Things do not "fall" to the ground. The so-called "falling" is nothing more than the result of the Earth accelerating upwards at 9.8 m/s², as evidenced by direct observations and experiments.
Then why do your cherry-picked quotes not say that then. Literally the first one you quote says:
In both situations you are accelerating upwards. In the latter situation it is the lift that is responsible for your acceleration. In the former, it is the fact that the Earth is solid that pushes you upwards through space-time
And:
That the surface of the Earth can accelerate upwards at every point on its surface, and remain as a solid object, is because it exists in a curved space-time and not in a flat space.
Once again you've quoted something which doesn't even say what you're trying to pretend it says.
And in your model why doesn't the acceleration mean the earth is now going faster than the speed of light? Don't worry, bro, special relativity has you covered:
https://wiki.tfes.org/Universal_Acceleration#Why_doesn.27t_the_Earth.27s_velocity_reach_the_speed_of_light.3FCherry picking again. You dismiss Special Relativity as some "abstract explanation" when it suits you, you accept and use it to explain other things when it suits you.
It's so intellectually dishonest. And once again you conflate "I don't understand this" with "this can't be true". The rest of your post is a box set of your arguments from incredulity. As a "wise" man once said:
Claiming incredulity is a pretty bad argument
Recent Posts