[CometStreak]

So you use the idea of an accelerating flat earth. The thing is that that would cause problems based on sphere earth physics and some real world tests.
So let’s begin.
The infinite acceleration of the earth would require infinite amounts of energy to work. And even if it didn’t, the acceleration would compact the atmosphere more than on a spherical earth. This would mean that buoyancy would be impossible for use by any space craft. And with both the acceleration of the earth and the lack of the ability to orbit, space craft would have to also have to have infinite energy and mass. Also, I have yet to see any proof that disproves the idea of different parts of the earth showing different weights for the same object. Not only that, but you would have to use even more energy than normally to get the spacecraft up into space, as the substitute you use for gravity shows that you would weight the same in space as on the planet. This means you should weigh the same in the tallest tower of the world when compared to the ground level. I have yet to see any proof of that while using a spring based weighing device. Also no one has ever tried to measure whether there was a curvature of earth by making the flattest piece of land and measure for both curvature and weight difference (the weighing machine must be very accurate and must use a spring) to see if the flattening of the surface results in a different weight or not at different points. Please answer.

[Boodysaspie]

I'm having the infinite energy argument in another thread "Show me your physics." I think the argument is that you should consider the Earth in an instantaneous frame reference, i.e. at rest. Therefore the concept of inertial mass doesn't arise.

You won't get any answer to any questions on space travel on this forum, as the stance is that it isn't possible so it doesn't exist.

I don't know what the responses (if any) to the tower or weighing machine will be, but it's usually that your experiment is wrong.

I'm sure they would love to further their research to cover these ideas more fully, but, as the wiki says, it's nigh-on impossible to get funding for FE research.

You have now travelled through the looking-glass. Welcome to Wonderland.

[Curious Squirrel]

Space travel doesn't exist in the FE hypothesis (See: The Conspiracy on the wiki) so that's a non-starter.

They assert Celestial Gravitation as an answer for the gravity variance on Earth. Which is essentially gravity but only exerted by the stars/objects in the sky. Although note they are very adamant that it shouldn't be labeled with 'gravity' in any way.

Alternatively (as recently asserted by Tom Bishop) gravimeters are simply a giant con that don't actually do anything. As such the supposed difference in gravity don't in fact exist, but are the results of charlatans trying to get money.