Goscar, this is the Q&A section of the forum. If you have questions about FET this is the forum to ask them in. If you want to complain start a thread in Suggestions and Concerns.
My apologies, I didn't mean it as a complaint. Though I can see how it would come across that way. I was simply saying I was disappointment there wasn't further explanation on the "traditional gravity requires magic comment" and hoping that John Davis might further expand on that. In that light.
I understand the basics of some of the FE theories on gravitational forces (or replacement of that force), such as constant acceleration. And to a less extent think I grasp the concept of the aether wind that forces things down. Both leave me with some questions about the details of their working I am hoping to answer with further reading. That said the traditional theory of gravity is something I have a better grasp of, and have yet to see other statements implying that it has serious flaws that would require "magic" to explain.
So what specifically about the RE concept of gravity was John referring to in his statement?