I can explain it all using what I've been explaining.
Is that why you repeatedly avoid explaining very simple things?
Even now you still refuse to explain what holds a rope together.
It's all pressures, vibration and frequencies and molecular linking
As pointed out before, molecular linking requires the exact opposite of what you claim, some kind of pull, such that if you move one molecule, it can pull the next one along.
Without that pull, you have no linkage.
It's just a case of looking a bit deeper.
Then look deeper. Clearly explain how such molecular linkage works to hold together a rope or any other material while only relying upon pushing and no reliance upon pull. Make sure you address materials like ropes, which are easily crumpled by applying a force on each end towards the centre, clearly ruling out any possibility of a push from one end moving the entire rope.
Let's use water as an analogy to what I've been saying but only use the water from an atmospheric point of view in my explanation to give you a grasp on what I've been saying.#The minute you use it for water purpose puts us back into another realm, so I'm making this bit clear.
Then why use it at all when you are admitting it makes no sense at all?
If you are standing on the bottom of that pool, do you accept that your body displaces the water it is stood in?
Instead of directly on the bottom, lets have it just above, comparable to an object in mid air.
But yes, it displaces water.
Do you agree that this water would be crushing you from all directions, including the water directly above your head?
Yes, and that is important ALL DIRECTIONS.
That includes from below.
In fact, if you measure the pressure you will see that the pressure increases with depth and that means the fluid (which can be air or water) actually pushes on you more from below than from above.
Do you agree that your feet on the deck are merely stopping all that water your body displaces from pushing you down.
Again, if you need to appeal to your feet being on the deck, you have no chance at all.
If he was going to be floating, his feet wouldn't be on the deck.
Instead he would be in mid air.
That means he has the water below pushing him up as well.
And in fact, he could even be up against the glass. In that case, there is negligible water to push him down.
The same way water does.
So by pushing equally in all directions, exactly as it is observed to?
A direct contradiction of your claim?
In order for your claim to work, you need to have the water just push down, and not magically go around objects, just like the wind does.
That means if you have a significant object above your head and close enough to it, you would be protected from the downwards force and float.
Otherwise you have it push equally in all directions to go around the object and thus it doesn't just push you down, but equally in all directions.
Just think of being under a glass dome, (or inside a building), you have the fluid go down, below you, then go through some opening, then go back up above you yet magically push you down, even though it had to push you up?
That makes no sense at all.