When I look at the image I see the line. What is the line? I don't know. I agree that it could be the things that you have listed above but, I also believe, that it COULD be a wire. Again i'm shocked at peoples inability to acknowledge that it might be a wire.
Do you have a citation for this sweeping generalisation?
Here are the Galaev experiments, the most thorough ever undertaken:https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1722791#msg1722791A direct proof of the existence of aether.Here is the mathematical proof of the existence of longitudinal waves:https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1994059#msg1994059A vector field is the outward manifestation of the potential, the ether, longitudinal scalar waves.Martin Ruderfer published one of the most sensational experiments of the 20th century and beyond.https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1846721#msg1846721Ruderfer, Martin (1960) “First-Order Ether DriftExperiment Using the Mössbauer Radiation,”Physical Review Letters, Vol. 5, No. 3, Sept. 1, pp191-192Ruderfer, Martin (1961) “Errata—First-Order EtherDrift Experiment Using the Mössbauer Radiation,”Physical Review Letters, Vol. 7, No. 9, Nov. 1, p 361in 1961, M. Ruderfer proved mathematically and experimentally, using the spinning Mossbauer effect, the FIRST NULL RESULT in ether drift theory.This is the reason why Einstein's relativity is being thrown aside, and mainstream physicists are embracing MLET (a local aether model).Mainstream physicists such as C.C. Su, Ruyong Wang, Ron Hatch, Tom van Flandern, S.L. Gift are publishing their local-aether in the best scientific journals, including IOP articles.The fact that the orbital Sagnac is not being registered by GPS satellites has changed everything.The local-aether model can no longer be denied or ignored.Here is the most mainstream proof of them all: the AHARONOV-BOHM EFFECT, which has been documented again and again for the past 50 years.The seminal Aharonov-Bohm paper:https://journals.aps.org/pr/pdf/10.1103/PhysRev.115.485https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4323049/The Aharonov-Bohm effect and its applications to electron phase microscopy, A. Tonomura (state of the art proofs of the Aharonov-Bohm effect)
GravityWhat hard evidence do you haveYou seem to be under the mistaken impression that it is somehow up to RE to prove gravity. FE makes the claim that it doesn't exist. The burden of proof is on FE if they want to challenge accepted science.Burden of Proof A fallacy is when someone makes an argument based on unsound reasoning. Burden of proof is one type of fallacy in which someone makes a claim, but puts the burden of proof onto the other side. For example, a person makes a claim. Another person refutes the claim, and the first person asks them to prove that the claim is not true. In a logical argument, if someone states a claim, it is up to that person to prove the truth of his or her claim.http://softschools.com/examples/fallacies/burden_of_proof_examples/521/Description: Making a claim that needs justification, then demanding that the opponent justifies the opposite of the claim. The burden of proof is a legal and philosophical concept with differences in each domain. In everyday debate, the burden of proof typically lies with the person making the claim, but it can also lie with the person denying a well-established fact or theory. Like other non-black and white issues, there are instances where this is clearly fallacious, and those which are not as clearhttps://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/222/Shifting-of-the-Burden-of-ProofOf course this only applies to people who are actually interested in making logical arguments so I could see how you would think it doesn't apply to you..