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:
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.
Amid the collapsed concrete, eyes were immediately drawn to one thing: a yellow school bus.
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.
tw - I may be having a bad day but your posts and attacks on me are growing quite old.
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.
It's a reflection on how you communicate tw. You are offensive in the way that you form your arguments/points.
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.
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.
In 2005, the federal government rated the Minnesota bridge as "structurally deficient," a status that does not require that a bridge be closed or replaced.
"We know that the bridge was inspected in 2005 and 2006 by state inspectors, and while there was some stress and surface concerns noted, they didn't identify a need for the bridge to be replaced," said Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty.
More than 73,000 bridges were rated as "structurally deficient" in 2006, while an additional 80,000 were considered "functionally obsolete," according to federal transportation statistics.
The status does not mean a bridge is unsafe to use, Transportation Secretary Peters said at a news conference in Minneapolis just before noon. Peters also said that the federal government would immediately offer $5 million to the recovery effort and would supplant those funds as necessary.
Dan Dorgan, the director of bridges for the Minnesota Department of Transportation, laid out some of the structure's history that earned the bridge its "structurally deficient" status, citing reports over the last 20 years that had found bearing and corrosion problems, and fatigue cracks that were repaired in the early 1990s. Despite the federal designation, which a federal highway transportation official described as "programmatic," the bridge was still deemed fit for travel, Dorgan said.
One thing you can be sure of,
Griff's trillion dollars could have rebuilt a lot of aging shit.
"A bridge in America shouldn't just fall down," Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar said at the news conference. She added that the collapse is a reminder that the nation's infrastructure needs to become a funding priority.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said the Minnesota bridge tragedy is a wake-up call on America's deteriorating infrastructure. "Since 9/11, we have taken our eye off the ball," said Reid, suggesting that infrastructure spending has taken a back seat to spending on the war in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Of course "top management" is making excuses already.
White House Press Secretary Tony Snow said this morning that while the deficiency status may not mean a bridge needs to be replaced, it is up to an individual state to deal with aging infrastructure.
"This doesn't mean there was a risk of failure, but if an inspection report identifies deficiencies, the state is responsible for taking corrective actions," Snow said.
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]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.
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
First, as I understand it, an identical bridge sits adjacent. Is it also failing? When was an emergency inspection conducted - and by whom?
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_HereafterGoddamnit Warch, why did Nichole Burnell lie?
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
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.
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. ...
Third, Federal inspectors reported serious structural problems in 2005.
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.
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.
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 have the same emotions. But I do not wear them on my sleeve.
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'll say this much for you, tw - you have a talent for understatement.
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.
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, ...
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?
It's just that he has now posted twice about this topic and has not ONCE blamed the President.
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.
the entire north and southbound 35 W bridge collapsed.
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.
theeeere's the tw I know and fail to love.
Good to have you back, bushbasher numero uno
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.
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.
Please repost.
OK
I have the same emotions. But I do not wear them on my sleeve.
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?
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.
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.
I'll say this much for you, tw - you have a talent for understatement.
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.
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.
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.
So you don't think it was the de-icing system, huh?
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.
Since I have not a clue what you are posting, I will assume it is a bad joke.
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.
The criticism was implied when you chose to open your post by pointing out the difference between your view and yesman's.
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.
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.
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?
When glare ice coats the highways, sand and salt trucks roar to the rescue, saving thousands of drivers from injury or death. The quantity of salt applied to Minnesota roads increases each year, up to 320,000 tons in 1999.
Calcium chloride and magnesium chloride
Novotny et al. (1999) provide a comprehensive overview of calcium chloride and magnesium chloride. These chemicals are more costly than many other deicers, but work at lower temps and have a faster melting capability. Both are commonly used with rock salt when temperatures fall as low as -25 degrees C. Calcium chloride is more corrosive than rock salt so it is seldom used alone.
~snip~
Calcium Magnesium Acetate (CMA)
CMA has received much attention in the literature as potentially the best alternative to deicing salt because it is not corrosive and causes less damage to plants, soil, and organisms.
~snip~
A strong deterrent to widespread CMA use is its high cost. It typically costs $600 per ton, compared to $30/ton for salt.
When glare ice coats the highways, sand and salt trucks roar to the rescue, saving thousands of drivers from injury or death. The quantity of salt applied to Minnesota roads increases each year, up to 320,000 tons in 1999.
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.
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.
Or even better, DanaC - rephrase that first paragraph to be political correct? You know what my point was. Post the rewrite.
ok.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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...
In a 2001 Federal Highway Administration test, only 4 percent of inspectors detected a hidden flaw on two bridges.
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:
Schwartz, who closed a number of bridges in New York City in the late '80s, wasn't surprised to learn that the 35W bridge was built in 1967.
"The worst period of bridge building is after World War II and especially in the 1960s," he said. In the late 1800s and early 1900s, engineers were extremely cautious about bridge design, doubling the strength needed to support the deck, then doubling it again, he said.
"But after World War II, we had much finer calculations," he said. "And we believed we were overbuilding [safety features]. The belief was we could build them sleeker and save money and build them with much lower safety factors."
Many bridges from that era weren't built to ensure that the structure would hold up even if one aspect failed. The flaw was exposed when some of those bridges collapsed in the 1970s.
"Nobody builds bridges like that anymore," Schwartz said.
In the 1960s, Pearson said, bridge builders didn't consider metal fatigue a major threat. He said the concept can be understood by bending a paper clip back and forth until it breaks.
"With steel, you can actually predict and calculate how many bends it will take to do that," Pearson said.
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?
:whofart:
From something I read/heard the piers have been ruled out, and the focus is on the steel truss. The thing shifted on the south side, dropped straight in the middle then snapped a break on the north side (the tall peak)
Money was not an issue. There was money available if deemed immediately needed. I'm sure closure of this major artery also featured in the decision. They didn't choose to add the reinforcing plates (a more expensive fix) they say, for a few reasons, not because of money, but because there was no assurance that the new holes they would drill wouldn't cause more harm than good.
I've seen some effects of the chemical deicer. It is definitely corrosive...
5 dead, over 100 injured, and 8 confirmed missing/near site. That's pretty amazing.
ps. cunt seems a bit affect-laden, from my interpretation.
Pete's company has done a lot of work on automated railroad inspection. I wonder if their methods for finding metal fatigue are adaptable and sophisticated enough to be of value?
An example of rusting rebar can be seen where they are tearing up the bridge to widen I-94 for the Waukegan Toll Plaza. Notice some of the rebar hooks, that were encased in the now demolished concrete deck, are rusted enough there is no traces of concrete adhered to them. They should have a green epoxy paint coating like the straight rebar sticking up on the left.
The bottom picture shows missing concrete and rusty rebar. It's easy to assume the concrete broke off and the rebar rusted from exposure to the elements. This is not true, however. Actually, water, probably salt brine reinforced water, worked it's way down through cracks in the concrete and rusted the rebar. When iron/steel rusts it increases in volume, creates pressure like freezing ice, and blows the concrete apart. That process causes spalling of the concrete and appears like in the bottom picture.
Now think of how the steel can react when there's no concrete to protect it at all. Unlike 99% of the thousands of bridges, the big, high profile bridges (George Washington, Golden Gate) are being painted continuously. More importantly, their decks and underpinnings are being inspected and maintained constantly.
You've probably heard rumblings about the states selling the rights to large portions of the interstates to private corporations for cash. My prophesy is, then the politicians piss away the money like Cheney with a War Budget, and when a major catastrophe comes along the corporation declares bankruptcy, the high ups bail with golden parachutes and the taxpayers get the mess dropped in their laps.
At least the ones that weren't killed in the catastrophe.
Like Warch, I was very close to the bridge when it collapsed and it was indeed a very interesting night.
Right now I am on vacation at my friend's place and he lives right next to the "crack stacks" (warch should know) and seeing police cars come by isn't a very rare occurance so for a long time we really didn't think of anything out of the ordinay when a bunch of police cars flew by. Yet as the afternoon went on we kept seeing more and more police cars, ambulances, firetrucks, and just about every boat in the metro area going to I-35.
We finally found out what happened, with numerous phone calls from our parents to make sure we were all right, and apparently our way back to my friend's apartment from where we were eating at the time goes across a footbridge where you have a perfect view of 1-35 so we of course went that way and it was very shocking as you can see from the photos.
The footbridge we walked across was absoultely packed from people trying to see what happened, a very cool thing to see in contrary to the horrors of what just happened since that area is always empty and literally thousands of people went to different spots along that bridge.
About two hours after the collapse the phone lines jammed up so I couldn't get ahold of people and I'm sure many worried family members and friends couldn't get through either which probably scared many people. Not a good situation.
Another scary thing, I got really close to going with my friend to pick up something from his house and he went across the bridge ten minutes before it collapsed. A very scary thought.
I hope the best for everyone that has been affected by this and give my thoughts to everyone that has been affected by the deaths. A tragic day.
About two hours after the collapse the phone lines jammed up so I couldn't get ahold of people and I'm sure many worried family members and friends couldn't get through either which probably scared many people. Not a good situation.
Land lines and mobiles? Or just cell phones?
Since tw seems to be so emotionless, he is different and has a correspondingly different viewpoint.
Tw is not emotionless at all. Beat him in an argument sometime and you will see plenty of emotion, believe you me. And it's not a pretty sight. Speaking of emotion, I have never seen tw happy or visible in enjoyment. Since the beginning of the year, I have seen the occasional quite funny quip from him, though -- almost as if there were some New Year's resolution.
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.
I am not sure if this observation is of a cause or a symptom, but one thing tw is not is a politician -- he largely does not have the people skills for it, lacking them to such a degree as to suggest not mere ignorance but some organic, inborn deficiency. There are degrees of sociopathy.
I am not sure if this observation is of a cause or a symptom, but one thing tw is not is a politician -- he largely does not have the people skills for it, lacking them to such a degree as to suggest not mere ignorance but some organic, inborn deficiency. There are degrees of sociopathy.
Has anyone considered the possibility that tw just doesn't post in an emotional way? (much) Maybe...maybe he's already had an emotional response to such things as the yelow bus, rapidly followed by a train of thought that seeks a wider understanding and by the time he posts here, the emotional part of the response is long since over. Or maybe he really did instantly see the wider picture...in which case, isn't it nice to know that there are people out there who are able to see the wider picture even in the face of emotional situations?
And, no people skills? How could you possibly know that? Some people don't wear their hearts on their virtual sleeve. Some people don't interract online the same way they interract in real life...some people actually require things like eye contact and tone of voice to adequately read (or care about) other people and interract accordingly.
I post on another forum (UKPolitics). I would not dream of opening up and being as much myself on that forum as I do on here. Can't put m'finger quite on why...that indefinable Cellar thang :P
You do not know his background, history or other net usage. You do not know what he's like when he isn't distanced by a keyboard and screen. None of us do, because he has chosen not to make that a part of his online persona in the Cellar. Why is that a fucking problem to you?
Emotionless? Fucking sociopathic now? Good God Almighty, he's just a bloke on a forum, Urbane, why don't you just get over yourself.
And incidentally, if you think anything you've said disqualifies tw from the world of politics then you are a fool.
Everyone - please let it go - this is between tw and I. I created a thread for he and I to hash it out if he is willing. Let us leave it there and keep these threads to the topic at hand. I find that it is a negative energy distracting all of us from sharing our thoughts and opinions on the thread topic and that is not my intention. I know I am a guilty, if not more, than anyone else. Please, lets leave it be.
Everyone - please let it go - this is between tw and I. I created a thread for he and I to hash it out if he is willing.
You're not the only one with a feud going with tw. UG and he have been clashing for as long as I recall :P Which is fine, even entertaining. But diagnoses of sociopathy? It's a bit ott.
I know, I know. I feel as though this has morphed into an attack upon him and that I have some culpability in that - lets just not do it here - lets talk about the issues at hand. Every thread is getting riddled with this. I've said my peace - as you were.
You aren't culpable for what other people post :P
Has anyone considered the possibility that tw just doesn't post in an emotional way?
No. No one does.
Bruce - Does that paint stay on after the concrete has been poured around the rebar? I can't really tell from the images you posted. Was that supposed to adhere to the rebar AND the concrete once it was poured or is/was that paint supposed to protect the rebar until the concrete was poured?
Yes, it's an epoxy paint like we use on airframes. Concrete doesn't stick to the iron work, it get it's purchase from the shape of (bumps on) the rebar.
1~When normal people see the school bus the normal reaction is, Oh, innocent children... an emotional response.
2~Then a normal person would move on to concern for the other victims.
3~The normal progression would be to then move to how and why this happened.
This sometimes happens all in one post, but more often in a progression of subsequent posts.
The problem tw has, is he doesn't acknowledge your point and add his own, or even ignore your point and add his own... he often condescendingly belittles other people for stopping at #1 or #2 and not moving on to #3 immediately.
I suspect it's because he feels his point is more important due to his superior knowledge.
It's exceedingly annoying, but he sloughs off this flaw as being unemotional, in his own condescending style, which just pisses people further.
One imagines an annoyed tw, on the scene, sternly ranting at all the people trying to help the kids on the bus.
"Ridiculous people. Only the foolish would be emotional. This bus is not the most important matter right now. Focus your priority: we must all look for and document evidence in the water that will help explain the bridge failure, before it is carried downstream and lost."
I heard on the news today that the next step will be to bring in Navy Salvage Divers to remove the biggest bits by large commercial cranes that are on the way. Should be an interesting engineering feat.
Yes, it's an epoxy paint like we use on airframes. Concrete doesn't stick to the iron work, it get it's purchase from the shape of (bumps on) the rebar.
That was my initial impression (bumps/grooves on the rebar being that which the concrete"grips upon") If I recall correctly they are in a diamond pattern running the length of the rebar...annnywayyyyy... if the rebar is rusting those grooves intended to hold it together would be greatly diminished and that, coupled with the vibration of years of automobile, could lead to some type of faulty structure. I cannot imagine the engineers not accounting for this when the bridge was built. Unless that nifty de-icer they installe increased the degradation of the supporting rebar exponentially.
Does anyone know if this has been the reason for replacing/rebuilding a bridge of similar structure in the past?
The biggest problem with rebar rust is that it splits the concrete, weakening the structure. On the W-35 bridge, I'd be more concerned with the effect on exposed steelwork of the nasty road clearing chemicals. But keep in mind this is wild speculation and we'll have to leave it to the experts to cover... uh, make the final determination that it's nobody's fault.
I understand that - I was wildly speculating along with you. As a total aside - hat brought me to these train of thought was an old boat trailer I bought - I completely disassembled, had all the parts sandblasted and then reassembled. Err, tried to reassemble. There was so much damage to the steel that during the disassembly and sandblsting the pieces did not go back together properly. There were up to 1/4" gaps in some spots where there was supposed to be none. In fact, I had the whole thing galvanized and still had to insert some shims after that!
Land lines and mobiles? Or just cell phones?
All I know is that the cell phones were jammed.
Bruce- I have to note that I love the way you used the word "purchase".
Pierce- Hey Mpls! Glad to meet you not as a featured new item with unfortunate head shot.
The rebuild is on the fast track. I think most people just want it on the SAFE track. Contractor bids are due in tomorrow. Yikes. I think its politicians reacting to the Katrina lag.
Navy is here to crank the junk up. The staging area is slick. Proof that some locals were making good on the post 9/11 training and funds. The city park has been turned into parking, service tents, boat docking, trailers of supplies. Cordoned off, you see park, cities, U, and state cops, contractors and other civilians, guard, and now navy working in concert.
Pierce- Hey Mpls! Glad to meet you not as a featured new item with unfortunate head shot.
Thanks, I'm glad you're okay as well.
DanaC, I read tw's posts. I stand by my contentions -- at best, the man's a neurotic: emotionally dysfunctional. At worst, there is some degree of sociopathy there -- also an emotional dysfunction, among other things.
His complete want of people skills, to a degree that does suggest counseling may be appropriate, is demonstrated in his manner of posting -- for one thing, this man cannot persuade, and he turns unpleasant very swiftly when he fails at it. Contrast his manner, if you're in a researching mood, with mine.
And incidentally, if you think anything you've said disqualifies tw from the world of politics then you are a fool.
I'm not that foolish: it's tw's manner that disqualifies him from the world of politics. I merely observed that this is so, if you'd kindly go back and reread.
His complete want of people skills, to a degree that does suggest counseling may be appropriate, is demonstrated in his manner of posting -- for one thing, this man cannot persuade, and he turns unpleasant very swiftly when he fails at it. Contrast his manner, if you're in a researching mood, with mine.
a) you're both fucking mentalists if you ask me.
and
b) none of what you say in any way suggests he is sociopathic, merely that his posts display characteristsics you dislike.
I'm not that foolish: it's tw's manner that disqualifies him from the world of politics. I merely observed that this is so, if you'd kindly go back and reread.
Again, if you think anything about tw's manner in any way disqualifies him from politics you are a fool.
there are a lot of politicians who are a bit lacking in social skills if you ask me.
I know of several whose personal skills would, in a sane world preclude them from ever having a career public service...ours is not a sane world.
Oh god, don't get me started on public servants. lol
I know of several whose personal skills would, in a sane world preclude them from ever having a career public service...ours is not a sane world.
I have no skill at lying or implying. I say things bluntly and honestly. I also hold little respect for ideas that arrive without the whys and numbers. When such supporting facts are missing, unfortunately, the messenger might take personal insult rather than grasp what is important - those missing supporting facts and numbers. Many people also associate speculative opinions as if it were their soul. It's not. It’s only a fact or opinion with a life of its own.
Another problem. Many don't want to be told the truth. We mostly want to hear only what we want to hear. Nobody can get elected being honest. It is why, for example, the White House could so easily destroy realities about global warming with outright lawyer rewritten lies. We often don't want to hear honest reality. So we elect lying politicians. Of course. And then blame politicians for being liars.
Why do politicians spin? More important is getting elected. Truth is only a secondary problem. Getting them to like me: that is more important to a politician. That just is not me. I never claimed to be politically correct. I would rather be liked for being honest rather than lying. But politically correct rather than honest is exactly what many want. I appreciate their point when they say, "We just cannot say that." But to lie is actually painful to me.
I just have no idea how, for example, Urbane Guerrilla can live with himself. His routine 'rewriting of history' even in the first thread he participated in is to me amazing. I could not live with myself lying that often every day.
What makes me unique? More than anything else - I have a massive contempt for liars and for those who always know only using wild speculation or a political agenda - other examples of lying.
Yes, I could never be a politician. A politician puts human emotion ahead of honesty. Lying is too much part of the job.
See, I told you he could make a rational, succinct, post.
I heard on the news today that the next step will be to bring in Navy Salvage Divers to remove the biggest bits by large commercial cranes that are on the way. Should be an interesting engineering feat.
Dangerous work, I wish them the safest of all jobs and honor their service.
As for politicians... again, I don;t care if they can speak at all.
If they vote for what I want they can just stand in front of the mike dressed as Elvis in a tutu and curse.
All I know is that the cell phones were jammed.
I read an article that discussed this. It took a few hours for Cingular and another cell phone company to setup emergency response cells meaning that cells were overloaded in the vicinity of that bridge collapse for two hours.
Meanwhile, I have been saying this for a long time. Why do you use and setup text messaging in your phone? So many older friends cannot be bothered. But when disaster strikes, only text messaging is remains reliable.
The report went on to suggest land line traffic was heavy. It was not stated whether land lines were overloaded - that fast dialing tone.
Curiously, the article suggested that Nextel users did not have the access problems that others were suffering. Do Twin City residents not heavily use Sprint Nextel?
If I understand correctly, "Nextel" users may make walkie-talkie style calls to other Nextel users, but must access the "Sprint" network if they want to make normal cell phone calls to other brands of cell phone. If the article is only referring to the Nextel network being open, that would make sense: around here, Nextel is almost exclusively business-based. Couriers, and other traveling workers, use them to call the home office while they are out in the field. Most people wouldn't be calling coworkers when there is a catastrophe, they'd be trying to call friends and family, which may mean they were counted in Sprint's network problems instead.
there are a lot of politicians who are a bit lacking in social skills if you ask me.
lol
Of all the politicians I've worked for/with, I'd have to say that precious few have good personal social skills.
es, I could never be a politician. A politician puts human emotion ahead of honesty. Lying is too much part of the job.
Well. I didn't say you'd be a good, or a bad politician. Merely pointed out to UG that his assertion that you have no interpersonal skills and therefore wuold never make a politician, was false. First off, he cannot tell from forum posts what your interpersonal skills might be in the real world, and secondly, politicians are people and there are those with and those without those interpersonal skills:P
On a slight tangent from where this was heading: I do slightly resent your characterisation of polticians. Not all politicians lie routinely, some are actually very decent people. I've met local and national politicians who work hard and are dedicated to the communities they serve. I've also met some absolute vipers.
You're right, Dana. For the most part, politicians want to do right by the people they represent (good social skills or not).
I do slightly resent your characterisation of polticians. Not all politicians lie routinely, some are actually very decent people. I've met local and national politicians who work hard and are dedicated to the communities they serve. I've also met some absolute vipers.
It is the nature of that environment. A politician that is a superb liar indeed has the inside track. Even honest men must lie or 'spin' to be reelected.
So when we talk about an honest politician, it is not an oxymoron. What we have are politicians who lie more often when things are less relevant.
For example, I was struck by the honesty of Bob Dole, a former presidential candidate. On Nightline, in response to a Ted Koppel question, Dole was so honest as to start his answer with something like, "Well Ted, I am going to avoid your question". One way to answer what a politician does not want to answer. Koppel was in the unusual position where he could not say, "You did not answer my question so I will ask it again." A rare example of honesty.
Numerous others don't bother to be so honest. As a result, more honest Republican power brokers such as Gingrich and Dole were uncerimoniously undermined and replaced by outright liars such as Trent Lott, Tom Delay, and other loyal friends of Abramoff and his peers. Gingrich is reported to hold exceptional contempt for what Tom Delay did to him. Lying created fertile ground for other corrupt government lawmakers and administrators. For example, 102 Republicans and 1 Democrat convicted in
http://txsharon.blogspot.com/2007/08/corruption-in-government-comprehensive.html
A list that does not include the CA Congressman who smashed all standards for corruption - Duke Cunningham.
It is extremely difficult for a politician to get elected and be honest. As George Jr so proved, lying is so easy especially to the most religious that most Americans, including so many here, believed George Jr's obviously lies about Saddam and those WMDs.
BrianR noted my contempt for America's worst president. What he forgot mention after what - 15 years? Combine every post of contempt for every politician. That total number from 15 years does not even approach numbers that accurately describe George Jr in only one month. George Jr also sets new standards for lying - and repeatedly getting away with it. Not noted in BrianR's post is how much contempt I have for a politician who lies most often, repeatedly, and earned political support by doing so.
So who do we blame? The world class liar George Jr? Or people who believe his lies? Why do politicians find lying necessary? Look at what lying has done for a mental midget like George Jr. Even Jesus Christ would eventually have to lie to be elected to public office. Ever wonder why high office is also called a hot seat? Chairs constructed for devils.
What does that say about those who support the most liars such as George Jr?
One imagines an annoyed tw, on the scene, sternly ranting at all the people trying to help the kids on the bus.
"Ridiculous people. Only the foolish would be emotional. This bus is not the most important matter right now. Focus your priority: we must all look for and document evidence in the water that will help explain the bridge failure, before it is carried downstream and lost."
Somehow, this just has to be delivered in Zoidberg's voice.:3_eyes:
One imagines an annoyed tw, on the scene, sternly ranting at all the people trying to help the kids on the bus.
Meanwhile, what tw posted is contrary to what UT "imagines". Notice that very first paragraph about that school bus (which is what set Yesman065 into a meltdown tirade):
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 tw has been seen running past the gaukers to start a solution. But tw, UT, and Yesman065 were not there. A responsible and very first question that tw, UT, and Yesman065 should ask (if concerned for children on every school bus) is "why did this happen?" or "what kids are currently at risk and where?"
Meanwhile, UG again takes cheap shots by quoting a UT post that contradicts what tw posted. Well that is logical and predictable since UG's routinely posts personal attacks on tw (and others); since UG has been caught repeatedly lying by tw. So where are all those fallen dominos in SE Asia?
The
post remains accurate, pertinent, still unanswered, and obviously attacks no one:
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.
Why UG is even posting is his need to post personal attacks on one who repeatedly exposes his lies.
Still at risk are other school busses: every school bus that was not on that bridge last week and is still carrying kids over other bridges. These bridge failures are predictable. Another question still not answered: how predictable was this failure. Or was the problem identified? Question far more important than unharmed kids on one school bus.
You're right, Dana. For the most part, politicians want to do right by the people they represent (good social skills or not).
I think you're right because it's the best way to cultivate the loyalty and adoration of their constituents.
The loyalty for obvious job security.... the adoration for their egos, that people who wish to be in the spotlight, seem to have in abundance.
The loyalty for obvious job security.... the adoration for their egos, that people who wish to be in the spotlight, seem to have in abundance.
Not all politicians crave the spotlight. They do it, because they have to increase their profile in order to reach as many constituents as possible and increase their chances of geting elected/re-elected.
The politicians who tend to crave that limelight are the serious, career politicians, the ones who are looking to get somewhere prominent on the national stage. Most politicians I've met are actually quite uncomfortable with media attention, and being the centre of attention at functions as well. This is one reason most polticians seek media training. It's not actually their natural habitat.
Even on the national scene, the representatives that each constituency elects to Parliament as an MP, are mostly people who've had other careers and other experiences. Most aren't 'career politicians' in that sense. We get more of them these days mind, people coming out of university with a political career in mind from the start. But for instance, my local MP worked in a bank until she got ill in her early 30s and lost her job because of it. She went off and got herself an English degree and was persuaded to run for Council, before eventually running for MP. She's the most down to earth normal person you're ever likely to meet. She lives in an ordinary little dormer bungalow, with a small lawn at the front. She hates having her photo taken and when she's been interviewed on tv she phones her sister to see if she watched it, and did her hair look okay?
They're just people. Most of them you'll never know their names, because they're not in the cabinet or in some prominent national role. They're just local MPs and they serve their local communities. You only see them as rows of faces on the green seats at Prime Minister's Questions.
Your politicians are unlike our politicians.
Most people in this country view our politicians in much the way you do yours bruce. That's because most of what we see of politicians are a) the high flying media darlings, or heavy hitters on the national scene, or b) politicians on the campaign trail where it's their job to court publicity and support.
a) is a minority, b) is most/all politicians for a portion of their time.
What might make yours seem more about the limelight, could be that more stuff is on an elected basis over there. Many of the high ranking public service roles for which you hold an election, we do not.
I'm not talking about National or even statewide office holders, but the local town/county politicians. Mostly businessmen or lawyers full time and hold political office on a part time basis. This accounts for the vast majority of our politicians.
Ahh ok. In local politics, most of our politicians have a career and serve as politicians part time. I am a full time student, I hold office in the Council, I wrap those duties around my college work. My colleagues are: a joiner with his own firm; a public sector manager; a retired playwrght; the CEO of a major charity; a lecturer in Teaching; an accountant; a retired lecturer in English; a retired managing director; a taxi-driver; a business owner.
That's the Labour group of Councillors. We all serve as politicians part-time.
What does that say about those who support the most liars such as George Jr?
Or those who are trying to get elected to that position now???
Meanwhile, what tw posted is contrary to what UT "imagines". Notice that very first paragraph about that school bus (which is what set Yesman065 into a meltdown tirade): A tw has been seen running past the gaukers to start a solution. But tw, UT, and Yesman065 were not there. A responsible and very first question that tw, UT, and Yesman065 should ask (if concerned for children on every school bus) is "why did this happen?" or "what kids are currently at risk and where?"
Still at risk are other school busses: every school bus that was not on that bridge last week and is still carrying kids over other bridges. These bridge failures are predictable. Another question still not answered: how predictable was this failure. Or was the problem identified? Question far more important than unharmed kids on one school bus.
NO The first question to be asked here was how can I get the children on THAT bus taken care of - period. The second one was every other human in that situation and a VERY DISTANT third, at best was how can we do something to protect the children everywhere else who are on school busses at 9:00 at night. Prevention is important, but in a crisis situation ACTIONS speak a lot louder than questions. Identifying the problem and rectifying or preventing it from happening again are not the logical course in an immediate crisis.
After the immediate situation is resolved is the time to look elsewhere for other POTENTIAL problems - dealing with the one that IS happening is paramount.
Aside - tw, I offered you an opportunity to settle our differences -
you chose not to - thats fine. Therefore, please do not use me as an example or reference in any of your posts/rants. Whether you feel it is demeaning or derrogotory is irrelevant - everyone else sees it for what it really is. Thanks, have a nice day.
NO The first question to be asked here was how can I get the children on THAT bus taken care of - period. The second one was every other human in that situation and a VERY DISTANT third, at best was how can we do something to protect the children everywhere else who are on school busses at 9:00 at night. Prevention is important, but in a crisis situation ACTIONS speak a lot louder than questions.
So how did you get those children off and taken care of - since you worry about things relevant? Those in MN responded accordingly. Why do you associate yourself with them? We could have sucked our thumbs and accomplished just as much. That school bus was their concern - not yours. To put it at 'concern number one' is an emotional response - not logic.
As posted repeatedly, people who must be concerned for those children were at the bridge. That definitely was not Yesman065 who would somehow save children by worrying?
Whereas you were concerned with details you could do nothing about, instead, I was more concerned with the bigger picture - and things I might be able to accomplish.
But again, so as to be clear because assumptions, speculations and implications now routinely become conclusions. Nothing here is an insult or an attack. Demonstrated is exactly how two people see things completely different - exactly as posted in the very first paragraph. For a bonus, demonstrated is how one has an emotional meltdown over a simple logical comparison - to wildly assume an insult where none existed.
Your offer was simple. You stopped posting attacks and the only time I demonstrated what an insult really looks like then stopped - just as I stated. See how easy it works? If you were making so other offer, well, I don't read nor even consider things implied.
Meanwhile, when you become a perfect example for a point, then I will use you accordingly. Again, that is not an insult even though I can already (all but) hear you assuming so. Whereas we outside of MN needed to see the bigger picture (ie a bridge fails every week), instead, Yesman065 worries about kids he can do nothing for (and calls that responsible action?). But again, demonstrated is a perfect comparison of how two people see the exact same event differently. What followed is how one takes personal insult to what was a simple logical comparison.
So what was the larger point? Intended was to demonstrate how some people see only tactical objectives when the strategic objective is looming and requires attention. Demosntrated is how many cannot see the strategic objective - the bigger picture. We never got there. You took insult where none existed.
For us, that single school bus situation was solved the minute that bridge collapsed. What remained was a problem only for people on that bridge. Apparently others (including UT) never grasp that point. The minute that bridge collapsed, our immediate concern was why and what other school busses are at risk. For example, how many bridges of that design exist in your county? Three exist in MN. Did you know that? Do you know those answers that are very much relevant if concerned for the safety of your peers? Why not? Later we look back to see if others whose job were those kids got done.
Maybe you worry about things that cannot be solved. So tell us. How many bridges in your area have the same non-redundant design? Did you ask? Is anyone? Did you even ask if anyone is asking or instead worry about insults that never existed? Or do we simply wait for another school bus to fall?
Ahh ok. In local politics, most of our politicians have a career and serve as politicians part time.
Appreciate in America that many politicians don't even spend as much time as lawmakers. Well over 50% of a major (full time) politician's time is spent on fund raising. Numbers once were something like $30,000 every day for 365 days just to get reelected. Where do you find enough generous people every day to give you $30,000? I believe that number may be 10 years old. Of course the number is less for local officials. But still, even some judges must have their hand out daily so as to run for reelection. Clearly those judges are honest? Clearly those politicians are doing their job when so much of every day is fund raising.
Someone walks around daily with his hand out only because he wants to be a public servant? It's hard to believe. Ego explains calling it 'serving' rather than a 'power trip'.
So how did you get those children off and taken care of - since you worry about things relevant? Those in MN responded accordingly. Why do you associate yourself with them?
I made no effort to solve any problem. I simply posted a link to which tw chose to attack me in post #8. Because I am a compassionate human.
That definitely was not Yesman065 who would somehow save children by worrying?
I never said I was going to save anyone by worrying about them. It is NORMAL to be concerned with the welfare of others though, and to express that concern. tw constantly claims that he does not read into others posts or make assumptions about that which may have been implied, reading only the words one has written. Why would tw assume that anyone was trying to save a child when all I did was post a link to an article with absolutely no opinion posted. And yet again an example of how tw reads into others posts that which was not written - Why does tw constantly tend to read into statements things which do not exist. Please refer to the original post in this thread for IRONCLAD proof. Contrastly, tw feels compelled to criticize others if/when they appear to have done the same?
Whereas you were concerned with details you could do nothing about, instead, I was more concerned with the bigger picture - and things I might be able to accomplish.
INCORRECT - I was not concerned with details at all. I VERY SIMPLY posted a link, nothing more nothing less. I had not intent at that time to solve any problems jump out the door and examine any bridges. tw seems to not be able to grasp this concept even though he has been repeatedly told. Why does tw continue to assume every post is about what HE thinks it is about instead of recognizing that other people post for their own reasons? All claims of superior thought through logical emotionless conclusions would not be made were it not for the underlying emotional need for said change or improvement to take place. One can only assume that posting dispassionately lets tw feel he is somehow greater or better or in some way superior. That tw's posts are intentionally devoid of any feeling has no bearing nor does it lend any credibility to his posts. This is a further example of how tw reads into posts that which is not there. Why tw? Why does tw see things that do not exist? What is it tw has accomplished by attacking yesman? Has tw accomplished anything since this bridge collapsed? has tw taken any action? Take notice - that information is conveniently lacking from tw's posts.
Your offer was simple. You stopped posting attacks and the only time I demonstrated what an insult really looks like then stopped - just as I stated. See how easy it works?
No, not really, the veil has been removed and the seething ridicule is now out in the open. For example see post # 8 where tw completely unprovoked in any way shape or form reads into a link that which does not exist and attacks yesman without any cause whatsoever. The demeaning TONE, yes there is a tone in the written word, which tw used was completely uncalled for. I made an offer to you for an end of your attacks and my counterattacks so that the cellar would not have to deal with this issue in ever thread where you choose to attack me. Furthermore, I created a thread specifically for tw to express his feelings, if any, attack me if tw wished or to reach a compromise. tw chose none of them - What we are left with is a "cesspool of wanker logic." {tm tw} The offer was apparently not simple enough for tw. tw could not even be man enough to respond to said offer in the appropriate place. Why is that? Why is it that tw is unable or unwilling to act accordingly when an offer for peace was made? Highly illogical for one who purports logical superiority.
Yesman065 worries about kids he can do nothing for (and calls that responsible action?)
yesman (now you have me referring to myself in the third person) - very strange indeed - will repeat himself again. It seems that tw must believe that if the same incorrect point is repeatedly stated enough times will somehow will it to validity. No it will not. A most serious illogical transgression. No matter how many times an incorrect assumption is repeated it shall forever remain incorrect. yesman posted a link - nothing more, nothing less. yesman had no intention whatsoever at that time to solve any problems nor examine any bridges. tw seems to not be able to grasp this concept even though he has been repeatedly told this. yesman made no effort to imply nor intended to determine a responsible course of action. That is another attempt by tw to make another erroneous claim completely unfounded and without basis. Why tw? Why does tw see things that do not exist?
yesman would like to take this opportunity to state that he was concerned about the traumatic events of that evening and would like to express his concern for the well being of the children on that school bus. Additionally, yesman would like to express his thankfulness to his God that they are all physically ok. Nothing more nothing less. There was never any attempt to examine any other bridges nor did yesman make any claims to have done so.
The minute that bridge collapsed, our immediate concern was why and what other school buses are at risk. For example, how many bridges of that design exist in your county? Three exist in MN. Did you know that? Do you know those answers that are very much relevant if concerned for the safety of your peers? Why not?
Those questions are not yesman's to ask. yesman is not in the field of engineering, however if yesman were to derive that information it would do yesman little good to know that information. Therefore that displays another illogical question derived on faulty logic which deserves no reply. How much time did tw spend to accrue that useless information? If that information becomes useful what is tw going to do with it? Has tw done anything constructive to address whatever situation tw has determined is in need? What tw, what would yesman or any other reader do with such information? Perhaps yesman could call his congressman and express his concern for the children in his area. Does yesman need that information to do that? yesman thinks not. In fact, yesman has already emailed and called his local representative to express his concerns about bridges in his area. Has tw done the same? Has tw taken
any action? tw has offered no solutions, no ideas, in fact all tw has offered is long winded posts questioning others feelings and opinions. Hardly a prudent course of action. What tw, what logic was this course of action you have chosen based upon? tell us what tw has done to increase the safety of the children who ride school buses near tw. Perhaps tw is not concerned enough about the children in tw's area to take action himself? yesman does not know as tw has not offered any constructive information on the subject.
Maybe you worry about things that cannot be solved. So tell us. How many bridges in your area have the same non-redundant design? Did you ask? Is anyone? Or do we simply wait for another school bus to fall?
OMG - again? My fingers hurt from repeating myself ad nauseum - should you, at this point, still need and answer to these questions than you are beyond help.
In conclusion, yesman recognized a need and took the appropriate action (calling his representatives) whereas tw has simply chosen to attack other posters feelings and opinions - hardly logical nor constructive.
I have repeatedly said that I respect tw's opinions and tw is obviously a person with above average intellect. Attacking others provides no benefit - therefore is a complete waste of energy and cannot derive any positive outcome. Why then does tw find it necessary to attack others when no attack was initially made nor implied?
Sorry, I was distracted... could you repeat that?
We just had a locally notorious penile-encephaly case, and toe-tag Democrat, write to the local daily and weekly papers explicitly blaming George W. Bush for the bridge falling down -- and never mind that it's been found rickety since about 1990. The poor bustard tried to sell us on the idea that since GWB is engrossed in fighting a war that other people labored two decades to start with us, the bridges are all rusting out. :right: From this particular crank, whose name I'll refrain from mentioning -- nobody you've heard of anyway, but he writes letters to the editor as a hobby -- this is par for the course. Well, maybe below par.
First off, he cannot tell from forum posts what your interpersonal skills might be in the real world, and secondly, politicians are people and there are those with and those without those interpersonal skills:P
To the contrary: I most certainly can tell what skills he lacks, and I have the entirety of his body of work here on this Cellar to back my view. Allow me to confine myself to just the most prominent example: in all his volubility on various subjects, has he persuaded anyone of his rightness? Are his posts received favorably or with snorts? Does he not resort too often and too easily to "You lie!"? He lacks that faculty to persuade. The only reasonable assumption I can make is that he talks as he writes, behaves as he writes -- that his soul is revealed in his works, especially on those fora concerned with politics, with religion, and with philosophy. These are the places that show your wants, your ideals, your worldview. No question but that they show mine.
This would be true even if I liked the man.
Meanwhile, what tw posted is . . .
Curiously in the third person. Odd. Not the sort of thing I do.
Meanwhile, UG again takes cheap shots by quoting a UT post that contradicts what tw posted. Well that is logical and predictable since UG's routinely posts personal attacks on tw (and others); since UG has been caught repeatedly lying by tw. So where are all those fallen dominos in SE Asia?
North Vietnam, Laos, South Vietnam, and Cambodia, in approximately the order of their fall. You could count Burma in there somewhere if you like. I've told you this more than once, and more than once you ignore these data -- ignoring data is not honesty. The contiguous dominoes that didn't fall were Thailand and Malaysia, to their great good fortune. It wasn't all luck, but it had luckiness to it.
And post #76 is not a contradiction of any sort, but a satire. If you don't want to scroll back that far, see post #99, which quotes 76 in full.
Why UG is even posting is his need to post personal attacks on one who repeatedly exposes his lies.
I do not lie even to you, tw, and the whole Cellar knows it -- you are the one exception. I'm not here to steer you wrong, either -- see previous.
Appreciate in America that many politicians don't even spend as much time as lawmakers. Well over 50% of a major (full time) politician's time is spent on fund raising. Numbers once were something like $30,000 every day for 365 days just to get reelected. Where do you find enough generous people every day to give you $30,000? I believe that number may be 10 years old. Of course the number is less for local officials. But still, even some judges must have their hand out daily so as to run for reelection.
In local politics, whilst there is fund raising (we do need funds to pay for elections) it's much smaller scale. There is a limit on what a person/party can spend during the election period. You can spend what you like in the interrim, though most local politicians don't spend much until quite near election time.
By a limit, I mean that once the election is 'called' so roughly four weeks before polling day, no local government candidate can spend more than: £600 plus .05p per registered voter. For my ward that worked out at approximately £1010. During my election my expenses came in at £940. In order to calculate election expenditure, one has to take account of everything. If someone lends you space in their office to use a base of ops, you must work out what an acceptable market rate wuold be for that amount of space and utilities and mark that within your expenditure as a Notional expense. Every printed leaflet, every stamp, every phone call which incurs a charge, election insurance etc etc. Services paid for, services given free, all have to be accounted for as expense and mustn't amount to more than stated limit. The only 'expense' that doesn't count, is the market value of volunteer labour. So, you really appreciate your volunteers. When you are counting every stamp, you want to hand deliver as much as possible ;P
To the contrary: I most certainly can tell what skills he lacks, and I have the entirety of his body of work here on this Cellar to back my view. Allow me to confine myself to just the most prominent example: in all his volubility on various subjects, has he persuaded anyone of his rightness? Are his posts received favorably or with snorts? Does he not resort too often and too easily to "You lie!"? He lacks that faculty to persuade. The only reasonable assumption I can make is that he talks as he writes, behaves as he writes -- that his soul is revealed in his works, especially on those fora concerned with politics, with religion, and with philosophy. These are the places that show your wants, your ideals, your worldview. No question but that they show mine.
Unlike yourself of course who routinely persuades others to your view and whose posts are never derided.
Every printed leaflet, every stamp, every phone call which incurs a charge, election insurance etc etc.
Election insurance? Does that support you until you can try again? Or buy you a bottle of booze to drown your sorrows?
North Vietnam, Laos, South Vietnam, and Cambodia, in approximately the order of their fall. You could count Burma in there somewhere if you like.
I don't think lumping in a right-wing military Junta with communists would be a good idea.
BTW, the most damning statement I've ever seen of any government is in the
CIA fact book on Burma.
the judiciary is not independent of the executive
Election insurance? Does that support you until you can try again? Or buy you a bottle of booze to drown your sorrows?
*grins* My local party buys it to cover the whole borough (ie. all the local labour candidates) it is in case, for instance, one of your volunteers has an accident whilst volunteering...or gets badly mauled by a dog f'r'instance..
...or gets caught handing out leaflets with lies about the opposing candidate?
That generally doesn't happen. Doesn't play well with the electorate if you slam your opponents. Their party maybe, you can slam someone else's party and that tends to be accepted, but generally not the personal attacks. They prefer you to say what you're going to do.
Unlike yourself of course who routinely persuades others to your view and whose posts are never derided.
There are those who try deriding them -- claiming that reasons or motivations they cannot articulate are superior to what I explicitly lay out, for reasons I
can articulate. These people don't come off so very well. About the best they can do as they finally throw in the towel is squeak, "You're not worth it!" which is the left-winger's code for "I got nothing left, none of my ideas are good enough to persuade." It's the American Left's want of wisdom that puts them in their sorry shape -- the Right tends to study wisdom and adopt it.
Sometimes these collapses are spectacular, such as Spexxvet's recent meltdown over guns. He didn't merely lose the argument to the combined efforts of xoxoBruce and myself, he jettisoned it over the side when his pacifism cracked and crumbled; the whole of the Cellar that was watching stared him down. I understand that gun rights are human rights -- not everyone does, not yet -- and that gun rights, made real, support in many ways the natural human right not to be wrongly slain by other humans, as in crime (retail, as it were) and genocide (wholesale). Literally, being able and equipped to fight preserves your right not to suffer death, in all imaginable circumstances.
This Republic is all about the widest possible distribution of political power in its truest sense, both in the Law's say-so and in the physical sense, with power delegated for use by the people's representatives from judges through Congress to the President being limited in time and in scope. This approach serves us well, though any corrections that from time to time become necessary tend to be noisy, and very public.
I don't think lumping in a right-wing military Junta with communists would be a good idea.
Though I do -- on the grounds that totalitarian regimes are fundamentally more alike than different. Dictatorship is dictatorship, no? That all such governments are much poorer at caring for a population's needs than democracies are hardly needs mentioning, and is among their salient characteristics.
When you've fallen into the heart of darkness, do you care what color it is?
UG, how can you be so blind?
You're right, totalitarians are totalitarians regardless of their left-right stance.
So how can you possibly support the Republican party, in spite of all its shameless authoritarianism? The only, only aspect of your life that the Republican party doesn't want to regulate is whether or not you own a gun. Who you sleep with, who you marry, who you talk to, what you think, where you live, everything else about your life, the Republicans want to regulate.
Do they? They don't seem to be working at it hard enough for me to notice, and I think I should if they were. They're certainly not chaining up any
Log Cabin Republicans.
No, Ibbie, don't believe everything you read from people bigoted against Republicans. It's really no better than the other sin you can find among that claque: bigotry against Jews. In fact, if you believe nothing they write, you're likely on the right track. You've been told "Oh those awful Republicans this and those awful Republicans that" by people whose primary agenda is less partisan politics than it is sheer anti-Americanism. I've been hearing it from them for longer than you've lived, and you know what? It's all crap. Shoddy antidemocratic goods.
I do not mistake Republicans for totalitarians, for I've lived totalitarianism, as you may recall. This quite clarifies my vision. It may do that for yours.
Continuing developments -- at least among the chattering class:
Must Be Dubya's Fault
A sober account of a cause for snickering.
I have it on good authority that the Mothman did it.
There was a sighting just before the collapse. Or a couple days before. Or something. The wings were "as wide as a Ford"
No, Ibbie, don't believe everything you read from people bigoted against Republicans. It's really no better than the other sin you can find among that claque: bigotry against Jews.
Okay, I call shenanigans.
I do not mistake Republicans for totalitarians, for I've lived totalitarianism, as you may recall.
No, Urbane, as a matter of fact I don't recall. I recall you saying it, over and over and over, but I don't recall you ever backing up the claim.
Do tell, UG. What totalitarian state have you lived in?
I am chatting to my friend who is in IT, he is heading for collapse site tomorrow to layer on security elements for the Minnesota Department of Transportation.
Ibram, any military service is a totalitarian social organization: mine was the United States Navy -- the experience was an instructive one. My nine years in it amounts to roughly half your entire lifetime's experience. You may sputter, "But that's not a state, you fool!" I am here to tell you it doesn't have to be, for one to learn.
For the umpteenth time I call BS on that, UG. You don't know jack shit. Actually try going to a totalitarian state someday, UG.
I've been to China, Cambodia, Taiwan... And I know people who've been in the REAL real thing, I know at least one person who has been to Pyongyang. Don't bullshit me with your 'being in the military = totalitarian experience' load of crap. My dad's in the military. It's rough - I certainly would never join it myself - but it's a far cry from genuinely being part of a totalitarian state.
It is a totalitarian society, and the experience was most instructive, Ibbie. I do not bullshit you, however hard you're moved to pretend I do. That a totalitarian society is or is not part of a totalitarian state is not the point; what is is that inhabiting a totalitarian organization allows an up-close understanding of the character, features, and failings of a totalitarian state. It is no great leap of extrapolation.
Now I'm calling BS on you. I'm not saying you couldn't learn from your experiences, but you're going to have to quit telling me I can't learn from mine.
And my experiences tell me not to mistake Republicans for totalitarians.
Now I'm calling BS on you.
Shouldn't the emphasis be on "you"? As in: Now I'm calling BS on
you. Seems to read better - just a thought.
Speaking of the Bridge Collapse - did anyone else get a letter from their local rep with the new budget on it? Mine had a whole lotta cash specifically designated for this. I thought the timing was rather convenient.
I mulled over that style of doing it -- but decided against using too much italic font. It may express emphasis well in voice, but in text it's easier to overdo. It was one pronoun or the other, but both becomes just that bit much. I picked one; the other would have worked too.
Hey, politicos budgeting money will react swiftly and strongly to a very public disaster. It's particularly obvious in a nice transparent democracy.
I'm calling
pigeon guano on the whole lot of ya!
Inspectors began documenting the buildup of pigeon dung on the span near downtown Minneapolis two decades ago. Experts say the corrosive guano deposited all over the Interstate 35W span's framework helped the steel beams rust faster.
"no shit?" I mean yeah - shit!
They have finished with the bird shit and are moving to the deicing system next. They have a long way to go yet. A waste of time and money, really... everybody knows Bush did it.
They have finished with the bird shit and are moving to the deicing system next.
I am still waiting for analysis that includes significant terms such as 'fatigue'. Also troubling is that redundancy did not exist on this bridge. Redundancy is even found in Roebling 1880 bridge - the Brooklyn Bridge.
Rusting is a common problem in so many bridges such as NY's Williamsburg Bridge that was not painted for 30 years. It took a falling structural member to finally get maintenance restarted.
One need only visit Philadelphia to view Interstate 95 some 40 feet above those neighborhoods. Rust is rampant everywhere. Is that 6 or 8 lanes highway ready for collapse?
The Golden Gate Bridge gets repainted constantly. A painting crew is constantly repainting that bridge. With landfall on Marin County, then the painting starts all over again in San Francisco. How many other bridges get that kind of maintenance?
But rust alone typically does not cause fatigue; would be unacceptable long before rust could create fatigue. However this MN bridge had no redundancy. This then begs the question why routine electronic monitoring is not installed on bridges without redundancy.
Questions that we should expect an engineering analysis to answer.
One need only visit Philadelphia to view Interstate 95 some 40 feet above those neighborhoods. Rust is rampant everywhere. Is that 6 or 8 lanes highway ready for collapse?
I've been hearing "experts" grumbling, for several years, that the whole elevated section of I-95 through Philly should be completely rebuilt. What a clusterfuck that would be.
I've been hearing "experts" grumbling, for several years, that the whole elevated section of I-95 through Philly should be completely rebuilt.
A point made (if I remember) in The Economist. There is no political reward for doing maintenance. Political reward is in building something new. Mayor Lindsay in NY had two choices. Maintain the bridges (ie Williamsburg) or rebuild Yankee Stadium - corporate welfare for the Yankees. Lindsay rebuilt Yankee Stadium.
Don't paint I-95 and don't do any maintenance on Veteran's Stadium - and the city will get everyone in PA to rebuild them. Phillies were given a new stadium for free paid for by all PA taxpayers. Clearly that was cheaper than standard maintenance.
Monday morning quarterbacking on the net.
At
http://taxa.epi.umn.edu/bridge/ an Epidemiologist (it's about diseases, nothing to do with bridges or engineering) weighs in with his theory.
He's blaming the construction/repair work.... with 8 x 10 glossies and a paragraph on the back.
Trying to share some pics of one of the sorting sites. Lots of scrap has gone through the site- metal, rebar and concrete. Barges bring it down, it is sorted and categorized then barged or trucked to another place for study.
not sure how to post a pic. If youre interested. you can send me a message and give me some posting tips...I give up!
Assuming the photo is saved to your computer:
[LIST=1]
[*]Go to
http://imageshack.us/
[*]Browse the photo you want to host and click "host it"
[*]Copy the direct link address (bottom)
[*]Click on the "instert image button
[*]paste url
[/LIST]
[IMG]http://img54.imageshack.us/img54/6914/bargeyh6.jpg" alt="Image" />[/IMG]
I'll try this one...thanks! They have actually moved a bit out. Last week there was quite a pile of broken rebar chunks.
try again...here is a sorted area of metal...
I assume that construction was to repair the surface of what is called the expansion joint. Using the maps and pictures, that expansion joint is located directly above support rollers for the south end. A bridge must expand and contract. Those rollers permit that change. But I understand one of the south support rollers had seized and was repaired.
Well that expansion joint would be directly above those rollers. I doubt construction on that expansion joint caused a failure. However they may have been fixing a symptom. The reasons for that expansion joint repair may have been due to fatigue orginally created by that seized south support roller.
Obviously this is all speculation. Photos only provide dots that the engineer's analysis must connect with lines to explain the entire failure.
I had heard expansion joints were repaired. That picture may be that expansion joint. Not described is why repair is necessary. Was the defective expansion joint due to a growing bridge fatigue? Curiously, that expansion joint is directly over what I am guessing is the support roller that seized.
Here's a picture I found on Wunderground that shows the cleanup progress.
In some ways I think it looks even worse once they start cleaning up these types of disasters. I think to me the emptiness when you know something used to be there renews the whole shock of the initial event...or something like that.
How far downstream is this? Is that the bridge that had all those people standing on it, in the pictures after the collapse?
Questions that we should expect an engineering analysis to answer.
A
story in this morning's paper contains information leaked by someone on the investigation. Apparently it was a design flaw, not rust or poor maintenance, that caused the failure of the Minnesota bridge. The gusset plates were not thick enough.
The National Transportation Safety Board is expected to announce today that investigators have traced the failure to steel structures known as gusset plates that held together beams on the Minneapolis bridge, according to sources who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the board's findings.
Some gusset plates on the bridge, which carried eight-lane Interstate 35W across the Mississippi River, snapped during evening rush hour on Aug. 1, leading the bridge to crumple, according to the sources.
Gusset plates are common on steel bridges across the nation, including in the Washington area. They hold together angled beams on the bridge's frame.
The sources said the fault in the Minneapolis span stemmed from the bridge's design and would not have been discovered during detailed state inspections.
When the bridge was built in the 1960s, its gusset plates were not thick nor strong enough to meet safety margins of the era, the sources said. Over decades, renovations added weight to the span. It was undergoing a construction project with heavy equipment and material at the time of the collapse.
The sources said investigators were not sure what role those projects played in the incident. But investigators have speculated that the weight from equipment and materials may have triggered the plates' failure, two of the sources said.
During the construction projects, the sources said, state officials and contractors did not recalculate how extra weight might affect the gusset plates. They said it was not standard procedure to do such studies.
The NTSB has not uncovered similar flaws in other bridges, the sources said.
The safety board is expected to recommend at a news conference today that federal and state authorities conduct more rigorous engineering studies of gusset plates before beginning renovation projects on bridges in the future, the sources said.
The first gusset plates suspected to have failed was U10. But which one is U10? Graphics observed so far say nothing.
The cascading failure resulted in failure of (was it?) 6 (or 8?) other plates. Still under study is why this plate failed at this time. What was the unique event that finally triggered the failure?
Gusset plates were one half the required thickness. Plates should be thicker (stronger) than connecting beams. Were they literally same or lesser thickness than the beams? In which case, why was this weakness not physically obvious to experienced construction workers?
Years of making the bridge heavier, then piling on a bunch of construction equipment plus rush hour traffic, eventually became the straw that broke the camel's back.