I'm just applying the concepts, not assuming they're true (e.g. Earth as a flat disc). I find that's a reliable way to debunk many theories, just demand consistency. > You’re using the definition of gravity as “the attraction of massive objects” which is not observable science. All we can say is that objects fall to earth straight down. Agreed, all I can say is that things fall towards the ground. I've never had any direct experience of gravity or that masses attract. It's a shame to squash all the possibility of how things actually work with a desire for certainty, e.g. people believing in the Big Bang as if it's proven fact. It's an attempt to construct a narrative that leads to where we are.