Anyone who has passed a freshman physics class is equipped to (with significant effort) verify Newton's law of gravitation.
Any middle school student with a stopwatch and a tower can drop things off and determine that there are laws describing the ways that unsupported objects move downward.
Everyone who ever lived has been in a position to independently observe many of the properties of gravitation without needing to trust even a single statement or datapoint provided by another person.
In order to even understand the theory of ACC, much less test it, requires a person to first have a ton of education and then to navigate a substantial amount of academic literature.
It doesn't matter what you think. What are the other sides of the statements you make? We need to hear hear them out and debate them as well.
You assume that so-called "freshmen physics" is a legitimate source of material and that middle school students are being taught legitimate science to begin with, when it could all be part of a pro-science agenda put forth by academic science thumpers promoting self-interested concepts of scientific ideology so that these people can continue to be employed and earn upwards of $40,000 per year as science propagandists. Let's not ignore the fact there's a lot of money at stake on these issues here, and for the involved parties getting you to believe in concepts like middle school science of freshmen physics are entirely based on a monetary incentive, despite what the evidence may show and even against contradictory evidence.
Also you assume that gravitation is proven beyond a theory or a concept, which is demonstrating your pro-gravity bias. The understanding of so-called "gravity" is based on nothing more than a theory, but general relativity and quantum theory are entirely incompatible with one another which basically debunks the entire thing as many leading scientists would agree, but again this assumes that any of the so-called "science" or the basis of any of this is even legitimate in the first place.
Finally, and this is very important, all of this completely disregards what religions might say too, and we need to hear each of the arguments of each individual religion and belief system and what their opinions and thoughts are on so-called "gravity", which, by the way, is not even mentioned in any holy books or writings whatsoever. That "gravity" is left out of every religious teaching entirely is very telling, and it demonstrates that from a theological standpoint that "gravity" has absolutely no basis in truth whatsoever, otherwise it obviously would be a subject of these belief systems and written about endlessly if it were a real thing. Can you really dispute or discount the words of supreme beings, let alone every God and belief system?
Anyone who has passed a freshman physics class is equipped to (with significant effort) verify Newton's law of gravitation.
Any middle school student with a stopwatch and a tower can drop things off and determine that there are laws describing the ways that unsupported objects move downward.
Everyone who ever lived has been in a position to independently observe many of the properties of gravitation without needing to trust even a single statement or datapoint provided by another person.
In order to even understand the theory of ACC, much less test it, requires a person to first have a ton of education and then to navigate a substantial amount of academic literature.