in the latest fire or pictures of crashed cars? Do we entertain our emotions or demand resulting facts - the whys?

tw - I may be having a bad day but your posts and attacks on me are growing quite old. Only you would see the school bus and wonder what could have been done, instead of trying to save them. have you no humanity no caring no compassion or feelings? what the fuck is wrong with you? You are an ass - a hole complete ass.

I feel your pain yesman.

I was wondering how fast yesman065 would perceive a logical post - that attacked no one - as an attack on Yesman065.

Yesman065 - only demonstrated is blunt honest analysis about things technical. Amazing how even that analysis is perceived by yesman065 as an attack.

Amazing is that some regard technical analysis in terms of themselves. Yesman065 - the person called yesman065 was completely irrelevant to what was posted. Two bateria called tw and yesman065 were contrasted and compared. At no time was there an attack on Yesman065 here or anywhere else. But you apply personal emotions to what is only an honest analysis.

Again, demonstrated was how two people perceive the same event completely different. That was the above post. Demonstrated from here on is another fact: how the person Yesman065 (not to be confuse with the test tube creatures tw and yesman065) immediately jumps to an emotional response rather than worry about things logical.

It is part of becoming an adult. The world does not revolve around you. You are no different than anyone else. The post from a bateria called yesman065 was compared to a bacteria called tw. Why would Yesman065 somehow take offense? Having taken offense, the first thing Yesman065 should have asked is why am I being so foolishly emotional?

Appreciate why Yesman065 ends up in conflict with tw. tw does not post to appease emotions. He posts blunt facts without any regard to how one may respond emotionally. tw believes if such blunt postings hurt someone's emotions, well, that person must learn to read technically rather than emotionally. Replacing emotion with a detached and unemotional analysis is what adults do.

Again, that too is not and obviously was never intended to be an insult. Children are quick to see things in terms of themselves. To children, the world revolves around them (as even taught in college psychology). Adults see the world bluntly rational. Adults do not need things worded 'politically correct' because adults do not entertain their emotions.

This post discusses two completely different point. First is that analysis that compares and contrasts how two bateria think. Second is that Yesman065 was so quick to take personal insult where no such insult exists.

It's a reflection on how you communicate tw. You are offensive in the way that you form your arguments/points.

Of course you don't see that.

Perhaps you should try.

Of course I do. It is not my job to appease the emotions of the more childish. And I am repeatedly blunt about this. I make no effort to be anything but bluntly honest. It also tells me how 'adult' the thinking is behind a reply.

Why do politicians worry about being politically correct? They need votes also from adults who perceive rather than analyze. Why do we elect politicians who lie? Because we want to feel good rather than acknowledge reality.

Again, Aliantha - at no time do I post anything personally insulting. But many 'feel' that insult. Not because of what I have said. Only because so many need words to be carefully crafted to 'appease' their emotions.

Please notice I have repeatedly stated that I make no effort to be 'politically correct'. Also notice I don't post profanity only to post emotional profanity. It is another factor that separates the emotional adult child from one who has decided to grasp reality without emotion.

Posted here was a completely blunt and honest assessment of how two people see the same event differently. Also posted were examples of critical questions that we all (who worry about our peers) should be asking. Why does Yesman065 take insult at what is only a blunt honest analysis? Why does he entertain his emotions rather than grasp the contrasts? No adult worries about how it is worded. But then many adults still view the world as if it revolved around them. Therefore they take emotional reactions rather than grasp the realities - the underlying facts.

I don't word anything to appease. Those who need such wording - well, now I know whether they have grown up enough to realize how trivial they are and how far more important the realities of this world are.

Nothing in my posts even implied insults. Those who take insult need to reassess themselves since inside their head is the only place that an insult exists.

No tw, you're derogatory and condescending. That's the problem. There's nothing wrong with the content. It's how you say it as if you're so superior to everyone else and as if you're the only one who actually thought of saying what you posted.

You're not the only intelligent person on this site or in the rest of the world.

You're just like everyone else.

I happen to believe you're right about everything except that one point, Aliantha. I firmly believe emotions are an integral part of the human experience, not just the trappings of childhood. Since tw seems to be so emotionless, he is different and has a correspondingly different viewpoint.

tw, you may well intend no insult with anything you post, but the situation is complicated by your unique perspective. You don't seem capable of entertaining the emotional responses so common to the rest of us. Even though you imply nothing, we often infer much due to our feelings.

Are you suggesting that tw has some sort of disorder that makes him slightly more 'challenged' than the rest of us UB?

To be honest, I don't really know. In fact, I simply don't know much about tw; we tend to travel in different circles around here. tw, from what I've noticed, spends most of his time in Current Events and Politics. I tend to avoid these areas, preferring to try to clown it up a bit elsewhere. Whatever has brought tw to the point of living with logic and not emotion has apparently given him a challenge in dealing with us.

tw has been the way he is as long as I've been here--6 years and change.

I appreciate many of his points, and sometimes I even get a chuckle out of him. But he (along with a few other people on here) try too hard, IMO, to pull emotion out of their posts. And that is impossible...we are emotional people as a whole. So when these folks try to be unemotional, they come across as callous and asinine...and it understandably throws people for a loop.

Of course, it doesn't help that none of us have voices to rely on.

In the end, post how you want...just be aware of how you might come across. The Cellar is too decent of a place to be disrespectful to each other.

tw's a dick... tw's condecending... tw's arrogant... which is unfortunate because quite often tw's right. As grating as he can be, try to understand what he writes, which often takes a bit of interpretation, I know... then tell him to fuck off.

One thing you can be sure of, Griff's trillion dollars could have rebuilt a lot of aging shit.
Of course "top management" is making excuses already.Personally, I suspect the automatic deicing system they installed a few years ago. If, as I suspect, it uses that liquid salt crap they are squirting on the interstates now, it probably ate the rebar inside the concrete. We won't know for a year, if ever.

This situation apparently scared St. Louis County enough to close the Old Gravois bridge.

From Wikipedia:

Black ice

In February and December 1996, the Interstate Hwy. 35W bridge over the Mississippi River east of downtown Minneapolis was identified as the single most treacherous cold-weather spot in the Twin Cities freeway system, due to a thin layer of black ice causing spinouts and collisions on the bridge.[23][24] By January 1999, the state Transportation Department began testing liquid magnesium chloride and a mixture of magnesium chloride and a corn-processing byproduct to see whether either would reduce the black ice that appears on the bridge during the winter months.[25] In October 1999, the state embedded temperature-activated nozzles in the bridge deck to spray the bridge with liquid potassium acetate to keep the area free of winter black ice.[26] The system came into operation in 2000.[27][28]

[edit] Structural reviews

In the years prior to the collapse, several reports citing problems with the bridge were issued. In 1990, the federal government gave the I-35W bridge a rating of "structurally deficient," citing significant corrosion in its bearings.[29] A 2001 Minnesota Department of Transportation report indicated weakness at the joints of the steel that held the concrete deck above the river, due to "unanticipated out of plane distortion" of the steel girders. The report also noted a concern about lack of redundancy in the main truss system,[13] which meant the bridge had a greater risk of collapse in the event of any single structural failure. In 2005, the bridge, along with over 70,000 other US bridges[30], was rated as "structurally deficient" and in possible need of replacement, according to the US Department of Transportation's National Bridge Inventory database.[31] In a subsequent report, an inspection carried out June 15, 2006 found numerous problems, including fatigue cracking.[32]

Other topics of concern were the water erosion around the north piers (which were partially toppled in the collapse), steel substructure defects (especially near the south piers which toppled sideways in a scissors motion), problems with the bridge de-icing system,[33] thermal cycling of the structure, recent heavy rains and flooding on the I-35W highway.[34]

As usual Bruce you are right - more often than you may realize. You also create a persona of sorts, an image of a human comes to mind as I read what you post. With tw's posts my eyes roll up into my head, my brain hurts and then I virtually blackout from the realization that I have just been attacked by a borg :borg:
I too, respect him because he has valid points, but his utter lack of emotion his "assimilate or be terminated" arrogance is so grating that it makes it very difficult to get through all his bullshit. It becomes a chore to find that little nugget of reason, or his point that is in there somewhere wading amidst a vat of _______.

I think it's funny that we're talking about him in 3rd person. Of course, he refers to us in 3rd person, so I guess it makes sense. :)

He isn't a person - thats the funny part

Wrong. the entire north and southbound 35 W bridge collapsed. Each direction was reduced to two lanes from the usual four. so the load was reasonably balanced and actually lighter than usual. On a usual rush hour, take the victims x 2.

The standing bridge is older, not identical in that is not a single steel span. It is a four lane "top" street bridge, not a highway. It is at relatively the same height above the river as 35 used to be.

I've grown used to tw's manner. He touts the primacy of rationale, of the value of embracing a lack of emotion, yet his post are generally spiced with affect-laden phrases like "bean counters" and ironically are highly passionate, (no matter the logic) tirades. So, I am sort of humored by the irony of his argument that seems to escape him.

Yes there was structural failure. Do I blame Bush? no. Do I blame Pawlenty? no. Do I blame the tax payers league? (for alot of stuff but I think this thing was exempt from that noise.)

It strikes me, so far, as a human lack of understanding of the damage and threat. A poor decision but not necessarily with negligent intent. It may well have been the deicer, the rusting, the rumble of the train below, the heat, the vibration from the resurfacers, the fractures, all of the above. I want them to make sure this doesnt happen again. Surveyors were spotted on other bridges today. A lot of repair projects just got bumped to the top of the pile.

Has anyone seen the movie The Sweet Hereafter? I keep thinking about it as the blame is starting to swirl.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sweet_Hereafter

Goddamnit Warch, why did Nichole Burnell lie?

But you never were attacked. You cannot even cite a post where you were attacked. However the topic is an I-35W bridge. Instead, every Yesman065 post is to attack tw.

Yesman065 - you could not even see facts in this post. Instead Yesman065 goes into an emotional 'melt down' about how HE was hurt. Curious. Yesman065 was never insulted. But he repeatedly posts insults at tw. Funny. Just like a valley girl whose who world revolves around her, so does Yesman065 post.

Funny. ValleyGirl repeatedly posts insults, and then insists only he was insulted. Meanwhile, he could not even bother to post a single useful fact about the bridge. Only imporant were his his emotions concerning that bridge. Valley girl. Big dic is reseved for men who have one. Valley girls first and foremost worry about vanity. His head hurts. That is more important than dead people on future bridges.

Incest. Still, ya gotta feel for Delores.

I have the same emotions. But I do not wear them on my sleeve. Notice which interviewed person gets aired on the news. The one that is crying. That give him credibility? Of course not. Those who wear their emtions on their sleeve are more often the lying party.

Meanwhile this is the post in question. Demonstrated is a difference between what yesman065 saw and what I saw. That yellow school bus: time to worry about it was long ago when this failure was predictable. Whereas contents of that bus were immediate concern to those on the bridge, instead, the rest of us should be worrying about all school busses. Show me where anything here insulted Yesman065. Why does Yesman065 never get past this first paragraph; completely ignore the technical facts? And why is it OK for Yesman065 to routinely insult me when I never once insulted him.

Well maybe I should post just like Yesman065. As so it begins.

I'll say this much for you, tw - you have a talent for understatement.

Personally, I like people worrying about the school bus, and school buses in general throughout the time space continuum. If they react with concern at all, I'll take it.

I'm sorry. But that sentence has so many interpretations that it requires me to apply a personal bias to grasp it. Please tell me what that post intended. Because of the five possible interpretations, then it currently has zero meaning.

Again, am I suppose to apply a personal bias to know what that sentance means? Apparently. Since the conclusion does not come with reasons why and since I have too much respect for people, I assume that message to be garbled in transmission. Please repost.

The term 'bean counter' has zero affect-laden meaning. None. In the factory, only two types of people exist: bean counters and car guys.

In England, it is called a bonnet; not a hood. Is that also emotional laden as if a car was really a woman who routinely have big holes to strap an engine in? Of course not - except where some routinely assume affect-laden meaning.

Affect-laden meaning is completely a reader’s bias. If use of ‘bean counter’ caused you to see anything other than accountant or CFO or bank officer or stock analyst or payroll clerk or mizer, then that is your bias. Meanwhile do you also get upset when someone uses the word 'colour'? That word also gets English Nazis upset. Notice another phrase with no affect-laden meaning. A simple term summarizing a general category of people.

English Nazi: those unique people with proper english training, that fanatically dictate how sentences should be structured, who edit things for syntactical correctness at the expense of technical facts or clarity, who ... and who are still not properly defined. Provided is only a ballpark description that is more than sufficient here: English Nazi

You are having a problem with my wording. Did that sentence just address everyone in the Cellar, everyone in Warch's city, or just Warch? All three because the sentence is so flagrantly ambiguous - defective - and yet syntactically correct according to English Nazis. Did you jump to an affect-laden conclusion of who *You* is? That same sentence is now syntactically corrected:
"Warch has a problem with my wording".
Exact same meaning with ambiguity removed because ambiguous first person wording was intentionally replaced with third person – for clarity - and English Nazis then take revenge. First and third person sentences should be routinely mixed in a same paragraph for perspicuity – with zero respect for English Nazis and to ‘attack’ ambiguity. Did you assume an affect-laden meaning when first and third person were mixed?

They repeatedly dictated poetic meanings in those Beatle songs. We were literally given Ds if we did not agree. Proven repeatedly even on the cover of Abbey Road: Paul was dead. So many need to observe only using personal biases. Yesman065 is a classic and repeat offender. Paul was barefoot. Therefore Paul was dead.

Warch has a problem with my wording? Or do you have a problem with my wording? Exact same meaning said twice. Did your emotions perceive two sentences differently. Then you have applied a personal bias where none should exist. But I proved Paul was dead as an Enlish Nazi insisted. Again, any affect-laden meaning is completely and 100% a reader's personal bias.

Meanwhile but another attempt to move past Yesman065's emotional tirade. What technical facts are leaking out about unbalanced loading? Unbalanced would be all traffic moved to one side of the bridge so that, for example, resurfacing could be ongoing on lanes on that other side.

The term 'structurally deficient' has massive 'affect-laden' meaning - and says near zero about bridge integrity. "Structurally deficient" bridges can be completely safe. However what is being leaked using the word 'fatigue'? Whereas the two words have same 'affect-laden' meaning; the word 'fatigue' should grasp your attention like a hammer in the skull. “Structurally deficient” is a meaningless term for this thread and for discussions about the I-35W bridge. What, using the engineering term 'fatigue', is being rumored or leaked to reporters? The word 'fatigue' is important because it has technical meaning - when all affect-laden biases are acknowledged and removed by the reader. The word 'fatigue' has a serious technical meaning for a school bus that is far more important - all other ones.

Personally, I neither like nor dislike tw. It's just that he has now posted twice about this topic and has not ONCE blamed the President.

Who'd a thunk it?

Incompetence only goes so far.

Meanwhile, George Jr must go visit - as if he will see or do something useful. If they gave him a shovel, maybe that $quarter-million trip might result in something useful – such as pictures.

This is what Warch was describing.

theeeere's the tw I know and fail to love.

Good to have you back, bushbasher numero uno

Well, you don't think that 5 million, plus follow-on, comes with out a photo-op do you. After all, were talking Minnesota, not Louisiana, here.

OK

I'll say this much for you, tw - you have a talent for understatement.

I was sad that people died. that is all - it was a time for mourning the loss of life - humans died don't you get that tw? I am aware of the aging infrastructure of our country. I am aware that something could have and possibly should have been done long ago - THAT IS NOT THE POINT.

Discussing the hows and whys weren't appropriate. Having human feelings is normal and expressing them here is what I do. I post to express my feelings because I have them. You may feel the need to point fingers and assess blame - well good for you. Don't criticize me because, in this case, I'm sad that people died. If that is your goal or aim or need why don't you start looking into how unsafe every skyscraper built 50 years ago is or take on the failing roadways or a multitude of other issues where tragedies have not yet happened instead of taking backhanded, thinly veiled pot shots at me and my emotions and then claiming they weren't there.

What I want to know is who is Valley Girl?

A reference to yesman...that wacky tw!

I think this bridge collapse (and the recent steam pipe explosion in NYC) are our 'infrastructure 9/11'. I think people are beginning to understand that protecting bridges, dams, gas mains, etc from terrorists isn't going to do much if the things are going to fail catastrophically on their own.

We're spending 2 billion a week to attack and occupy a country because it was in the neighborhood of the country that harbored the guy who brought down a 2 billion dollar building and killed 3,000 Americans.

How much are we going to spend to fix a few trillion dollars worth of infrastructure which could kill thousands of Americans over the next few decades as it starts to fail?

So you don't think it was the de-icing system, huh?

Demonstrated again is exactly the point made repeatedly in previous posts. Yesman065 was criticized zero times in that first post. However Yesman065 took offense anyway - assumed criticism that clearly and obviously did not exist.

Point One: show me, Yesman065, a quote where you were criticized? You cannot. That post simply compared and contrasted a difference in how we view things. What that post did was blantantly and logically obvious - zero insults. Your above quote says grasping reality should occur later after appropriate grief is expressed. First take stock of emotions. Fine. And that is what my post said - a logical comparison how two people see the same thing.

But Yesman065 continued with his emotions Point two: somehow you expanded your emotion into rationalizing a personal attack. That is bull - a complete lie. Now Yesman065 used emotions to also lie and to attack tw. Not only did you invent a mythical insult, but you used that mythical insult to attack another. Point two says 'shame on Yesman065'.

Yesman065 has no interest in 'hows or whys' - as he clearly states. He even charactertizes a grasp of reality as "weren't appropriate". Fine. And so the most accurate post compared and contrasted how two people grasp events; one with emotion and the other more concerned with human life - such as all other school busses in the country. But then Yesman065 followed that with a meltdown; further entertained his emotons as to even invent mythical insults.

Meanwhile, the very first thing one does during such events is ask 'how and why'. Time for emotions comes long after all events have been grasped.

What happened when a boat with 125 gallons of gasoline has a fire? Fortunately, no one entertained their emotions. Everyone logically grasped and then performed a task - each without instruction - which is why we all lived and the boat was saved. In silly movies where people are screaming - those people wasting time and putting both themselves and others at risk by entertaining their emotions.

Compared and contrasted - first - was how two people view a same event. Then - second - compared and contrasted is how one is so emotional as to invent insults and then attack others - due to something that exists only in his head. Same mythical insults are common in the self centered heads of a typical Valley Girl. One more concerned with her own emotions rather than with responsiblity to others. Yesman065 is accused of inventing insults where none existed - except in his head.

You knew exactly what I was asking. Since I have not a clue what you are posting, I will assume it is a bad joke. Ha, Ha. No belly laugh.

The criticism was implied when you chose to open your post by pointing out the difference between your view and yesman's. You made a post about the lack of foresight you percieve to have been used by the relevant authorities and chose Yesman's instinctive response to the sight of the fallen schoolbus as symbolic of the difference between you and the shortsighted authorities.

Of course it was a fucking criticism.

Being so much colder, MN cannot use conventional deicing materials such as salt. Salt water would simply freeze. Did those harsh chemicals attack structural members? We have no reason to say yes or no. IOW deicing is simply another of hundreds of possibilities.

But again, I am struck by reports from a Federal analysis that used the word 'fatigue' in 2005. I am also struck by a recommendation for adding plating and the MN response that the solution was too expensive. Some may be quick to claim budgetary constraints caused this. And yet that is far from relevant. What is relevant is a report that used the word 'fatigue' AND another report that recommended expensive corrective actions. Why would they ask for a report on corrective measures if nothing was wrong? And why is the word 'fatigue' only associated with Federal inspections - not in two following state inspections?

And finally, as one eyewitness noted, people were doing things they should not have been doing - such as floating in the air. That implies the bridge rose before it fell. Why would some parts rise when the bridge was (theoretically) collapsing (only falling) in sections?

Before casting blame, first establish what existed and what happened. Suspecting deicing is nothing but wild speculation at this point because those important two points (what existed and what happened) are not even apparent yet.

'The bridge fell down' says near zero about what happened - to preempt an old joke.

I have no idea what's going on. Nice to meet you tw. <<looks at yesman>> "..." <<cold nod>>.

I actually didn't know a lot about this until I read the thread, I only watched the insane video, thanks for the facts and theories errbody.

Demonstrated is the lack of simple rational thought by tw. tw made the statement, "I have the same emotions. But I do not wear them on my sleeve.' Uisge Beatha replied, "I'll say this much for you, tw - you have a talent for understatement." Assumption is unnecessary. The definitions of pertinent terms "talent" and "understatement" make clear the concept of aptitude for representing as being less than actual. Adult thinking processes this simple statement and registers the fact tw goes well beyond simply not wearing emotions on his sleeve.

That assumes we must be politically correct. Are we all children? Why do you apply something that 1) I never intended and 2) was not explicitly posted? Why do you now do as only children do – see things that do not exist? Warch described posts with passion. Passion? Those are posts only intended to say only what they say – and make every blunt and politically incorrect effort to make that point.

In an above post, I have zero idea what Uisge Beatha is posting. Why? His post is completely ambiguous – both times – makes zero sense. Or should I say 'her'. I don't know, I don't care, and only children would take insult (another example of some here so emotional as to care that a reply used the wrong gender). Am I supposed to apply my biases to understand his post? However since you seem to know more about what is in his post, then tell me; what is Uisge Beatha trying to say? What is this understatement?

DanaC - I don't imply insults. If I was insulting you, then it would be clear how bad I thought your cunt smells. Did I insult your cunt? No. But those who read with implication into everything will now assume so. Let’s be explicitly clear here. There is not even an implied insult here. And yet many are still so ‘childish’ as to apply personal biases; therefore assume an implication. Can I be any more blunt, honest, and politically incorrect to make a point clearly (with "passion")? And yet still, some minds will be so childish as to assume an implied insult anyway.

Which brings us right back, again, to two questions. One, what is Uisge Beatha posting? And two, what are your biases that caused you to see something in a post that did not exist? Do you condemn people for worrying about one school bus – or see that worry about one school bus as an example of how people think differently? To see insult in that post, does DanaC assume those who are quick to entertain their emotions considered evil? I do expect answers because these questions only imply exactly what they ask. Those questions were never asked to imply anything. They were asked to elicit an answer.

Or even better, DanaC - rephrase that first paragraph to be political correct? You know what my point was. Post the rewrite.

Do I ask these questions to attack you? In those questions is only what those questions ask. If your personal biases see them as an attack (as Yesman065 would), then terminate your biases. Those questions only imply exactly what they ask.

And I will tell you 'quite honestly' (an expression only used because so many are looking for implied meanings) that I have no idea what that means. The previous sentence had maybe five+ different meanings to me.

A talent for understatement per your definition is, for example, what I saw in some great leaders who said so much with so few words. It is also how some might say "you are lying to me" in a poltically correct manner. Or it implies one does not grasp the concepts and says, "I want you to stop talking to me". Or it says one has this phenomenal grasp of the concept well beyond what all others have observed.

In each case the exact definitions of 'talent' and 'understatement' apply. In each of four cases, those same definitions resulted in completely different conclusions - if implication is an acceptable in analyzing communication.

Adult thinking is why adults ask for clarification instead of jumping to assumptions about insult. Even in politics, we have so many children pretending to be leaders. Some so childish as to jump to war over simple misinterpretation. History is full of adults who harmed their own people only because an implication was only assumed.

I am reminded of Admiral Halsey during the battle of Leyete Gulf. He received a message. Words used to better encrypt messages were accidently included in his message. His message started something like "The world asks". An exhausted Halsey immediately assumed he was being insulted by his superior. He applied his own biases and saw an implied criticism where none existed and none was clearly intended. An exhausted Halsey used personal bias to assume facts not in that message.

So I again am completely confused why your explanation remains vague. Again, I am not playing games. Your post is a perfect example of what I am saying. I still don't know what your post intended to say. It requires me to make assumptions. It is not politically incorrect - which means blunt and honest. Necesary assumptions would only come from biases. I don't entertain my biases AND when I insult, it will be clearly so - never implied.

I am doing what adults do and children sometimes do not. I am asking - and yes there is nothing even implied here - I am asking what you meant because it is not clear. I am asking this obviously because I still don't know what you meant - as even demosntrated by four interpretations.

Notice this post is long because I am being blunt clear. Nothing should be implied. Political correctness is completely unacceptable and even leads to implication which adults need not do. And your post is still easily interpreted more than four ways. I don't know how I can make this any clearer. However, this is the same mindset that also saw justification in the Kuwait Liberation (long before Saddam even invaded) and saw no indications of WMDs in 2002. Notice why? I don't accept implication as I also do not post implication. The question is exactly as posted. What do you mean?

I believe UT may be refering to a problem with bridges in MN. Their surface tends to be colder and tends to freeze faster. Salt that may work on MN roads may not be sufficient to keep bridges from freezing. Therefore bridges with heavy traffic may suffer from more of more destructive deicing materials. But again, only wild speculation because we don't even know bridge condition previous to collapse and don't know how the collapse occurred - even where the failure started.

For example, did the foundation at one end of the bridge shift causing one truss to slip off? I have very little information here. And I don't see many answers appearing in reply to numerous questions.

ok.


or

It's been pointed out that the eye is drawn immediately to the yellow school bus...the time to worry about that schoolbus was was long ago when this failure was predictable. Whereas contents of that bus were immediate concern to those on the bridge, instead, the rest of us should be worrying about all school busses.


tw. I rarely post in such a manner as to make you take umbrage. Yet how rapidly you resort to nastiness. I pointed out to you (as several others did) why that post was percieved by yesman to be insulting to him. The reason he felt insulted, is that he was in fact insulted. That you intended no insult, does not negate the fact that what you posted was insulting. If you really cannot see how what you posted could be construed as an insult then perhaps you should read through the posts in this thread again.


The fact that two people had different responses to this situation is indicative of very little. You weighted that difference with implied criticism. The implied criticism? That you, unlike Yesman, see the bigger picture.....therefore your insult to yesman, is that he, like the city officials, doesn't see the bigger picture.


This is not about personal biases. Your post was either a) intentionally insulting, or b) unintentionally insulting.

I am quite happy to think that you intended no insult, that indeed, you cannot see why your post would have insulted anybody. For yesman to read an attack into that post required no 'personal biases', nor did it require his being 'childish', it merely required that he have a basic understanding of how the english language works and that he applied that understanding to your post.


There was absolutely no need for that. You have just plummeted in my estimation.

Wow. tw, I think you need to take a step back. We can usually count on you to dig into tech stuff, but here you're taking us off-task. If de-icing is ruining our bridges we need to know it.

In the past, road salt has proven problematic for bridges. Because of the numerous bridges in this area, Indeed, I-95 through Philly is all bridge (elevated highway), I've been concerned about the caustic brines they have started routinely spraying in the last couple years.
When I read an automatic liquid deicing system was installed on this bridge six years ago, it aroused my suspicion because of prior concern.

tw is right in that it's wild speculation at this point and like I said, we won't know for a year, if ever, what caused this failure.

OK tw, lets end this right here and now - ONE WORD ANSWER ONLY -

Did you call me a "fucking scumbag"? Remember one word answer - if you can manage that.

This Star-Tribune story on bridge inspection is very good. It first explains how bridge inspections are done: mostly with a hammer. Turns out it's more of an art than a science. Which is probably why...
Yuck. But page two: maybe it's not Iraq funding, but Vietnam funding that caused this one. Can't have guns, butter AND infrastructure? The key stuff: