Density doesnt make things go up or down, gravity does.

Throw out an object from a plane into the air.

How about something you can do in an enclosed car maintaining speed at a consistent 55 mph.

You can lightly toss a baseball up in the air then have it fall back into your hand.

The ball in the car to your frame of reference goes straight up and straight down.  An outside observer sees the ball path move in the direction of the car in an arc.  Where the ball ends back in the hand 10 or 30 feet from when it was tossed up. 

There is nothing stopping the ball in the FE model from just keep floating up.  In fact, there is less air resistance up.  So if you think there is nothing supporting the ball, there is also nothing to resist it from rising. 

The ball is already traveling in the direction of the car.  Just hold the ball in your open hand and drop your hand.  The ball drops.  Why.  There is more resistance down than the ball just traveling straight in the line of travel with the car.

What force causes the ball to travel down despite the car moving forward and the momentum of the ball is in the direction of travel with the car where down is into more air resistance where there is less air resistance up?

Again.  I can push a car in neutral all day long on a smooth garage floor.  As soon as I push the car up an incline like a ramp, I can’t. Why.  What force is acting on the car to prevent me pushing it up an incline despite the mechanical advantage of wheels where I pushed the car around the garage in neutral all day long. 

Everything is on the surface, and always has been on the surface, and nothing is in air, and never has been in air.

Nothing is in ‘space’ and is pulled down to Earths surface by a made up force.  There are countless things on Earths surface and always have been on the surface as we know it from day one and ever since then, and ever in future will be on the surface.

From countless things always being on the surface since day one and ever since, along with nothing that has ever been in ‘space’ or in air being pulled down to the surface since day one or ever since then, but please don’t claim that one specific object called a ‘comet’ is in ‘space’ and is pulled to Earth, again and again, but no other object ever has been ‘pulled down’ to the surface, because that’s even worse for your argument, to claim that the countless unique things on the surface all were ‘in space’ and were ‘pulled down to Earths surface’ by your made up force, yet they were all on the surface when we first were here and ever since then, and now the only thing that gets ‘pulled down to Earth’ are comets once in awhile, for some strange reason!!

Everything is on the surface, and always has been on the surface, and nothing is in air, and never has been in air.

Repeating the same pathetic assertion with no justification at all will not help you.
It in no way addresses the countless issues raised against your pathetic BS.

Again:
THINGS DO NOT RETURN TO THEIR ORIGIN!
If I move something to the right, it does not magically fall back to the left.
And it clearly isn't moving towards the surface either.
If I pull something diagonally away from a hill, it doesn't fall back diagonally, going directly towards the nearest part of the surface, instead it goes down.
If I break something off a vertical cliff face, it does not go back to the cliff face, it goes down.
If I break something off an overhang, off the bottom surface, it still falls down, directly away from the surface.
If I dig a really deep hole and push something into it, it still falls down, going below the surface.

Again, your pathetic BS clearly doesn't work.
Things do not magically return to their origin, regardless of if you want to have some shred of honesty and have that as a point, or be a lying POS and pretend it should be an entire surface.

Likewise, that does NOTHING to negate the fact a force is needed.
We need one to explain why things accelerate.
We need one to explain why they compress springs and can otherwise be measured on a scale.
We need one to explain why the pressure gradient of the atmosphere exists and why it doesn't push everything up.

Again, your pathetic BS doesn't work and has no chance to.

Our place of origin means what environment and medium of origin.

You can lightly toss a baseball up in the air then have it fall back into your hand.

The ball in the car to your frame of reference goes straight up and straight down.  An outside observer sees the ball path move in the direction of the car in an arc.  Where the ball ends back in the hand 10 or 30 feet from when it was tossed up. 

There is nothing stopping the ball in the FE model from just keep floating up.  In fact, there is less air resistance up.  So if you think there is nothing supporting the ball, there is also nothing to resist it from rising. 


Turbs.  Baseballs used to be made of leather.  And the “medium” for leather is a biological animal.

Why does a baseball made out of leather fall back down to “earth” and not fly off to its medium of a biological animal. 

And how do you accelerate a mass without unbalanced forces again? 

Everything is on the surface, and always has been on the surface, and nothing is in air, and never has been in air.

What about clouds?

Clouds have the same density as air, so they remain in air, and move along in air by the winds in air.

You need to use a force to throw the baseball up into air, or it will be on the surface.

The answer to all that is relative density of an object to the medium it is within.

Your made up force would not care about anything’s density or mass, it would hold all things down to the surface, regardless of their density or mass.  That’s why it’s just a made up phone force. It doesn’t work as it really would if it actually existed

What makes a sub rise up or sink down in water?

Its relative density to the water is what decides whether it rises up or sinks down in the medium it’s within, which is water.

You have two made up forces that neither can explain why it rises up or sinks down in water. It is relative density of the sub to the density of water which makes it rise up or sink down in water. No force needed here, nor two forces needed either. Maybe you need to make up a third force to explain it, these two sure don’t work at all!!

Relative density easily explains why all objects of different mass and density fall through air at the same rate. Because all objects have greater relative mass and density than the air, making them fall at the same rate through the air due to all having more relative density than air.

Clouds have the same density as air, so they remain in air, and move along in air by the winds in air.

Clouds are made of water, aren't they?  Are you saying that water has the same density as air?

The question in the post was

Density doesn’t make things go up and done, gravity does’

Except when another made up force makes things go up 😂

Clouds have the same density as air, so they remain in air, and move along in air by the winds in air.

No, the density of clouds varies. They have water droplets, and are typically suspended by currents in the air.

You need to use a force to throw the baseball up into air

I also need a force to move it to the right, yet that doesn't make it fall back to the left.
This shows that there is always a force acting on it trying to move it down.

Your made up force

No, that is your strawman, where things just things just magically occupy the same space.

What makes a sub rise up or sink down in water?

Again, already explained in several ways.
If you want the simple one, it is a balance between the weight (i.e. the force due to gravity) of the sub and the water is displacing.
If the sub weighs more, it goes down and the water goes up. If the water weighs more, it goes down and the sub goes up.
That is because we are in reality, where we can't have the sub and the water occupy the same space.

It is just like 2 kids on a see saw.
The heavier one goes down, the lighter ones goes up.
A child can understand this. But apparently it is entirely beyond your comprehension.
And so you need to continually lie to everyone.

Except when another made up force makes things go up 😂

Again, that is just your strawman.
Gravity makes things go down, and makes thing go up when it is making something else go down.

Meanwhile, you still have no explanation for why density should make things go down.
Instead you just magically assert it does.

So gravity, a consistent coherent explanation which explains what is observed in reality vs "it just does cause magic".

And makes you magic even more pathetic, in order for it to work, you need to ignore reality.
You need to ignore that there is a pressure gradient pushing everything up, because that destroys your BS.
You need to ignore that objects have weight, that there is clearly a force acting on the object which can be measured such as with a scale.

Right, whatever gravity is or is not doing that proves it doesn’t exist as an actual force, is what another made up force was needed to explain as doing instead of the first made up force that failed to work out as it would if it existed.

Right, whatever gravity is or is not doing that proves it doesn’t exist as an actual force, is what another made up force was needed to explain as doing instead of the first made up force that failed to work out as it would if it existed.

So you will just entirely ignore my post and repeat the same pathetic, already refuted BS?

How about you try reading my post, to understand how gravity make things go down AND UP!
And that a separate magical force is not needed, but merely a direct consequence of gravity.

Again, gravity has not failed. You are yet to provide a single instance where it does.
Isntead you just repeat the same pathetic refuted BS, i.e. you blatantly lie to everyone.

How would your made up force you’ve always claimed pulls all things above the Earth, down to the Earths surface, fail to pull all things down to Earth or hold them down to Earth?

Because it’s not an actual force, which is consistent in what it does and doesn’t do, in any situation or scenario.

Actual forces don’t need another force to explain what it would really do but fails to do, actual forces don’t need to explain things it should be doing, actual forces always do what they should do, they don’t need another force to solve their problems and failures of consistency in how they act or don’t act as they would as a real force.

What one thing alone which destroys your made up force, is that it is supposedly pulling down all objects of various masses and densities at the very same, single rate of speed, and one same single rate of accelerating all objects of different masses and densities.

That’s the most ridiculous thing and impossible to explain, there are no actual forces that could ever do such magical feats as that one.

If your bs force is somehow able to equalize its level of strength needed to pull them down at the same rate, based on each of their mass and density, or just mass, it must have the ability to detect their specific and exact mass and density, and then adjust its strength to their specific mass in exact proportion to the objects, in order to use millions of different levels of strength on each object, to pull them down at the same speed!

There’s nothing more convoluted than trying to make up a ridiculous story that isn’t even fit for a fairy tale, being so hopelessly off of any reality.

When your force pulls all things of any mass and density down to Earth at the same speed, that means your force pulls all things of all masses and all densities, whether less or more dense or less or more mass, all are pulled down to the surface by your incredible force, yet this fails to be true, once again.

That force should pull all things of any mass and any density down to the surface, for your argument to work as you claim it does.

There’s absolutely no reason it wouldnt pull down a helium balloon because NOW it cares about an objects density being a shield against the force that’s supposed to pull all things down to Earth of any mass or density!

Oops, that didn’t work out very well either

While you’re incapable of answering for your problems with another made up force and a bunch of other made up excuses, that will never solve your real problem. You cannot simply think you can make up some sort of force and think it would work for all things, and think whatever it fails to answer for can be another made up force to solve for, and excuses to solve other problems with. That’s what you have made up as a convoluted mess of trash now. It’s never going to work, it only becomes more convoluted and an uglier mess of nonsense upon other nonsense.

Of course your story that has a force that pulls all things down to Earth is never going to work at all. They all fall through air at the same speed, so there must be a reason their mass and density don’t matter within the air, only that they must all have more mass and density than the air they’re within at that time.

Relative density explains all of these things you cannot ever explain with made up forces or excuses.

The factor in all cases is relative density. Nothing else is needed but that to explain all of these things.

A sub in water has the same mass when sinking down or rising up in water, or slightly more mass when rising up in water.

Your made up force doesn’t explain this confliction. It should always pull the sub down in water to the surface at the bottom of the waters, and hold it down to the bottom surface. It’s density wouldn’t matter at all, your force pulls all things down of any density, and will detect each objects density, to then adjust its strength to its density, to pull all things down with various levels of different strength so they are all pulled down at the same speed. It also fails to pull down things based on their density, so it fails to work at all then.

A sub in water has the same mass when sinking down or rising up in water, or slightly more mass when rising up in water.

No.  On the surface, a submarine is positively buoyant.  In order to submerge, a sub will take on extra mass in the form of ballast water until it becomes negatively buoyant.  While cruising submerged, it will discharge some of the ballast until it becomes neutrally buoyant.

How would your made up force you’ve always claimed pulls all things above the Earth, down to the Earths surface, fail to pull all things down to Earth or hold them down to Earth?

Maybe instead of acting like a complete imbecile, you should read what I have already provided.

Or again, the simple version.
Set a see-saw.
Place a light object on one side, it goes down.
Now place a heavy object on the other side.
This heavy object going down results in a torque on the see-saw, rotating it about the pivot point, so the other side goes up.
That makes the light object go up.

Again, children understand when playing.
Yet you are acting like a complete imbecile that fails to understand such a basic concept.

And this is transferable to other forces as well.

Just what are you hoping to achieve by acting like such a complete imbecile?

Actual forces don’t need another force to explain what it would really do but fails to do

Sure they do, all the time when multiple forces are acting.
e.g. a sail boat with a sail out in the wind, but moored at a dock.
The wind says it should go, but it doesn't. Why? Because of the tension in the rope holding it to the dock.

But in this case, it is just you blatantly lying to everyone.
In this situation gravity doesn't need another force and we observe what is expected for gravity.

Yet again, you spout complete and utter crap to pretend gravity is wrong, while ignoring the refutation of your pathetic crap.

Again, you are yet to show a single fault or inconsistency, you just keep repeating the same pathetic refuted lies; showing everyone what a worthless, lying, subhuman POS you are.

What one thing alone which destroys your made up force, is that it is supposedly pulling down all objects of various masses and densities at the very same, single rate of speed, and one same single rate of accelerating all objects of different masses and densities.

Wrong again.
In the absence of other forces, it accelerates objects at the same rate, which is expected due to gravity being a force proportional to mass.
Just like electromagnetism accelerates all objects with the same mass to charge ratio at the same rate.
That is nothing surprising at all.

This was already demonstrated by a simple question you decided to give the insane for and then fled from the follow up.

Again, how does your magic know that the object was split into 2 so its needs to double the force?
Why isn't it providing the same force to each bit of mass in the object, regardless of if it is a single object or split into 2?

You can't answer these because it relies upon pure magic.
While gravity address it just fine and consistently.

If your bs force is somehow able to equalize its level of strength

Again, gravity does not magically "equalise its level of strength" or any BS like that.
The gravitational field has a particular strength and acts on mass in that field.
The greater the mass of the object, the greater the force.
This is trivial to understand.

There’s nothing more convoluted than trying to make up a ridiculous story that isn’t even fit for a fairy tale, being so hopelessly off of any reality.

Yet here you are, still doing that.
Maybe you should stop with all the convoluted BS?

There’s absolutely no reason it wouldnt pull down a helium balloon

And it does.
But in order for the helium balloon to go down, the air needs to go up.
They can't occupy the same space.
And it is also trying to pull the air down.
So again, it is like the 2 objects on the see-saw.
The heavy one goes down, the light one goes up.
Again, a child can understand this.
Yet here you are, acting like a complete imbecile that entirely fails to understand such a basic concept.

Or for the more complex explanation, the real, measurable, verifiable pressure gradient in the air (or any other fluid, which is a direct result of gravity and the fluid being supported) is also pushing the balloon up.
Something your delusional BS can't address at all and needs to repeatedly flee from.

Oops, that didn’t work out very well either

Your pathetic BS never works out.

While you’re incapable of answering for your problems

There you go blatantly lying yet again.
Firstly, you are yet to show any problems.
You have pathetic lies.
Secondly, and far more importantly, I HAVE ANSWERED FOR THEM!
I have explained why your arguments are pure BS.
And what is your response?
Like the worthless, subhuman, lying POS you are, you just ignore and repeat the same pathetic BS.

Can you show any fault with my explanation/answers?
No, none at all.
You just ignore it all because it destroys your BS.
Showing everyone how truly pathetic and dishonest you are.

It’s never going to work

Then why are you unable to show a single fault and instead resort to repeating the same pathetic, refuted lies?

Relative density explains

Absolutely nothing, because it provides no reason for any object to move in any direction.
It fails to explains the pressure gradient.
It fails to explain why the pressure gradient isn't pushing everything up.
It fails to explain why objects have a clearly measurable force acting on them such as we see when we place them on a scale.
It fails to explain why objects all accelerate at basically the same rate in air.
It fails to explain why this rate varies over Earth.

It explains NOTHING!

A sub in water has the same mass when sinking down or rising up in water

This depends on exactly how you view the sub, especially its ballast tanks.
If you want to view the sub in its entirety, including everything in the ballast tanks, the mass does vary.
When they want to sink, they let air out the top and water in the bottom. This results in the mass in the tanks increasing due to the added water.
This makes the sub heavier and means the downwards force acting on it from gravity directly is less than the upwards force from the pressure gradient (i.e. gravity acting indirectly on it) so it sinks.
To raise, they force more air in which pushes the water out, reducing the mass, and making the downwards force directly from gravity less, so it rises.

Gravity explains this trivially, and the explanation has already been provided.
You have failed to show any fault at all with this explanation, and instead just lie to everyone.

your force pulls all things down of any density, and will detect each objects density, to then adjust its strength to its density

No, that is not my force. That is your strawman. As repeatedly explained.

Now care to stop repeating the same pathetic lies and instead if you want to say there is no explanation, actually deal with the explanation provided. Stop spamming the same pathetic refuted BS.
The only goal you will achieve by doing so is clearly demonstrating to everyone beyond any sane doubt that you are a worthless, pathetic, lying, subhuman POS, that is a waste of the oxygen you breathe.

Two objects of different mass placed on each end of a scale or seesaw held up in its middle, and the heavier object goes downward on the same board the lighter object is put on, so the heavy object going down on the same board makes the lighter object lift upward on it!!

Thanks for stating the obvious here!

Nothing to do with your made up force or forces at all, though.

To raise, they force more air in which pushes the water out, reducing the mass, and making the downwards force directly from gravity less, so it rises.

But your made up force is pulling all things down to Earth and holding all things to Earth, of any and all masses and densities of all things on Earth, saying this force holds them down to Earth, pulls them down from air to the Earth…

If that was true, everything must be pulled down to Earth from air and held down to the Earth, no exceptions to that claim are acceptable or permitted, for the claim must be true or is not true.
 
First and the very worst problem your claim of a force is, that there’s nothing of proof for it even existing at all, nothing to demonstrate it exists, so fails right then, in fact.

They told us this unproven to exist force was really true, while nothing proved it even existed at all, as anything at all, let alone an actual force, which is some huge leap to make with no proof to start with!!

It’s trash, and nothing else but trash

But your made up force

Then why can’t I push a car in neutral up an incline when I can push the same car around a garage all day long. 

What makes a ball thrown straight up slow down faster than what is accounted for by air air resistance, stop, change direction 180 degrees, then accelerate straight down.


How do make a mass accelerate without a force.

Why does a bullet fired with a level barrel and a bullet dropped from the same time hit the ground in the same amount of time. 

Turbs .  In your butchered explanation of butchering RE and mass is attracted to mass, what makes things return to your supposed origin without a force like gravity. 

Two objects of different mass placed on each end of a scale or seesaw held up in its middle, and the heavier object goes downward on the same board the lighter object is put on, so the heavy object going down on the same board makes the lighter object lift upward on it!!
Thanks for stating the obvious here!

Now maybe you can think and apply that to an object in a fluid.
A dense object going down in the fluid pushes the fluid up.
A light object in the fluid is pushed up by the fluid.

The fluid is acting as both the other object and the see-saw.

SO quite relevant to what is being discussed.
Your pathetic BS is like claiming that heavy object pushing the light object up is defying gravity.

It is pathetic and trivial to see is pure BS.

Nothing to do with your made up force or forces at all, though.

Again, I'm not the one making up forces.
I am the one sticking to reality.
Including the pressure that exists in all fluids, which you are desperate to ignore because it simply doesn't work in your BS fantasy. You need it to not exist in your fantasy.

But your made up force

No, that is YOUR made up force.
Your pathetic strawman because you can't show a fault with gravity.

and holding all things to Earth

Again, that is your strawman.
In reality, gravity is simply a force.
It is not magic.
It cannot magically hold all things down regardless of what other forces are acting on it.

pulls them down from air to the Earth…

Again, gravity pulls everything, including air.

everything must be pulled down to Earth from air and held down to the Earth, no exceptions to that claim are acceptable or permitted

Yet you just admitted there is, in the simple case of a see-saw.

Again, what happens with the light object?
Is it pulled down? Or does it go up because of the heavier object on the other side?

Again, a child can understand this. Why are you pretending to be such an imbecile?
Or are you not pretending?

First and the very worst problem your claim of a force is, that there’s nothing of proof for it even existing at all, nothing to demonstrate it exists

Except the plenty of examples which have been shown which you just ignore or dismiss.
There are the simple examples of objects falling, or the weight they impart on a scale.
The further example of how this downwards varies over Earth.
But you also have more direct examples like the Cavendish experiment, which you refuse to try and instead make up pathetic excuses about.

So your BS fails right there.

But even if you want to ignore what is the actual cause, the simple fact is simple observations of reality DEMAND a downwards force acting on objects which is proportional to their mass.

You want to lie to everyone and say it is just density. But that doesn't work.
Because of the pressure gradient. Something you are desperate to ignore.
When you factor in the pressure gradient, your density BS turns out to be a downwards force proportional to mass and an upwards force from the pressure gradient.
And now density is not required. You just use those 2 forces.

So it is your pathetic BS that is trash.


And as usual, you have yet again ignored the refutation of your pathetic BS and just spammed the same crap again and again.

Quote from: turbonium2 on July 06, 2025, 03:42:09 AM

A sub in water has the same mass when sinking down or rising up in water, or slightly more mass when rising up in water.

No.  On the surface, a submarine is positively buoyant.  In order to submerge, a sub will take on extra mass in the form of ballast water until it becomes negatively buoyant.  While cruising submerged, it will discharge some of the ballast until it becomes neutrally buoyant.

It is called density, and not a made up force they called ‘buoyancy’ can cover for the failure of their first made up force works either.

Again, what explains all of these things, all of the problems they cannot excuse with two made up forces?

The explanation doesn’t require made up forces, which still don’t explain anything at all. They cannot, they’re made up and not real.

Why would a sub rise up or float on water, when your first made up force should pull it down through the water like everything else is pulled down by it, supposedly?

Because the sub is less dense than water, of course, so it rises up in water and floats on water, being less dense than water, while far more mass than water.

Yet why does your first made up force care about anything’s density? It would pull everything down regardless of their densities. But it doesn’t pull them down, when it would if it existed. So it does not exist at all. You cannot pick things it can do and ignore things it cannot do but would do if it was an actual force. There’s no consistency or logic with your made up force, that’s what happens when you make things up like that, they all fail to hold up as valid. Excuses and picking what fits and ignoring the rest doesn’t work, it fails miserably as a bs claim.

Another made up force had to be created because the first one stunk out once again.

There’s nothing about an object being less or more dense than water or air that would hinder your first force if it really existed at all.

When a sun rises up in water, that proves your first made up force is garbage.

The same factor which determines if an object rises up or sinks in water, whether an object rises up or falls down in air, is absolutely proven to be their RELATIVE DENSITY TO WATER AND TO AIR.

Nothing else would ever explain this but relative density. It decides their direction of movement up or down in both mediums, in any mediums in fact.

They claim a sub rises up in water because of buoyancy, but sinks down in water being pulled by gravity.

How amazing that buoyancy takes over when an object is Jess dense than water or air, at the precise moment they’re less dense than air or water. But gravity takes over the second they’re more dense than air or water!

It’s completely stupid.

Of course, the second an object rising up in air by buoyancy becomes denser than the air, gravity takes over, instantly detects its mass and density, and transmits proprtional strength on it to pull it down at the same speed it pulls everything down to Earth at, or once again ir is explained by relative density, making them all denser than air to then fall through it at the same speed!

It works way better than your magical super duper ovject sensing and calculating strength of equal pulling down speed fairy tale, that’s for sure!

Relative density explains all of it, you need two made up forces with one that makes super man look real by comparison!

It is called density

Which has no directionality and as such cannot explain why things move.

a made up force they called ‘buoyancy’

Your wilful rejection of reality does not make reality made up.

cover for the failure of their first made up force

Again, your wilful rejection of reality does not make reality made up.
Nor does it make it so buoyancy is not a direct result of gravity.

Again, what explains all of these things, all of the problems they cannot excuse with two made up forces?

Gravity. A real force.
One you can show no fault with and need to continually flee from simple explanations exposing your pathetic BS.

If you don't want gravity itself, then a downwards force proportional to mass also works for a lot of it.

What certainty doesn't work is density.

Why would a sub rise up or float on water

How many times must the same explanation be provided to you before you stop asking such stupid questions?

Once more:
Simple version - Sub go down mean water go up.
Like see-saw.
One with more force go down.
One with less force go up.
So if more force on sub, sub go down.
If more force on water water go down sub go up.


More complex version - The downwards due to gravity creates a pressure gradient in the fluid (water).
This pressure gradient means that for every object in the fluid, there is greater force pushing up from below than pushing down from above.
That means the fluid provides an upwards force.
If this force is greater than the force of gravity acting directly on the object, the object goes up.

This is not hard to understand.
Stop playing dumb.

If you want to say there is no explanation, you need to deal with this explanation and explain what is wrong with it.

Otherwise, you are just yet again demonstrating to everyone you are a worthless, low-life, lying POS.


Why don't you try explaining it with your pathetic BS.
When doing so, make sure you explain the origin of and include the force from the pressure gradient; or admit that in order for your dishonest, delusional BS to work, you need to reject the existence of the pressure gradient.

The wackiest force ever invented by nutcases out of sheer desperation, no wonder it stinks so bad!

Even they can’t make up any excuse for how their force, or WHY their force, would first have the capability or the mechanisms of mythical gods to detect and measure instantly all objects density and mass, after having emitted out its great force at one level of strength, outward, when every other force on or above Earth emits outward at one level of strength at one time, and that’s it, energy goes outward, the end.

The wackiest force ever invented by nutcases out of sheer desperation, no wonder it stinks so bad!

And yet. It takes a force to accelerate a mass.

Vs you Turbs trying to label gravity as return to origin.  You mean mass is attracted to mass.

😂😂😂😂😂

The wackiest force ever invented by nutcases out of sheer desperation, no wonder it stinks so bad!

That certainly sums up your garbage.
And it in no way represents gravity.

Now care to stop continually changing topics and admit you can show no fault at all with the mainstream explanation of buoyancy?
And either provide your own explanation or admit you have none.
When doing so, make sure you explain the origin of and include the force from the pressure gradient; or admit that in order for your dishonest, delusional BS to work, you need to reject the existence of the pressure gradient.

They made up another ‘force’
they called buoyancy to account for relative density in water, because their first bs force failed to hold up as a real force would have in all conditions and mediums.

All of it has failed to hold up in the end though.

How amazing that both made up forces use relative density to see whether objects rise or fall in air and water, while one force is claimed to pull all things down to Earth and hold all things to the surface, which is not true, so they make up excuses for it and another garbage force, but still failed miserably anyway.

Everything on Earth, has always been on Earth. All the evidence supports that, none supports any other claim we didn’t originate on Earth, nothing has landed on Earth from’space’ and exists on Earth now.

My argument holds up much better than yours, if you have another argument on it than mine.

That’s where we start from, no force needed to hold us down on a speeding ball Earth in endless space. 

They made up another ‘force’
.

What’s the force you think makes objects accelerate to your back to origin BS?  How do you make mass accelerate without a force?  The answer isn’t Turbs BS, that’s for sure. 

They made up another ‘force’

Repeatedly lying will not save you.
I have repeatedly explained to you have buoyancy is a direct result of gravity.
You have been unable to show any fault with this and instead just repeat these same pathetic lies.

How amazing

That you need to repeatedly lie and ignore what has been explained to you, as if you know that it is true and you cannot refute it, so you just ignore and lie to pretend your pathetic BS is true.
How amazing that you need to repeatedly ignore trivial questions which expose the failure of your model.

My argument holds up much better than yours

Your behaviour demonstrates it clearly doesn't.
You cannot show a single fault with my argument.
You need to entirely ignore it and repeat the same pathetic BS which has already been refuted.
That shows your argument doesn't hold up at all.

If your argument actually held up, you would be able to explain what is wrong with my argument and defend your argument from the refutation of it.

Again, if you want to spout such utter BS, then explain what is wrong with my explanation of an upwards force resulting from gravity and a fluid; and explain how this works in your delusional fantasy, including explaining what is causing the pressure gradient and why this doesn't push things up.