A spinning globe does not disprove denpressure. If it does could you explain how?
Denpressure should work on a round spinning earth as well as a flat stationary one.
No, because for denpressure to work atmosphere has to be stacked. It cannot be stacked on your spinning globe model because your globe has the atmosphere all around with no feasible foundation nor ceiling for the stacking.
Evidence for gravity:
Things have been placed in orbits and sent through our system using the gravity model.
So you've personally verified this or have you just accepted it's true?
Things fall at the same rate in a vacuum.
Are you going to cite the hammer and feather on the moon shenanigan? Please don't.
Are you going to use the rock musician turned professor, Brian Cox's video of a huge evacuation chamber for the bowling ball and feather drop shenanigan? Please don't.
So what do we have left?
Basically similar things will drop at similar rates to our eye and perception. It's been proved in many experiments that this is untrue but weirdly they're discounted, as in brainiac.
Tides can be reliable predicted years in advance using the gravity model.
They can be reliably predicted in what way? As exact heights at exact times or just merely high and low tides?
Gravitational waves were detected.
Explain how and what with and how you physically know.
It has been measured over and over again for generations.
Measured with what exactly?
We can measure the gravitational pull between two objects.
Again, tell me how you do this and what instruments accurately prove this gravity pull between masses?
The pull varies over different locations on Earth. This is the result of the Earth not being a perfect sphere with its mass perfectly distributed.
You seriously do not know any of this, do you? You're simply going on stories and explanations as to how it worked, right? If not, tell me physically how you know all of this?
How about that things fall towards the center of mass.
Tell me about this falling towards the centre of mass. What does this mean in terms of you standing in the middle of a field with a couple of bricks or whatever? Enlighten me as to how you see this centre of mass falling routine?
So people do not have the answer to why mass attracts other mass, but they sure do understand enough that very reliable predictions can be made.
Nobody knows why mass attracts mass but they know they can predict stuff from something they don't know. It sounds absolutely mental. Can you explain a little for me?
That is why Pluto was thought to exist before anybody ever observed it.
Another story, right?
Astronomers noticed that the orbits of Neptune and Uranus were being affected by the gravity of an unknown object in the Solar System. They predicted when and where it should be and someone looked there at the right time. This was accomplished using the gravity model.
Another story, right?
Be truthful. Your reliance on all of this is based on acceptance of story telling of people that have been put on a pedestal for you, right? If not then tell me how you physically know all of what you're saying?
Directly above is what can be done if you are on the right track about something and got at least the very basics down.
I can read stories and follow enough of it to parrot. It doesn't make the stories true.
Just curious what is your explanation for things accelerating at the same rate when dropped?
The only things that accelerate at the same rate when dropped are identical objects. All other objects differ but many cannot be readily noticeable at small heights.
You need decent heights and good quality video with good quality slow motion on the cameras.
In low pressure chambers you also need even better slow motion cameras to accurately see a perfect unison drop of two objects all the way to the bottom.
I assume you have seen videos of stuff being dropped in a vacuum.
Nope.
Well under your model I guess stuff being dropped at the lowest pressure that can be achieved.
Yep, this is true.
Why does drag decrease as a plane gains altitude? Under your model the surface area of the air should be the same at any altitude and creating the same resistance to moving through it.
You're obviously not taking full notice of my model.