The measurement of acceleration across different parts of the earth was discussed extensively in
this thread.
It is crucial to the UA theory that observed acceleration at ground level is the same at all points of the flat earth. However, scientific measurements indicate considerable differences, which standard gravitational theory explains very well, but for FE theory has absolutely no model.
Tom raised many objections.
Here (Nov 22nd) he cites a paper apparently showing a massive departure from the value predicted by the standard model, and thereby showing (in his opinion) that the measuring equipment is defective. However, as I showed
here, that number is an obvious typographical error.
In this post, Tom argues that gravimeters measure noise, rather than any true underlying effect. However the papers he cites are about the effect of measuring acceleration on moving objects such as ships. I uploaded
some research of mine showing how tiny the noise is compared to the change caused by change in latitude.
Later he argued that there were unexplained ‘gravitational anomalies’ in the scientific data. I
explained what an anomaly actually was, etc.
Measurement of gravitational acceleration is another nice case of where Science attempts to explain observations by means of models that try to predict them. For example, we take the many thousands of observed accelerations at different latitudes and different heights. Then we construct a mathematical model (see e.g. my post
here) that attempts to explain these observations, then make a statistical comparison. The model we use happens to be consistent with a roughly spherical earth.
Tom finally objected that the differences could also be explained by other effects (e.g. Dark Matter). That is true. It could also be explained by unicorns or magic pixie dust. But the unicorn hypothesis is completely arbitrary, whereas the hypothesis of universal gravitation takes a single underlying formula to explain observations wherever they are made.