*I don't need to explain gravitation for it to be true.*You need to explain right away your claim that it is attractive.

How does attractive gravity work?

If you have no authority on gravitons, then you are simply accepting what someone else said.

Please explain how two gravitons attract each other.

*But whether or not gravitation can be explained it's effect and behavior has been verified countless times. *You are claiming that it is attractive.

Please explain the attractive mechanism.

If you cannot, then we are dealing with something worse than Aristotle's Credo Quia Absurdum Est (I believe because it is absurd).

Take a look at how Einstein faked the 1919/1922 data for general relativity:

The most extraordinary proofs on HOW EINSTEIN FAKED HIS 1919/1922 DATA FOR THE SO CALLED EINSTEIN SHIFT:

http://einstein52.tripod.com/alberteinsteinprophetorplagiarist/id9.htmlhttp://www.ekkehard-friebe.de/dishones.htm (scroll down to the section: With regard to the politics that led to Einstein's fame Dr. S. Chandrasekhar's article [46] states...)

http://web.archive.org/web/20070202201854/http://www.nexusmagazine.com/articles/einstein.htmlHOW EINSTEIN MODIFIED HIS FORMULA RELATING TO MERCURY'S ORBIT IN ORDER TO FIT THE RESULTS:

http://www.gravitywarpdrive.com/Rethinking_Relativity.htm (scroll down to The advance of the perihelion of Mercury’s orbit, another famous confirmation of General Relativity, is worth a closer look...)

Dr. F. Schmeidler of the Munich University Observatory has published a paper titled "The Einstein Shift An Unsettled Problem," and a plot of shifts for 92 stars for the 1922 eclipse shows shifts going in all directions, many of them going the wrong way by as large a deflection as those shifted in the predicted direction! Further examination of the 1919 and 1922 data originally interpreted as confirming relativity, tended to favor a larger shift, the results depended very strongly on the manner for reducing the measurements and the effect of omitting individual stars.

Moreover, Einstein made a terrible blunder.

Einstein, 1905:

"The principle of the constancy of the velocity of light is of course contained in Maxwell's equations”

We can infer immediately that Einstein had no knowledge whatsoever of the original ether equations derived by Maxwell, and based his false/erroneous conclusions on the MODIFIED/CENSORED Heaviside-Lorentz equations.

"Einstein claims that “The principle of the constancy of the velocityof light is of course contained in Maxwell's equations”.

If the Lorentz force had still been included as one of Maxwell’s equations, they could

have been written in total time derivative format (see Appendix A in ‘The Double

Helix Theory of the Magnetic Field’) and Einstein would not have been able to make

this claim. A total time derivative electromagnetic wave equation would allow the

electromagnetic wave speed to alter from the perspective of a moving observer."

Here are the censored Heaviside-Lorentz equations, USED BY EINSTEIN to justify his erroneous claim regarding the speed of light:

Here is the original set of J.C. Maxwell's equations, which prove that the speed of light is variable and not constant:

Please explain to your readers how four trillion billion liters of water stay glued next to the outer surface of a sphere.

If you cannot, then we are dealing with a fanatical and dogmatic agenda.

As for your quotes regarding the new radical chronology of history, your shtick is getting old.

I have already answered your questions in full detail here:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=76954.msg2081202#msg2081202Gauss' Easter formula is the truth: the most accurate astronomical dating available. This formula proves immediately that the official chronology of history has been totally faked/falsified.

Explain right now how attractive gravity works.

Gravitons, general relativity, pure magic won't help you to justify how trillions of billions of liters of water stay in place on the outer surface of a sphere.