Every time I wish to test the likes of onemale's idea of what happen to the WTC he gets upset.<quoted text>
No, the key word is ignorance and you are oh so ignorant.
1) You're the only loon claiming the towers fell at free fall. That just makes you exceptionally delusional.
2) A body in motion is dynamic. You can't argue against that since you're a) clueless and b) you're, like all your twoofer brethren, scientifically illiterate.
3) For free fall to occur resistance can be present but negligible. Huge difference from your twoof sanctioned canard.
4) As pointed out already (thousands of times in this thread alone) the debris no longer attached to the building fell faster than the collapse front proving there was no free fall.
Place balling ball on his head and his heads supports the static weight.
Then I want to fee fall the balling ball/upper block of the WTC to see if the "Dynamic Load is non-existent"<quoted text>
To have a Dynamic Load, you need an impact.
When a building is falling at free fall acceleration the Dynamic Load is non-existent