Why does flat earth equate no space travel by man?

No, you’re made up force that supposedly adjusts all objects of any mass, as if they’re all the SAME mass

No, that is YOU.
You are the one spouting delusional BS with no connection to gravity at all (except making things fall).

Gravity does not magically adjust to magically make all objects have the same mass.
That is just your delusional BS.

Back in reality, gravity applies a force proportional to mass.

The reason all objects fall from air at the same speed and acceleration, is because they all have more mass and density than the air does, so they all fall through it at the same speed. There is no force pulling things down to the surface.

If there is no force, there is no reason for them to move.
Them being more dense does not provide a reason.
Nor does it address the observable and measurable pressure gradient pushing them up.

That is confirmed with objects of less mass or density than the air, which rise up in air, not fall down through it.

Quite the opposite.
The fact that the net force on an object is the combination of what appears to be a downwards force proportional to mass and a force due the pressure gradient of the fluid, that downwards force proportional to mass is needed.

The same reason objects fall down from air, is why other objects rise up in air, their mass and or density compared to that of the air.

No, it isn't.
As above, we KNOW there is a pressure gradient in all fluids.
This is measurable.
This pressure gradient acts to force all objects upwards.
This is why objects "weigh" less in water than in air.
This pressure gradient is proportional to the density of the fluid, and is based upon a downwards force proportional to mass.

Your made up force is supposed to pull down all things from air, and adjust in strength to their mass, yet balloons rise up in air, while they also have mass

No, that is what YOUR made up force is meant to do; while entirely ignoring the air around the balloon.

Again, what you are doing is equivalent to putting a light kid on a see-saw, so they are near the ground, then putting a heavy kid on the other side and claiming gravity isn't real because the light kid went up.

You are entirely ignoring the heavy kid which gravity is also acting on.
The force of gravity acting on the heavy kid is what pushes the light kid up.

The same applies here.
The force acting on the air creates a pressure gradient which pushes the helium filled balloon up.
As I have already explained to you, we see this in other equivalent environments, like an accelerating vehicle, and a centrifuge.

So no, this observation is exactly what is expected with gravity. And it doesn't require you to entirely ignore the pressure gradient.
It also explains why heavier things are harder to lift.

Stop repeating the same dishonest refuted BS.

Why not make up another force, that will solve this mess?
And they said there is another force called ‘buoyancy’

You mean why not make observations of reality, clearly observing and measuring pressure gradients in fluids and understanding that this pressure gradient will act to push things up?

Why not be honest and say how you will entirely ignore this aspect of reality because it doesn't fit with your delusional BS.

Their mass and density explain both of these things, as it always does when it is true.

No it doesn't, not in the slightest.
Do you know why?
Because NEITHER have directionality.

No, you’re made up force that supposedly adjusts all objects of any mass, as if they’re all the SAME mass, pulling them all down at the same speed and acceleration within the air.

The reason all objects fall from air at the same speed and acceleration, is because they all have more mass and density than the air does, so they all fall through it at the same speed. There is no force pulling things down to the surface.

That is confirmed with objects of less mass or density than the air, which rise up in air, not fall down through it.

The same reason objects fall down from air, is why other objects rise up in air, their mass and or density compared to that of the air.

Your made up force is supposed to pull down all things from air, and adjust in strength to their mass, yet balloons rise up in air, while they also have mass, proving that no force exists, because it would pull down balloons too, since density of every other object will vary, even more than a balloon does, yet they are still ‘pulled down’ by that goofy force.

A balloon has the same or more mass when it is rising up in air, so they would be pulled down by this force that varies in strength to their mass. 

This alone showed there was no force involved here, it is claimed to pull down all objects, regardless of their mass or density. That killed their claim of a force, at that alone, but it didn’t

Why not make up another force, that will solve this mess?

And they said there is another force called ‘buoyancy’, to excuse the problems that killed their first made up force, which had failed to work as actual forces do.

Yet we know that only objects that are less or more dense than air, fall or rise up in air.

Their mass and density explain both of these things, as it always does when it is true.

Trubalonium2, are you sure you're not a sock puppet of scepticmaniac?

All of these problems were addressed in the 83 painful pages of the duncepressure thread. Buoyancy and density does not explain why things fall down to the ground, does it, hmm? It never has and never will. Heated air is lighter than cooler air, which enables hot air balloons to rise into the air, resisting the force of Earth's gravity. But the people standing in the basket under the balloon still weigh the same weight they did before stepping into the basket.

Gravity cannot be shielded, that's one way how we know buoyancy and density are wrong. Oh, and ofcourse duncepressure is wrong.

It is explained by the one, very same reason, without any sort of made up forces, because our actual forces work consistently and never need other forces to explain why they aren’t consistent at all times

somewhere.

You cannot have a force that is pulling down all things from air, which you say is also pulled to the Earths surface, and held above it, yet cannot pull down objects less dense than air, it should pull down all things of mass, lighter or greater mass than air. 

Another failure of this made up force, which cannot hold up, since it’s fake.

It is explained by the one, very same reason, without any sort of made up forces, because our actual forces work consistently and never need other forces to explain why they aren’t consistent at all times

No, your nonsense doesn't explain anything at all. Density has no directionality. It CANNOT explain why things fall.
You need to resort to so much extra BS to pretend it works.
Conversely, gravity works just fine and in an entirely consistent way without needing to make up other forces.

You cannot have a force that is pulling down all things from air, which you say is also pulled to the Earths surface, and held above it, yet cannot pull down objects less dense than air, it should pull down all things of mass, lighter or greater mass than air. 

Another failure of this made up force, which cannot hold up, since it’s fake.

Another failure from you.
Again, why not present it honestly.
According to your dishonest BS, a heavy kid on a see-saw making a light kid go up magically refutes gravity.

Again, STOP IGNORING THE AIR!
Gravity isn't just pulling down objects in the air.
It is also pulling down the air.
In order for the object to go down, the air must go up. In order for the air to go down the object must go up.
It is like 2 kids on a see-saw.

The more technically correct analysis is that it is pulling the air down, so it is pushes the air below down, creating a pressure gradient which pushes everything in the air up.

This applies for all fluids and explains why the measured weight of on object depends on the fluid it is emerged in and why objects less dense than the fluid go up.
And this pressure gradient is measurable.
So gravity does behave in a consistent manner, and produces results consistent with reality, and explains what is observed.

Conversely, your BS doesn't.

Objects in water will rise up or sink, and objects in air will rise up or fall through it, based on their relative mass and density to these two mediums.

That’s why all objects fall through air at the same speed and acceleration, as they are all have more mass and density than air, or they rise because they are less dense than air.

A submarine sinks down in water and rises when filled with air in it, based on its relative density to that of water.

No made up force or forces needed to explain all this.

The simplest explanation of all
is the correct one.

Objects in water will rise up or sink, and objects in air will rise up or fall through it, based on their relative mass and density to these two mediums.

Again, relative density explains NOTHING!
What that also entirely ignores is the objectively verifiable and measurable pressure gradient.
Fluids are observed to have a pressure gradient. This can be measured and found to be proportional to the density of the fluid and g.
Objects immersed in such a fluid will then be pushed upwards by that pressure gradient.
Again, this pressure gradient directly explains why objects are measured to have a reduced weight in a fluid, including why objects go up.

We also observe the equivalent occurring in accelerating reference frames.
e.g. a car/van accelerating, where a helium filled balloon moves forwards as the car accelerates forwards.
This is based upon the same pressure gradient.

You have no explanation at all for this pressure gradient and instead just need to repeatedly ignore it.

No made up force or forces needed to explain all this.

That's right, no need for your made up BS. Gravity explains it just fine. Including through creating a pressure gradient which pushes objects up.
No need for any of your delusional BS which doesn't explain anything.
And with parts of this explanation being used the same for accelerating vehicles, it sure sounds simple, consistent and transferable.

The simplest explanation of all
is the correct one.

So we can stick to gravity instead of your BS.

In order to be the simplest explanation you need it to be an explanation. You don't have that yet.
You cannot explain why being denser than air makes an object fall, when there is absolutely no reason to.
Until you have that you don't have an explanation.

You also have no explanation for the pressure gradient, or why object fall in direct defiance of this pressure gradient.
You have no explanation for why objects fall at a particular rate, and why this rate varies depending on location.
You have no explanation for why objects weigh less when immersed in a fluid.


Reality acts as if there is a downwards force acting on EVERYTHING, with that force being proportional to mass.
Once you have that, all of the above is explained.
There is no need for your density BS as it explains nothing and we already have a working explanation.

Why do we need a force to pull us down when we are up in air? There’s no need for a force to pull us down from air, our mass and density are greater than air, so we simply fall through it to the surface, where we all exist in the first place.

The Earths surface is where we originated, and the air above us was created for us to breathe and live on, or within water for other life forms.

You don’t have any reason for why we should not fall through air, we don’t exist within the air, we exist on the surface, and must be put up into air, in order to fall back through air afterwards to the surface.

Why would we need an external mechanism to pull us down from air, when our mass makes us fall through it to the surface once again?

What do you think would happen to us if this pulling down force didn’t exist as you believe?

You think we’d all just ‘float’ around on air or ‘space’?

Except we have more mass and density than air or ‘space’, right?

So why would air suspend us within it?  A helium balloon rises up in air, being less dense than air, and no made up force pulls it down to the surface, so why would our greater density not make us fall through air? 

What you say is another force called ‘buoyancy’, is just something less dense than air or water they’re within. Same as things with more density fall down through air and water because they are less dense than they are.

You have to make up two forces when none are needed at all.

The relative density of objects makes them rise or fall through air and water, nothing else needed, no pulling down force, no buoyancy force to cover for the flaws of the other force, it’s a complete mess!

Why do we need a force to pull us down when we are up in air?

Because we need forces to make things move.

our mass and density are greater than air

Which has no directionality and provides no reason to move in any direction.

origin

You have had your origin BS refuted countless times. No need for you to bring it up yet again.
Things DO NOT magically go back to their origin.

You don’t have any reason for why we should not fall through air

You don't have any reason for why we should.
If you want to claim it should just move without reason, then why down?
You don't have any reason for why we should not fall sideways, or upwards.
Even if you attempt to appeal to your BS origin (which you are yet to prove in any way), you can lift something up and to the right, why shouldn't it fall down and to the left?

It is quite simple why, because there is no reason for it to move that way. Instead, what is making it move is gravity.

Why would we need an external mechanism to pull us down from air, when our mass makes us fall through it to the surface once again?

Because our mass can't magically make us fall. We need a force to do that.

What do you think would happen to us if this pulling down force didn’t exist as you believe?

We would not be pulled down to the surface. Quite simple.

So why would air suspend us within it?

Why should air force us down?

A helium balloon rises up in air

Due to the pressure gradient in air, something you wish to ignore.
This pressure gradient should push everything UP.
But as that pressure gradient relies upon gravity, it wouldn't exist if you magically removed that downwards pulling force.

What you say is another force called ‘buoyancy’

No, I clearly explain how this is a direct result of gravity, and state that it is commonly referred to as buoyancy.
I also explain how this applies an upwards force to EVERYTHING in the fluid, including making objects appear to weigh less when immersed in a fluid.
I also explain how this pressure gradient is observable and measurable, and you just ignore that.
I also explain how this also works with acceleration, giving the example of a helium filled balloon in an accelerating car.

But because reality doesn't fit with your fantasy, you just dismiss it as a made up force.

You have to make up two forces when none are needed at all.

No, I use 1 force, when 1 force is needed, and explain how this force results in what is observed.
Buoyancy is not a magical additional force. It is the direct result of gravity.
You don't like that, especially because you cannot show any fault. So you just ignore it all and repeat the same pathetic lies.

All the evidence points to a force trying to make things go down.
You have nothing to show otherwise, and no explanation for why being more dense than the air should make things go down.

it’s a complete mess!

Your BS certainly is.
No explanation for why mass should magically make things move, and why it should go down.
Nothing to explain the observed and measurable pressure gradient.
Nothing to explain why objects defy this pressure gradient to go down.
Nothing to explain why things should accelerate at a particular rate.
Nothing to explain why this rate varies.

All you have is a baseless assertion to cling to to pretend Earth is flat, and blatant lies to pretend the mainstream model is wrong.

Why do we need a force to pull us down when we are up in air? There’s no need for a force to pull us down from air, our mass and density are greater than air, so we simply fall through it to the surface, where we all exist in the first place.

We simply fall.
Due to a force...

Cool

Why do we need a force to pull us down when we are up in air? There’s no need for a force to pull us down from air, our mass and density are greater than air, so we simply fall through it to the surface, where we all exist in the first place.

The Earths surface is where we originated, and the air above us was created for us to breathe and live on, or within water for other life forms.

You don’t have any reason for why we should not fall through air, we don’t exist within the air, we exist on the surface, and must be put up into air, in order to fall back through air afterwards to the surface.

Why would we need an external mechanism to pull us down from air, when our mass makes us fall through it to the surface once again?

What do you think would happen to us if this pulling down force didn’t exist as you believe?

You think we’d all just ‘float’ around on air or ‘space’?

Except we have more mass and density than air or ‘space’, right?

So why would air suspend us within it?  A helium balloon rises up in air, being less dense than air, and no made up force pulls it down to the surface, so why would our greater density not make us fall through air? 

What you say is another force called ‘buoyancy’, is just something less dense than air or water they’re within. Same as things with more density fall down through air and water because they are less dense than they are.

You have to make up two forces when none are needed at all.

The relative density of objects makes them rise or fall through air and water, nothing else needed, no pulling down force, no buoyancy force to cover for the flaws of the other force, it’s a complete mess!

If a doctor were to read this post of yours, it would be almost enough to lock you up in a sanitarium for an assessment.

Sorry. I didn't realise you were this far gone. I'm out. I'm done. Good luck with life.

Everything exists on the Earth, on its surface or in its waters, that is where all things were first created, after the Earth was created, while all that exists above the Earth, was created to be above Earth, to offer its light and beauty, for us to live and see above us.

This is the part you need to understand, that the Earth was created from the void, for all life to exist upon, to enjoy and hold as a gift, as special.

God created the Earth, and all life to exist on Earth, or in the heavens above Earth, for us to enjoy and use our imagination.

That’s all that exists, in our world, when it was all created at the beginning.

Everything on Earth was created to exist on the surface or waters of Earth, while everything above Earth was created to exist above Earth.

So why would God need to create a force to hold us down to the surface, or pull us down to the surface if above it?

When you always think of the Earth is that all around it, is an endless universe, with stars above Earth being trillions of miles away, and Earth is a ball, speeding through endless space, you’ll never understand why there is no such force that exists, no need to exist, to create it, to do so would make no sense, no logic to create, it would be useless and pointless.

Everything was first created to be on the Earths surface and waters, while the air was created to be above the surface, for us to breathe and so forth.

When there is no endless universe above the Earth, and the Earths surface is flat, and covered from above by the Firmament, with air and Sun and moon and stars below the Firmament, and all things on Earth were created to have more mass and density than the air above Earth, that is what makes things which have to first be PUT UP into air, fall down through it to the surface again.

There is a kinetic force created by things put up into air, which is having more mass and density than air.

If I asked you how helium balloons can rise upward in air unless there is some sort of force that exists above the air, PULLING them UPWARD, it is the same as when you claim there must be a force below objects in air that pulls them DOWNWARD!

So when you say there IS another force, buoyancy, it actually is due to their relative density to that of air, and that of water, which causes things to rise upward within air or water, it is not due to some sort of force at all, except the kinetic force which is created by things of more or less relative density than the medium they are within.

When objects rise up or fall down in the air or water, both are due to their relative density to that of air and water.

It works the same way in both directions things move in, one cause of both motions, in both mediums on Earth.

What about density causes onjects to be atrracted to each other?


- Cavendish experoment

Everything exists on the Earth, on its surface or in its waters, that is where all things were first created

Firstly, PROVE IT!
Stop just asserting delusional BS.

Secondly, and vastly more importantly, YOUR ORIGIN BS HAS BEEN REFUTED COUNTLESS TIMES!
Things don't magically go back to their origin.

So why would God need to create a force to hold us down to the surface, or pull us down to the surface if above it?

You can leave all your religious BS out of it, and stick to reality.

We know there is a force, because we can feel it resisting us when we lift heavy objects.
We know this force is proportional to mass, because the heavier the object, the harder it is to lift.

When you always think of the Earth is that all around it, is an endless universe, with stars above Earth being trillions of miles away, and Earth is a ball, speeding through endless space, you’ll never understand why there is no such force that exists, no need to exist, to create it, to do so would make no sense, no logic to create, it would be useless and pointless.

You mean I will never understand your delusional BS?
And instead, I will stick to reality, where a force is needed to accelerate objects to make them go down, and to resist those trying to lift it up?
That such a force makes perfect sense and is based upon mountains of evidence with you unable to show a single fault?

When there is no endless universe above the Earth, and the Earths surface is flat, and covered from above by the Firmament, with air and Sun and moon and stars below the Firmament, and all things on Earth were created to have more mass and density than the air above Earth, that is what makes things which have to first be PUT UP into air, fall down through it to the surface again.

Again, YOUR ORIGIN BS DOESN'T WORK.
IT takes a force to move an object to the right. That doesn't magically make it fall back to the left.

There is nothing special about directionality unless you have something to make it special.

For Earth, what makes it special is gravity, a force acting towards mass.
Things go down, because that is where the large amount of mass is.
Things don't just magically go down, they go to Earth.

Density cannot explain that, as density has no justification for the directionality.

Your origin BS cannot explain that, as the only justification it has for the directionality doesn't work.
If things did magically go back to their origin then they should go to a single point.
So if you move it to the right of that point, it should fall back to the left.

If I asked you how helium balloons can rise upward in air

And I explained how.
GRAVITY creates a pressure gradient in the air, due to the lower layers of air having to support the air above.
Again, this pressure gradient is directly measurable.

This means there is an upwards force acting on EVERYTHING in the air.
This means gravity, through the pressure gradient of the air, is exerting an upwards force on the balloon.
The net force on the object is then the sum of the downwards force directly due to gravity, and the upwards force indirectly due to gravity acting through the pressure gradient of the air.
If the downwards force is greater, it falls. If the upwards force is greater, it rises.

There is no problem with that, which is why you have made absolutely no attempt at refuting this explanation.
Instead you just blatantly lie to everyone by pretending buoyancy is just a made up force, entirely ignoring the fact that it is a logical consequence of gravity and the fact that the pressure gradient is experimentally verifiable and measurable.

If you want to pretend gravity doesn't exist, then you need an explanation for what is causing this pressure gradient, and an explanation for why objects defy this pressure gradient to go down.

unless there is some sort of force that exists above the air, PULLING them UPWARD

No, there is the air the object is in with a pressure gradient which is directly measurable which is pushing the object up.

it actually is due to their relative density to that of air, and that of water, which causes things to rise upward within air or water, it is not due to some sort of force at all

Again, density explains nothing.
You need a force acting to accelerate the object.

Why should a helium filled balloon go up?
Why should a lump of led go down?
If I break off a piece of stone from an outcropping, why should it fall away from that outcropping and go down?
If I kick a ball upwards and to the right, why does it follow a roughly parabolic trajectory where it goes down?

Stop just repeating the same refuted BS and start dealing with the refutation of that BS.

When you cannot find any object on Earth, which was not always on Earth, and when no object has landed on Earth from elsewhere, and don’t try to tell me about some ‘comets’ or ‘meteorites’ from ‘space’ landing down on Earth, because it’s just bs, without a shred of proof for it!

The evidence of all things originating on Earth is that all things have always been seen on Earth, since we first existed on Earth, and ever since then, and every day from now, and ten or a hundred years from now, they will be on Earth.

We weren’t here to see things before we came to exist, so it’s impossible to prove it, or prove otherwise, either.

But based on the evidence that exists, with all things being on Earth for thousands of years at least, we also know that nothing has come to Earth from elsewhere, in thousands of years either.

If you think that meteorites or comets have come down to Earth from ‘space’, we’d have more than the same two objects coming from ‘space’ all the time by now, just the same two objects and nothing else, would already make no sense at all. If it were true, that is

What would make your argument that all things originated from elsewhere BUT on Earth, be more likely than my claim they all DID originate on Earth?

The evidence supports my claim, the lack of any evidence is with your claim of being from ‘space’, which doesn’t even exist to begin with.

All regions of the air are less dense than most objects are, which is why all objects fall through the air downward at the same rate of acceleration and speed, and maximum speed.

Higher air pressure at lower altitudes does not push objects upward, or slow them down in falling through the air.

Helium balloons do not rise slower in greater air pressure than in less air pressure either.

They fall through air, and rise up in air, at the same rate of speed, no matter what the air pressure is.

That is because air is always less dense or more dense than the objects, which determines if they fall through it or rise up in it.

Pressure gradients have nothing to do with it. They all fall at the same speed through all pressure gradients.

The fact is, all things are on the surface, and exist on the surface. Nothing is in the air, or exists in air, so all things originate on the surface, every species of life is born on the surface, which is where they all originate from.

You also originated on the surface, you weren’t born in air or in ‘space’, right.

There is nowhere else you originated from but on the surface of Earth.

Maybe your ancient ancestors were born in space, or Planet Zimbot, but you originated from the Earth, so you’re wrong to say we can’t prove where we originated from, which is from the Earths surface.

There are so many flaws which prove your magical force is nonsense, it’s hard to count them all.

You’ve claimed there is a force within the Earth, or it’s ‘core’, that holds everything down to its surface, and pulls everything down to its surface from the air above the Earth, and adjusts how much strength of force is needed to make them all be pulled down from air at the same speed and acceleration.

How exactly would a force know every objects mass from miles away, instantly, cannot be explained or demonstrated or measured at all, but it’s their only excuse for it.

Except it would also pull down helium balloons, they also have mass and density like other objects do, so when they are rising up instead of being pulled down, this proves there is no such force at all.

No force is needed, either.

We originated on the Earths surface, remain on the surface from our greater mass and density than that of air, do not sink down through the surface, because it has more mass and density than we do.

You simply must have a force to explain your ball Earth speeding through space and spinning around, that would fling us off the Earth like a tiny bug!

When you cannot find any object on Earth, which was not always on Earth, and when no object has landed on Earth from elsewhere

We have, you just lie about.
You have NOTHING to support your entirely worthless and entirely baseless claim that everything magically originated on Earth.
It is based upon nothing more than your wilful ignorance and wilful rejection of reality.

We weren’t here to see things before we came to exist, so it’s impossible to prove it, or prove otherwise, either.

It is trivial to prove otherwise, with the countless observations of things from space coming down to Earth.
Your wilful rejection of that because it doesn't match your fantasy doesn't help your case. It just shows how dishonest you are, how little you care about the truth, how you are willing to reject any part of reality to try to prop up your fantasy.

But thanks for admitting your claim is entirely basis and you have no way to prove it.

But based on the evidence that exists

You mean your wilful rejection of the evidence.
Or alternatively, based upon only the evidence you accept.
That is not all the evidence that exists.

we also know that nothing has come to Earth from elsewhere, in thousands of years either.

And how do you know that?
The closest you have gotten is NOT knowing; coming up with crazy fantasy explanations for meteorites.

So if you wanted even a shred of integrity, that gives you NOT knowing.
If you were honest, and actually followed the evidence, then it would be knowing things have come from space, and yet they still fall down.

If you think that meteorites or comets have come down to Earth from ‘space’, we’d have more than the same two objects coming from ‘space’ all the time by now, just the same two objects and nothing else, would already make no sense at all. If it were true, that is

Why?
Yet again you just baselessly assert garbage with no justification at all.
Why should other things have come down? What others things should have come down?

But we have been over all of your BS before.
OBJECTS DON"T GO BACK TO WHERE THEY ORIGINATED.

Stop with this pathetic BS because it doesn't help you at all.

What would make your argument that all things originated from elsewhere BUT on Earth, be more likely than my claim they all DID originate on Earth?

Why must you continually lie about other people's arguments?
My argument is that SOME things have come down, as shown by all the evidence. The countless observations of objects from space coming to Earth.
That is what makes it more likely.

The evidence supports my claim

Lying will not help you.
The evidence shows you are wrong.

All regions of the air are less dense than most objects are, which is why all objects fall through the air downward at the same rate of acceleration and speed, and maximum speed.

Again, WHY?
What magic causes the object to go down? You have no reason for it at all.
And you are wrong, it is NOT the same rate.
The rate is measured to vary with location.

Higher air pressure at lower altitudes does not push objects upward

Yes it does.
The effects of pressure gradients are quite well established.
If you have an object with high pressure on one side and low pressure on the other, the fluid pushes the object from the higher to the low pressure.

So yes, the air, having a higher pressure below the object, pushes it up.

This is an inescapable fact that you need to deal with.

Pressure gradients have nothing to do with it. They all fall at the same speed through all pressure gradients.

Pressure gradients are very important, and explain why objects immersed in a fluid appear to weigh less and as an extension why objects less dense than the fluid goes up.

Again, this all makes perfect sense with gravity, as this pressure gradient is a direct result of gravity, and so the upwards force from it is a result from gravity as well.

It makes no sense without such a force.

The fact is, all things are on the surface, and exist on the surface.

Holding a ball up refutes that "fact" of yours.
It isn't a fact, it is delusional BS.

all things originate on the surface

That is your baseless claim, refuted by evidence, and which you are yet to even attempt to support except through blatantly lying to everyone with further baseless claims and wilful rejection of evidence.

There are so many flaws which prove your magical force is nonsense, it’s hard to count them all.

Then how about you stop with the pathetic BS about origin, and instead try to provide a single one, because you are yet to show any fault with gravity.

You’ve claimed there is a force within the Earth, or it’s ‘core’, that holds everything down to its surface

No, I haven't. That is your strawman.
I have stated that there is a force of attraction between mass.
i.e. mass attracts other mass with a force proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them.

and adjusts how much strength of force

There is no magical adjustment.
Like all forces, it is proportional to something.
Gravity is proportional to mass.

How exactly would a force know every objects mass from miles away

This is just you objecting to the idea of forces (and plenty of other things)
This is nothing special about gravity.

How does a fan know how large a sail is?
How does the sun know how large a solar panel is?
How does a magnet know how magnetic something is?
How does whatever is generating an electric field know what the charge on something is?

Your wilful ignorance doesn't make a flaw.

Except it would also pull down helium balloons

And it does. If you have a helium filled balloon in a vacuum chamber, it does fall.
What you are intentionally ignoring so you can LIE to everyone is the air, which has a pressure gradient which pushes the balloon up.

Again, it is like you are claiming a light kid on a see-saw going up is refuting gravity because you are intentionally ignoring the much heavier kid on the other side.

Repeating the same refuted BS just shows how dishonest you are and how desperate you are to pretend there are problems with gravity.
It has been explained why this is not a flaw at all so many times it isn't funny.
Yet you repeat this same dishonest BS because you have no actual flaws.

No force is needed, either.

Yet you cannot explain why things fall.
And all the evidence shows that if you want to move something, you need a force.

origin

Again, the fact that moving an object to the right does not cause it to fall to the left demonstrates your origin claim is pure BS.
The only way you could hope to have any chance of saving it is if you claim Earth is a perfect sphere and everything originated at the centre.

remain on the surface from our greater mass and density than that of air, do not sink down through the surface, because it has more mass and density than we do.

And more delusional BS.

You simply must have a force to explain your ball Earth speeding through space and spinning around, that would fling us off the Earth like a tiny bug!

We must have a force because a force is needed.
If your delusional BS was true, no force would be needed, not even with a RE in space.

And notice your blatant hypocrisy?
You are happy to boldly proclaim a force is needed to keep us from flying off Earth.
But you lie to everyone claiming no force is needed to oppose the pressure gradient trying to push everything up.
Why one and not the other?


So even after all that, still no flaws.
Just the same pathetic lies.

There are so many flaws which prove your magical force is nonsense, it’s hard to count them all.

You’ve claimed there is a force within the Earth, or it’s ‘core’, that holds everything down to its surface, and pulls everything down to its surface from the air above the Earth, and adjusts how much strength of force is needed to make them all be pulled down from air at the same speed and acceleration.

How exactly would a force know every objects mass from miles away, instantly, cannot be explained or demonstrated or measured at all, but it’s their only excuse for it.

Except it would also pull down helium balloons, they also have mass and density like other objects do, so when they are rising up instead of being pulled down, this proves there is no such force at all.

No force is needed, either.

We originated on the Earths surface, remain on the surface from our greater mass and density than that of air, do not sink down through the surface, because it has more mass and density than we do.

You simply must have a force to explain your ball Earth speeding through space and spinning around, that would fling us off the Earth like a tiny bug!

There are zero flaws with the globe Earth spinning ball model. There are innumerable flaws with the flat earth model.

The real argument here with you boils down to religion versus science. You are a literalist Christian mixed up in some funny fundamentalism Christian religion. It's obvious. Religion has always been at odds with science and you are living proof.

You can believe in religion with what the priests and church ministers say, or you can believe in science. Compromising doesn't work.

You believe in religion. So, I suggest you stick to what makes you all warm and fuzzy inside - stick to your religion, and forget all about science. You don't want to know about science. You aren't remotely interested in science. Religion is your reality.

Yet you cannot explain why things fall.
And all the evidence shows that if you want to move something, you need a force.

A rock is on the ground, and always was on the ground, before you lifted it up, and if you didn’t lift it up from the ground, it would still be on the ground.

The rock is not in air, or in your hand, beforehand. You had to lift it up with your hand, or it would still be on the ground.

Why is it always on the ground?

You were born on the ground, that’s where you originated from, right? You weren’t born within the air, or in ‘space’, or on the moon or on Saturn, or anywhere else!

The surface of Earth is where you originated from.

It doesn’t matter that we don’t know where rocks originated from, even though we’ve always seen them on Earths surface, it doesn’t matter if we can’t prove they originated here.

But we can prove that WE originated here, and you can’t excuse it as not being true, or not proven true.

That alone proves Earths surface is where we originated from, all life is originated from every day, before and after today, for thousands of years, at least.

What you are trying to argue, is that everything on Earth came from somewhere else, in ‘space’, whatever you think that is supposed to be, and over millions or trillions of years, everything floated or travelled by Earth, close enough for a made up magical force within Earth to ‘grab it and pull it down to the surface’, and this force has  held everything down to the surface ever since!

Except ‘space’ doesn’t exist, it is a lie, a trick, illusion, with a blackened sky, where objects cannot be seen or measured for distance, because size isn’t known for them, beforehand.

It’s easy to determine how far away a plane is, if you know what type of plane it is, we know its length, and can determine its distance or altitude above Earth from that.

But when we see a light in the distance at night, but don’t know what or where it is, we don’t know if it’s a huge light far away, or a small light close to us.  Even if the same light is seen from another point, far away from it, or many more points, far from it, we cannot determine it’s actual size, or what it is, or it’s distance away from us.


This bs about points over the surface will measure size of objects, doesn’t work when the points are all far from the objects, which are of unknown size to start with!


We can use reference points that we DO know the distance of, to determine the objects distance away from us, with other factors involved, though.

They always tell us that all the stars are trillions of miles away from Earth, in ‘light year’ measurements, supposedly.

We’ve now seen this is absolute bs, beyond any doubt.

We’ve now seen how stars are very unique and different from other stars, and seen details of stars, colours and patterns and movements, and changing their shapes, over and back again to one shape, or colours, among other things.

Telescopes showed us what the stars looked like, moved like, for the first time. 

And more than ever before today, and more in future.

When your side mentions stars, for how they appear and move, you always use stars that are circular in shape, as if all stars are circular in shape, and nothing else at all!!

I’ve shown you stars are not all circular in shape, and move different from other stars, and so forth.

The atmosphere was their original excuse about why stars always twinkled and sparkled in the skies, it was all caused by our atmospheric effects, or an effect, when there wasn’t any such effect at all.

There is a similar effect of atmosphere which causes a light far away to be blurry and sparkling out light, or twinkling the light, but only in certain conditions of atmoshpere, and at certain distances away from it, and heights above it, and it is not a permanent effect on a light, either.

Making up anything that’s close enough to work as an answer, does not answer anything at all.

Simply because the atmosphere distorts what is seen somewhere, that is all objects and air around objects, it is not only the objects which are distorted, because the effects are found within the air, not from any objects, which are only within that air.

The effects of atmosphere occur along and just above the surface, under cloud altitudes, not higher than clouds.

Because there’s so little air at higher altitudes than clouds are found at. 

We know very well, that these effects always occur near the surface, just above the surface, or not much higher than over cities, where smog is found over them.

Same as your heat hazes are found near the surface.

Smog, fog, heat hazes, mirages, mists, rains, snowstorms, whiteouts, smoky air, from fires, or chemical pollutants, etc. - will occur near or over the surface, where most of the air is present.

They are created out of certain conditions at the time, and area, and they later die out, over and over again

So we came from the ground and return to the ground.

So theres a force that pulls us back to the ground.

Hurray
Glad we agree

Next
Can we agree what to call this force?

So we came from the ground and return to the ground.

So theres a force that pulls us back to the ground.

Hurray
Glad we agree

Next
Can we agree what to call this force?

No, our greater mass and density than that of air is why we are on the surface, where we all originated from.

That does not require any sort of external force. Our relative mass and density keep us on the surface.

We only need a force to go up into air, being we have more mass and density than air does.

And again, it’s our greater mass and density than the air, when we are within air, that makes us fall through the air afterwards.

We ourselves will create a force from our motion of falling through air, of course.

But nothing pulls us down from air, we simply fall through it being of greater mass and density than the air.

This is confirmed by things that have less density than the air, because they rise up in air, being less dense than air.

Why would buoyancy be a force of objects less dense than air, but not of more density than air making them fall in air?

Because you need a made up pulling down holding down force for your ball Earth speeding through endless ‘space’, of course! And another made up force to cover for glitches that show it’s just made up

Once we use a force to jump into the air, there requires a force to bring us back to the ground.

How is it possible to require a force to escape the ground yet magically no force to return to the ground?
You never had to pick up something heavy?

Lets take the ground put of the equation.
You have a heavy box on the ground.
You push it 10ft forward.
To get it to go back to the start you have to 1.  Push it back   2.  Do nothing, it will return on its own bcause that was the origin.




Playing if fluid densities you find out the upward force is from the pressure gradient.
The pressure of the displaced fluid pushes things up.
Changing the fluid density can move an object up and down.
Removing the fluid causes objects to fall.

I see you have realised you have been entirely refuted yet again, and you need to flee from the topic yet again to pretend that your delusional fantasy is true.

A rock is on the ground, and always was on the ground, before you lifted it up, and if you didn’t lift it up from the ground, it would still be on the ground.

Again, we have been over this delusional BS of yours repeatedly.
Firstly, you have no basis for that claim AT ALL!

Secondly, this works equally well for moving the rock to the right.
It doesn't magically fall back to the left.
So clearly the point of origin does not explain it.

But we can prove that WE originated here, and you can’t excuse it as not being true, or not proven true.

I originated in a particular location. I don't feel any force pulling me back to that location. Instead, it just seems to be pulling me down.
So again, that excuse doesn't work.

And again, steam can easily originate on the surface, yet it goes up.

So again, that clearly is NOT the explanation.

You are just spouting crap which clearly explains nothing.

What you are trying to argue, is that everything on Earth came from somewhere else, in ‘space’,

No. I'm not. Not in the slightest.

That is just your pathetic, dishonest strawman which you invent because you can't deal with what I am actually arguing.
What I am actually arguing is that you have no basis at all to conclude that everything magically originated on Earth; that there is evidence that things have come from space; and most importantly, that even if your dishonest delusional BS was true and everything magically originated on the surface, that still doesn't explain it, as things go DOWN (or up) not magically back to their point of origin.

Except ‘space’ doesn’t exist

Except there are mountains of evidence showing it does exist.
And unless you have some magic to replace it, the simple fact that pressure decreases with increasing altitude means it MUST exist.

We can use reference points that we DO know the distance of, to determine the objects distance away from us, with other factors involved, though.

Yes, like measuring parallax with Earth.

\
We’ve now seen this is absolute bs, beyond any doubt.

No, you have asserted it, with no justification at all.

We’ve now seen how stars are very unique and different from other stars

No, we haven't.
We have seen blurry, out of focus videos.
You have made no attempt to show any consistency for a single star, to show that different are actually different.
When pushed to justify your BS you just try to shift the burden of proof.
But all that BS can sit in your other thread.

For this one, try explaining what magic makes things fall, when all the evidence shows it is gravity.

No, our greater mass and density than that of air is why we are on the surface, where we all originated from.

And notice how with this you directly contradict yourself.
This shows the origin has nothing to do with it.
Instead, it is magical density which magically makes things go down.

Except we can easily place more dense objects above less dense objects.

That does not require any sort of external force.

Yes, it does.
You need a force to make it accelerate.
Density is not a force, so can't make it accelerate.
You need a force to give it directionality.
Density has no directionality.

We only need a force to go up into air, being we have more mass and density than air does.

No, we need a force to go in any direction.
That is why horse drawn carts used horses, to make it move.
It isn't just up that is special.
You need a force to make things accelerate.

We can also see your claim is BS by considering an object in mid-air.
It has less dense air below it, so why would it go into it?
If it takes a force to move an object into a less dense medium e.g. by lifting it off the ground, then why doesn't it work the same when trying to move the object down?

We ourselves will create a force from our motion of falling through air, of course.

No, a force causes our motion.

But nothing pulls us down from air

Then why does all the evidence support gravity, i.e. a force of attraction between masses?

This is confirmed by things that have less density than the air

Which are pushed up by the measurable pressure gradient caused by the weight of the fluid caused by gravity.
Because the force from the pressure gradient is greater than the force directly acting on the object, it goes up.

This is confirmed from measurements of the pressure gradient which apply a force to ALL objects immersed in a fluid.
This is also confirmed by objects more dense than the fluid weighing less when immersed in that fluid, by an amount expected from this pressure gradient.

Again, all the observations are 100% consistent with gravity.

Why would buoyancy be a force of objects less dense than air, but not of more density than air making them fall in air?

Because buoyancy is simply the name given to the force from the pressure gradient due to gravity.
This buoyant force acts on ALL objects, not just those less dense than the fluid.
This is an upwards force on these objects, reducing their weight.

Because you need a made up pulling down holding down force for your ball Earth speeding through endless ‘space’, of course! And another made up force to cover for glitches that show it’s just made up

Why do you continue to repeat the same refuted BS?
Do you want to make it abundantly clear that the only way you can pretend there is an issue with the RE or pretend your fantasy is true is by blatantly lying to everyone?

As has been explained to you repeatedly, if your delusional BS actually worked, it would work better on a RE, because you could use the centre of Earth as the origin.

We need a very really force acting to make things go down, to explain why they go down. To explain why there is a pressure gradient observed in fluids. To explain why this pressure gradient doesn't just push everything up into the sky.
And once we have that downwards force, no extra force is needed as buoyancy is a direct result of gravity.

So it is just 1 force, a force needed to make reality work.
Without it you have crap which has no chance of explaining reality.

You can pretend gravity isn't mass attracting mass, and instead pretend it is just a magic downwards force to try to explain all that, but you still need that force.

We only need a force to put things up into air, because they are denser than air, and originate on the surface, not in air.

When you put something up into air, you are changing their place of origin, and their medium, to another medium not of their origin.

You threw them in one direction, upward, at first, right? Why would you not expect them to fall in the opposite direction to the one you threw them in? 

Objects are on ground, unless put upward into air, by a force. They fall through air again by their greater density than air.

It needs no force to fall through air, their greater density than air makes them fall through it down to the surface again.

Relative density of objects and the medium they’re within create their movement up or down in the medium. A sun rises or sinks in water by its relative density to water. It has  more mass but rises in water because it is less dense than water. Same as a helium balloon in less dense air rises up in it.

We only need a force to put things up into air, because they are denser than air, and originate on the surface, not in air.

Again, ORIGIN DOESN"T WORK!
We have been over this countless times.
It takes energy and force to move something to the right, but it doesn't magically fall back to the left.

You threw them in one direction, upward, at first, right? Why would you not expect them to fall in the opposite direction to the one you threw them in?

No, I threw them to the right.
I don't expect them to fall in the direction opposite I threw them because there is no force trying to accelerate them that way, and I never observe such an insane occurrence.

Yet according to your delusional BS, it should magically fly back.

So that is clearly pure BS which has no place in this discussion.

It takes a force to move anything.
But it takes an additional force to move things upwards.
As if there is a force trying to move it down, a force which resists moving it up, a force which needs to be overcome.

They fall through air again by their greater density than air.

Density has no directionality. It provides no reason for an object to fall, nor for an object to magically overcome the pressure gradient trying to push it up.

So yes, it needs a force to allow it to overcome the pressure gradient and to make it accelerate and to provide the directionality.

Relative density of objects and the medium they’re within create their movement up or down in the medium.

WHY?
What magic causes more dense objects to move at all?
Why does this make them go down?
Why does it magically make their apparent weight reduce when immersed into a fluid?

When you cannot find any object on Earth, which was not always on Earth, and when no object has landed on Earth from elsewhere, and don’t try to tell me about some ‘comets’ or ‘meteorites’ from ‘space’ landing down on Earth, because it’s just bs, without a shred of proof for it!

The evidence of all things originating on Earth is that all things have always been seen on Earth, since we first existed on Earth, and ever since then, and every day from now, and ten or a hundred years from now, they will be on Earth.

We weren’t here to see things before we came to exist, so it’s impossible to prove it, or prove otherwise, either.

But based on the evidence that exists, with all things being on Earth for thousands of years at least, we also know that nothing has come to Earth from elsewhere, in thousands of years either.

If you think that meteorites or comets have come down to Earth from ‘space’, we’d have more than the same two objects coming from ‘space’ all the time by now, just the same two objects and nothing else, would already make no sense at all. If it were true, that is

Oh, what a mess. It’s hard to imagine more utter nonsense. Meteors have been falling towards us for a long time. What about the Tunguska meteor? or is he also just a fairy tale?