"Gravity still remains one of the biggest mysteries of physics and the biggest obstacle to a universal theory that describes the functions of every interaction in the universe accurately. If we could fully understand the mechanics behind it, new opportunities in aeronautics and other fields would appear."

***

***

B) With the rotation speed of the Earth (in ball terms) being much faster at the equator than further north or south, surely this affects the magical force of gravity?

















Universe Today says there is only a super slight differential in gravity due to the rotation of the earth:





I personally love the quote, "This rotation is trying to spin you off into space, but don’t worry, this force isn’t much." Lets see a wet tennis ball spinning:

Now multiply that by a million or so, and that is the force Universe Today says "is not much."





So, if I'm standing on the equator at the widest point of the alleged globe, spinning at 1000 mph, my weight will be 175lbs, if I then fly to either north or South poles (not actually allowed but lets wave that for now) at the narrowest point of the alleged Globe,the rotation of the earth would be reduced to around 150 mph, The gravitational pull if existent would have to be so great that my weight would be around 7000lbs and I would be squashed like a bug.





Mainstream science ignores the rotation speeds of the earth at different places and states it has next to no affect on the magical force of gravity. This is a massive alarm bell.

C) The Solar System is travelling at an average speed of 828,000 km/h (230 km/s) or 514,000 mph (143 mi/s) within its trajectory around the galactic centre, which is about one 1300th of the speed of light (err no new constellations anyone?). But this apparently has no affect on the magical force of gravity either. This again, is a massive alarm bell.

D) The Moon does not fall into the Earth.





E) The Earth does not fall into the Sun.





F) Satellites do not fall into the Earth.





G) So, mainstream science says Gravity is so strong that upside-down water at the surface of the ocean (near air) is being pulled to the centre of the earth?





But this force is also not that strong, in that this water can move in any direction with currents and tides, and be easily scooped, splashed, and thrown by a human hand.













Also mainstream science tells us gravity is so strong that water bends, like below, but we all know water is always flat and finds the nearest horizontal. Note here that mainstream science states the earth's spin, and speed of the solar system through space both have no affect on the oceans, and the super magical force called gravity pulls water molecules to the centre of the earth.













H ) So, if gravity is a force that causes all matter to be attracted to all other matter, why are atoms mostly empty space inside? An atom is like having a 5p coin in the centre of an empty football stadium - this is the scale.









I) Science claims our World is surrounded by a giant vacuum of space and that we are moving through space at a speed of 514,000 mph miles per hour, yet the feeble pull of Gravity on Air holds it to our World. Turn on a vacuum and it sucks the air right into it. Why does Space not pull our air into it?





J) Why is gravity so strong to hold people, buildings and the oceans stuck to a spinning ball-Earth, but weak enough to allow balloons, birds, bugs, flowers, and smoke to easily rise against its awesome force?





If gravity is keeping 1,450,000,000,000,000,000 tons of ocean water stuck to a ball that's spinning 1000mph, explain how we are not crushed by the tremendous force it would take to accomplish this?







K) Some Quotes, the first from Newton himself.





"Tis inconceivable that inanimate brute matter should (without the mediation of something else which is not material) operate upon & affect other matter without mutual contact; as it must if gravitation in the sense of Epicurus be essential & inherent in it. And this is one reason why I desired you would not ascribe {innate} gravity to me. That gravity should be innate inherent & {essential} to matter so that one body may act upon another at a distance through a vacuum without the mediation of any thing else by & through which their action or force {may} be conveyed from one to another is to me so great an absurdity that I believe no man who has in philosophical matters any competent faculty of thinking can ever fall into it. Gravity must be caused by an agent {acting} constantly according to certain laws, but whether this agent be material or immaterial is a question I have left to the consideration of my readers." A letter correspondence between Newton and one of his associates.





“Most people in England have either read, or heard, that Sir Isaac Newton’s theory of gravitation was originated by his seeing an apple fall to the earth from a tree in his garden. Persons gifted with ordinary common-sense would say that the apple fell down to the earth because, bulk for bulk, it was heavier than the surrounding air; but if, instead of the apple, a fluffy feather had been detached from the tree, a breeze would probably have sent the feather floating away, and the feather would not reach the earth until the surrounding air became so still that, by virtue of its own density, the feather would fall to the ground.” -Lady Blount, “Clarion’s Science Versus God’s Truth” (40)





Wilbur Voliva, a famous flat-Earther in the early 20th century, gave lectures all over America against Newtonian astronomy. He would begin by walking on stage with a book, a balloon, a feather and a brick, and ask the audience: “How is it that a law of gravitation can pull up a toy balloon and cannot put up a brick? I throw up this book. Why doesn’t it go on up? That book went up as far as the force behind it forced it and it fell because it was heavier than the air and that is the only reason. I cut the string of a toy balloon. It rises, gets to a certain height and then it begins to settle. I take this brick and a feather. I blow the feather. Yonder it goes. Finally, it begins to settle and comes down. This brick goes up as far as the force forces it and then it comes down because it is heavier than the air. That is all.”





“Any object which is heavier than the air, and which is unsupported, has a natural tendency to fall by its own weight. Newton's famous apple at Woolsthorpe, or any other apple when ripe, loses hold of its stalk, and, being heavier than the air, drops as a matter of necessity, to the ground, totally irrespective of any attraction of the Earth. For, if such attraction existed, why does not the Earth attract the rising smoke which is not nearly so heavy as the apple? The answer is simple - because the smoke is lighter than the air, and, therefore, does not fall but ascends. Gravitation is only a subterfuge, employed by Newton in his attempt to prove that the Earth revolves round the Sun, and the quicker it is relegated to the tomb of all the Capulets, the better will it be for all classes of society.” -David Wardlaw Scott, “Terra Firma” (8)





“The ‘law of gravitation’ is said by the advocates of the Newtonian system of astronomy, to be the greatest discovery of science, and the foundation of the whole of modern astronomy. If, therefore, it can be shown that gravitation is a pure assumption, and an imagination of the mind only, that it has no existence outside of the brains of its expounders and advocates, the whole of the hypotheses of this modern so-called science fall to the ground as flat as the surface of the ocean, and this ‘most exact of all sciences,’ this wonderful ‘feat of the intellect’ becomes at once the most ridiculous superstition and the most gigantic imposture to which ignorance and credulity could ever be exposed.” -Thomas Winship, “Zetetic Cosmogeny” (36)





"That the sun’s path is an exact circle for only about four periods in a year, and then of only a few hours - at the equinoxes and solstices - completely disproves the ‘might have been’ of circular gravitation, and by consequence, of all gravitation … If the sun were of sufficient power to retain the earth in its orbit when nearest the sun, when the earth arrived at that part of its elliptical path farthest from the sun, the attractive force (unless very greatly increased) would be utterly incapable of preventing the earth rushing away into space ‘in a right line forever,’ as astronomers say. On the other hand, it is equally clear that if the sun’s attraction were just sufficient to keep the earth in its proper path when farthest from the sun, and thus to prevent it rushing off into space; the same power of attraction when the earth was nearest the sun would be so much greater, that (unless the attraction were very greatly diminished) nothing would prevent the earth rushing towards and being absorbed by the sun, there being no counterbalancing focus to prevent such a catastrophe! As astronomy makes no reference to the increase and diminution of the attractive force of the sun, called gravitation, for the above necessary purposes, we are again forced to the conclusion that the great ‘discovery’ of which astronomers are so proud is absolutely non-existent.” -Thomas Winship, “Zetetic Cosmogeny” (44-45)





“We are asked by the Newtonian to believe that the action of gravitation, which we can easily overcome by the slightest exercise of volition in raising an hand or a foot, is so overwhelmingly violent when we lose our balance and fall a distance of a few feet, that this force, which is imperceptible under usual conditions, may, under extraordinary circumstances, cause the fracture of every limb we possess? Common-sense must reject this interpretation. Gravitation does not furnish a satisfactory explanation of the phenomena here described, whereas the definition of weight already given does, for a body seeking in the readiest manner its level of stability would produce precisely the result experienced. If the influence which kept us securely attached to this earth were identical with that which is powerful enough to disturb a distant planet in its orbit, we should be more immediately conscious of its masterful presence and potency; whereas this influence is so impotent in the very spot where it is supposed to be most dominant that we find an insurmountable difficulty in accepting the idea of its existence.” -N. Crossland, “New Principia”



“I remember being taught when a boy, that the Earth was a great ball, revolving at a very rapid rate around the Sun, and, when I expressed to my teacher my fears that the waters of the oceans would tumble off, I was told that they were prevented from doing so by Newton’s great law of Gravitation, which kept everything in its proper place. I presume that my countenance must have shown some signs of incredulity, for my teacher immediately added - I can show you a direct proof of this; a man can whirl around his head a pail filled with water without its being spilt, and so, in like manner, can the oceans be carried round the Sun without losing a drop. As this illustration was evidently intended to settle the matter, I then said no more upon the subject. Had such been proposed to me afterwards as a man, I would have answered somewhat as follows - Sir, I beg to say that the illustration you have given of a man whirling a pail of water round his head, and the oceans revolving round the Sun, does not in any degree confirm your argument, because the water in the two cases is placed under entirely different circumstances, but, to be of any value, the conditions in each case must be the same, which here they are not. The pail is a hollow vessel which holds the water inside it, whereas, according to your teaching, the Earth is a ball, with a continuous curvature outside, which, in agreement with the laws of nature, could not retain any water.” -David Wardlaw Scott, “Terra Firma: The Earth Not a Planet Proved From Scripture, Reason, and Fact” (1-2)



Plus a reading from a book declaring Gravity does not exist:















L) Many others are starting to see massive errors in the worship of Gravity , and let us remember, Newton was an occultist first, and a scientist second.























N) If Gravity were true, and Darwinism true - both of which are taught as true to children, then we would evolve as pancake people.



O ) There will still be many reading thinking I am a conspiracy theorist etc, but PBS NOVA rejects Gravity, QUORA rejects Gravity, GSU rejects Gravity, Live Science rejects Gravity, Live Science 2.0 rejects Gravity, Astronomy Today rejects Gravity, Nature.com rejects Gravity, and even Wikopedia rejects Gravity....... M) Even the BBC finger puppet, Brian Cox, idolised by many for being the ultimate word on space and science, is starting to get ridiculed. (His middle name is 'Sucks,' but we don't need to go into that in this article, and it's far too crude for this site).

"You might be surprised to know that the force of gravity on Earth actually changes depending on where you’re standing on it. The first reason is because the earth is rotating. This rotation is trying to spin you off into space, but don’t worry, this force isn’t much. The gravity of Earth at the equator is 9.789 m/s2, while the force of gravity at the poles is 9.832 m/s2. In other words, you weigh more at the poles than you do at the equator because of this centripetal force."***