First of all, I have to apologize to everyone (including myself) for wasting their time. No one is going to change their mind as a result of my post. Conspiracy theorists will always be conspiracy theorists. Google "social justification theory".
Also, I have to laugh at the "requirements" that I agreed to to be able to post in forum, as I am not allowed to post anything "false" or "inaccurate":-D
Anyway, as a physicist, I have to say you've done a decent job at creating a solid batch of pseudoscience. To the uneducated eye, quite a bit of it is believable. The piece about gravity being a "fictional force" is particularly good, in that actual science technically supports the denotation you've chosen, if not the connotation. But I would like to point out two glaring errors that anyone with a college course in physics can see. First, Special Relativity explicitly rejects infinite acceleration. As gamma approaches c, the speed of light, it requires exponentially increasing energy to achieve the same amount of acceleration (an infinite amount of energy to accelerate to the speed of light). Therefore, you should slightly modify your propaganda to qualify infinite power input, not acceleration. Second, the theory of dark energy relates to the expansion of the universe, NOT anything to do with a wall of mountains at the edge of the earth. You show me that derivation mathematically and I'll kiss my own flat ass.
OK, so now I have that out of my system. Here's my (relatively) simple test. (Besides the fact that I have personal friends who have been to antarctica.) Walk to your local weather station. Ask them for the power distribution of their sonar. Ask them why they can't accurately view weather patterns after a certain distance. They will tell you it is because the curvature of the earth gets in the way of the signal. Note that the sonar system must be ground-based for this to be true. This experiment can also be duplicated with a long-range dipole antenna. The signal will dissipate long before it mathematically should based on a normal power distribution. A laser would also work, although it would be hard to correct for landscape changes.
Oh! One more. Get a spectrometer and point it at the sun. The wavelength emission spectrum will tell you that it's much too hot to be only 3000 miles away based on blackbody radiation and not burning us to a crisp. Even if you correct for the emissivity constant of the sun.
Now tell me that all weather-people, all scientists that use blackbody radiation equations every day, and all members of higher education and academia are in The Conspiracy:-)