>>18288663>Gravity is a well observed and documented effectIt's really not. Gravity™ is a theory, and they add multiple fairy tales on just that one natural observation; object falls. It doesn't go further than that in regards to physics. From there it goes directly into imagical fairy tales. You can conceptualize and invert reality and even put math on that. But that doesn't prove physical reality. And calling anyone stupid that doesn't agree with your regurgitation doesn't prove anything either.
>Reminder that a lot of it necessarily means the earth is a spheroid. Where? How? What is your physical scientific measurement? Every object falls vertical, and all vertical vectors of "fall" are parallel 100%. There is no "proven spherical acting gravity". You observe objects to fall vertically, that's it. And from there you move into complete imaginations.
One example, they are currently building a straight level line in Saudi-Arabia. They don't calculate any curvature into their CONSTRUCTION. They will build that 170 kilometer complex straight and level, as any real world construction always does in all of time. No one accounts for "earth curve", because it doesn't exist.
The problem with this line is that people would have a massive balance problem on both ends of this straight plumb and level building complex if Gravity™ was really a spherical acting force. The vertical direction would change dramatically over 170 kilometers. They won't end up magically and coincidentally with a curved line. They literally construct a straight line.
To give you an idea of how much curve they would have to factor in if Gravity™ and earth curve was real: the curvature drop over 170km is about 2.14 km or above 7000 feet. That means they would have to construct a building complex that goes theoretically from the top of this mountain down to the very sea level. That's not happening.
