posted on Dec, 13 2007 @ 10:39 PM
The bridge that collapsed did not melt. That story came from ONE article in the San Francisco Examiner and was quickly pulled when they realised
their stupidity. Someone posted it on the net and you know what happens then..
The steel was re-used, the only thing that melted was the rubber that's used for dampening between joints. I have an article somewhere with the
construction supervisor talking about how quick they could repair the bridge cause they didn't have to replace any steel. If you really need to see
it I'll look for it, or you could try a google search.
OK never mind I found it...
“It doesn’t look right now like we’re going to have to replace it,” Caltrans spokesman Bob Haus said. “We might have to do some
straightening, but it looks as if the actual structure is OK despite the scorching.”
Note this article says 'scorched' not 'melted'...See what difference a word makes? Especially when people take what they see in the media at such
[edit on 14/12/2007 by ANOK]