What happened to the Tanker Truck?

So I was laying in bed last night thinking about the Oakland freeway collapse caused by the tanker truck that apparently crashed on it's side and started the fire. There were a few immediate thoughts that came to my mind, just a couple of interesting questions that don't seem to have any logical conclusion. These questions are:

1: Why was the gasoline fire only confined / contained to one portion of the freeway?

Gasoline is a liquid that will run, drip, pour over and spread out while it continues to burn. I only see one / maybe two sections of the freeway taken out by this fire.... this doesn't seem possible. Under the freeway there's plenty of scrub and dry brush, amongst other things to ignite when doused with gasoline and on fire.

2: Where is the tanker truck?

I've seen many pictures and you tube videos, but I don't see any sign of a tanker truck.

So I went to the next logical source for information on the tanker truck, a news article.

Such as this on SF Gate: www.sfgate.com.../c/a/2007/04/29/BAGVOPHQU46.DTL

No sign of the truck remains at the scene.

There's more blaring questions I have but these seem to be the ones I'm scratching my head about at the moment.

So, just reading from the same SF Gate article, witness reports cars driving through the flames.... again, I have to ask the most obvious question: Wouldn't there be a tanker truck in the way?

www.sfgate.com.../c/a/2007/04/29/BAGVOPHQU46.DTL

"There were cars driving through the flames. The first cars slowed down like they didn't know what to do and then kept going.

The question still remains, where is the tanker truck?

There's gotta be at least some piece or portion of the truck, but it's also interesting as I understand it, Concrete is supposed to explode under high heat, not melt.









So where's the tanker truck?

Originally posted by promomag
So, just reading from the same SF Gate article, witness reports cars driving through the flames.... again, I have to ask the most obvious question: Wouldn't there be a tanker truck in the way?

www.sfgate.com.../c/a/2007/04/29/BAGVOPHQU46.DTL

"There were cars driving through the flames. The first cars slowed down like they didn't know what to do and then kept going.

The question still remains, where is the tanker truck?

As you can see from the images I posted, the freeway is three lanes wide, if a Tanker Truck was laying on it's side, in flames, how do cars manage to drive through this?

San Francisco - Sunday April 29th - 4am Temp - 50°F, Dew point - 47°F, Humidity - 89%, Wind - 9mph West North West.

How cold is metal and concrete in the early morning moist? A few things need to happen to get extreme temps from the fire. Obviously, if this happened in an enclosed area then outside / weather conditions wouldn't have much of a factor on why the freeway melted and collapsed as it had.

Which leads into another interesting fact:

www.sfgate.com.../c/a/2007/04/29/BAGVOPHQU46.DTL

This wasn't the first major crash to clog the crucial traffic corridor through Oakland. On Feb. 5, 1995, a tanker loaded with liquefied gas crashed and burned on the MacArthur Maze, killing the driver, injuring 10 other people and creating an all-day traffic jam.

There was no freeway collapse then, just a traffic mess for a day.

How no replys?


Speachless I guess.




I don't see a truck...



Anyone else care to share or should I assume this is the evidence that the Pentagon attacks were real and huge metal objects really do just vanish...



I think aliens abducted the truck but got scared when they realized fire was hot...



However, as Mr. Lear may be seen to put it. "The above [^---- ] is just my opinion"

Michael Brown, the commissioner of the highway patrol, said the driver had been able to escape the burning truck, and he apparently took a cab in order to go to the hospital.

nytimes.com

Ah yes, the driver, some how makes it to a spot to call a cab to take himself to the hospital. Or, did he use his cell phone and have the cab drive through the flames to pick him up?

I've been on this freeway, there's not much around, assuming he got a ride off the freeway as the exit is not that close at all, it's probably a good mile walk to get off the freeway, wouldn't he call like emergency 911, not a cab?

Called a cab?!

Yet in this article:

Rodriguez said. "I saw movement and there was a man up there. I started talking to the guy. Are you the truck driver? 'Yes.' He said, 'I'm burned. I got out as soon as I could.' ''

The driver seemed disoriented.

"It looked at one time he was walking toward the truck again. I believe he was in shock,'' Rodriguez said.

Rodriguez said he regretted not thinking to send a vehicle up to get the injured man. He and a coworker stood for some 40 minutes watching the freeway burn.

www.sfgate.com.../c/a/2007/04/29/BAGVOPHQU46.DTL

So we have a witness that says the driver was walking towards the tanker truck, which doesn't seem to exist, actually spoke to the driver, yet the driver of the tanker truck, called a CAB to get to the hospital.

Uh, does this make any sense to anyone?


[edit on 1-5-2007 by promomag]

mod edit, format link

[edit on 1-5-2007 by DontTreadOnMe]

Yeah ok, I see your point, but...don't you think that they would have done something that would have caused a lot more damage if it was intentional?

I mean, something that would get rid of all the freeways would be something kind of crazy plot, not just a small section....

Originally posted by c3hamby
Yeah ok, I see your point, but...don't you think that they would have done something that would have caused a lot more damage if it was intentional?

I mean, something that would get rid of all the freeways would be something kind of crazy plot, not just a small section....

Right now I'm just asking some simple questions:

1: Where is the tanker truck?
2: How do cars manage to drive through the flames?
3: Why is the fire limited to a small area?
4: Why did the driver call a cab to get to the hospital, not 911?

Anyone?

Originally posted by Watchful1
How no replys?


Speachless I guess.




I don't see a truck...



Anyone else care to share or should I assume this is the evidence that the Pentagon attacks were real and huge metal objects really do just vanish...

I think aliens abducted the truck but got scared when they realized fire was hot...



However, as Mr. Lear may be seen to put it. "The above [^----

] is just my opinion"

I'd just like to keep this simple for the moment and not tie it into September 11th stuff. The main questions are:

1: Where is the tanker truck?
2: How do cars manage to drive through the flames?
3: Why is the fire limited to a small area?
4: Why did the driver call a cab to get to the hospital, not 911?

I think these questions should be easily explained..... Or maybe the questions can't easily be explained. If this is the case, then perhaps a new conspiracy is born.

I didnt read much about this story, but have they ever explained how the truck actually crashed? It was early in the morning so there are probably not that many cars... How do you just flip a truck with no other people? Possible I guess, but I havent seen how he crashed yet and was just curious

Originally posted by racerzeke
I didnt read much about this story, but have they ever explained how the truck actually crashed? It was early in the morning so there are probably not that many cars... How do you just flip a truck with no other people? Possible I guess, but I havent seen how he crashed yet and was just curious

Yeah, I'm having a hard time finding a tanker truck in all the photos, even news articles say there is no tanker truck at the scene....

Seems to be a key point.

I havent paid a whole lot of attention to this story, but after reading through this thread, it seems pretty shady that a tanker truck would blow up and then disappear from the scene.

Also, why on Earth did this section of the freeway simply collapse? It seems to me that although a tanker full of gas blew up, wouldnt most of the blaze be consumed initially by the blast? How could all of the fuel continue to burn and thus weaken the structure so much that it just collapses?

This is looking like it has all the makings of a fine conspiracy but it will take some time before some of the more bizarre theories pop up

Something is not adding up here with this story, but I dont know what variables are missing.

it melted in the exteme heat
LOL
good question.
simple yet profound

It is possible that (what was left of) the tanker truck were hauled away, either to facilitate the investigation of the crash or to make way for the cleanup. Let's not jump the gun on this...

Originally posted by PhloydPhan
It is possible that (what was left of) the tanker truck were hauled away, either to facilitate the investigation of the crash or to make way for the cleanup. Let's not jump the gun on this...

PhloydPhan,

Cars were driving through the inferno, there's only 3 lanes, if the tanker truck is crashed on it's side.... how is this possible, let alone possible for vehicles to pass through gasoline fire?

Also, there's plenty of photos and videos during the inferno, and shortly after. Do you think they hauled the tanker truck away while it was engulfed in flames?

the man has a point

great point..for some reason when i first heard this story something seemed a bit odd..i just couldn't figure it out. I hope we find some answers soon

promomag, according to all verified reports of this incident, the driver was able to walk away from the crash and hail a cab to get to the hospital. It seems to me that there would be plenty of opportunity for drivers safely buckled into their cars to drive past/around the crashed truck.

The video provided as a supplemental to this LA Times Article includes some shots of what appears to be a truck on fire at 42 seconds and (possibly) 24 seconds.

Most of the pictures linked in this thread - as well as much of the linked video - are of aerial shots of the site. These shots are of limited utility, considering that the truck crashed into a pylon underneath the bridge - and, therefore, is UNDER the collapsed portion of the bridge.

My point is that the truck - or what is left of it - might not be visible in the available shots of the wreck, it might have been hauled away after it stopped burning (as part of an investigation, etc.), or - as other have stated - there might not be enough un-melted truck to be recognizable as a truck.

All I'm saying is that we're not necessarily dealing with a conspiracy here.

(Edited because the spell-check portion of my brain has negotiated for Tuesdays off...)

[edit on 1-5-2007 by PhloydPhan]

Even more things to think about...

No Jews died when that bridge collapsed. Every Jew in the Bay Area was warned in advance to stay off the freeway.



www.sanfranciscosentinel.com...
NWO white van next to "something" secret that "they" doesn't want the public to see.

Could be covering up evidence of the cruise missile that hit..

If not a missile who at the California Department of Transportation ordered a standdown? Who told the California Highway Patrol not to pull over the speeding tanker truck on the highway? hmm.. why Bush? why?

This whole thing a signal for the Israeli attack against Iran, Mexico, or something? I guess we will all find out soon enough..

Stay inside people