It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


The bathtub and piano

page: 1

log in


posted on Dec, 10 2006 @ 03:56 AM
Judy Wood

On September 11 the bathtub mysteriously remained without significant damage despite two quarter-mile tall towers allegedly collapsing on it. How did the bathtub avoid significant damage despite a million tons of WTC material supposedly slamming into it? Even if no material directly hit the bathtub, serious seismic impacts on bedrock would have damaged walls, wall corners and tunnels under WTC leading under the Hudson River because of motion similar to that caused by an earthquake.

How can this be possible?

A single tower of 500,000tns hitting the ground would surely of cracked/comprised the bathtub.
The twin towers were vaporised resulting in minimal impact damage.

The bathtub was fine. Manhattan survived. The Hudson luckily didnt break through.

posted on Dec, 10 2006 @ 10:16 PM

Originally posted by debate
A single tower of 500,000tns hitting the ground would surely of cracked/comprised the bathtub.

Maybe if it fell directly on top of it, transferring all of its force in one instant, but neither of them did. The areas under those towers were huge, and would have absorbed a lot of force, like any sort of padding.

And when the towers are busted up floor-by-floor and sent out laterally so that ~90% of their masses lands radially around the towers themselves, and all over neighboring buildings, over the course of 16-18 seconds, and there is a massive amount of matter between the scattered pieces hitting the ground and the actual foundations of the building, it becomes less reasonable to assume the bathtub should have been destroyed.

At any rate, what Wood suggests is not supported. For example, she thinks this damage to the Banker's Trust building...

...was caused by a beam from space, when there is clearly a perimeter column section from a WTC tower hanging out. I would regard this kind of stuff, or anything associated with her or Reynolds, as disinformation, personally.

posted on Dec, 13 2006 @ 04:18 AM
and here is the inconsistancy

The pancake theory has us believe that the pancaking floors pulverised the contents of the building e.g top 20 floors produced this

complete obliteration by 'pancake collapse'.

Here is the bathtub after both buildings collapsed and the # was scooped out.

So as bsbray was indicating the entire building (90+ % my estimation) was turned to dust and as such the bathtub was untouched.
The energy required to pulverise all that material requires 100,000tns of tnt which is ridiculous and so hydrogen bomb/nuke is being touted to account for the energy required. Yet, these energy sources would damage the bathtub, there would be no escape from this eventuality.

So onward with janedoe;

big picture showing 'holes' in WTC buildings and on the left perimeter of the complex.
Debris falling, the size indicated by the hole would have damaged the bathtub unless the holes were not created by falling debris.
BSBRAY offered a picture of damage to Bankers Trust so lets look at the interior of that damage;

yellow beam shrivelled up. What caused that? Judy Wood hasnt stated any conclusions and BSBRAY you shouldnt jump in so quickly. I believe that Judy is moving forward the idea that the cause of the 'holes' had after effects which produced;

1) Bankers trust
2) Scorched cars

Cars scorched and engine blocks melted

[edit on 13-12-2006 by debate]


log in