You have no idea what you are talking about. Newtonian Gravity does not work as a coherent physical theory and has been long discredited. The weightlessness and simultaneous falling of between bodies of different masses in Newtonian theory does not work without absurd mechanisms.
I very much do know what I'm talking about.
Earlier in this thread, you said (when discussing the zero g hair picture):
If there is a pulling phenomena which pulls and accelerates all atoms "down", how could the atoms in the hair flow freely up and down without resistance in free-fall? Surely if she were to mold her hair into a certain shape it should not flow up and down freely without resistance if there were a phenomenon pulling all atoms downwards.
In a situation where you are losing a game tug-of-war with an elephant and are being pulled along, any time you pull against the rope it creates resistance against the direction you are being pulled in. If the atoms in the hair are all being pulled down towards the earth they should not be allowed to float freely up and down without resistance. Yet water, hair, and various types of materials act weightless in a zero-g freefall flight.
All of this and more is easy evidence that the true physical nature of gravity is that of an upwardly accelerating earth.
This is simply incorrect - much like the slinky video people, you are publicly demonstrating a complete lack of understanding of basic physics. There is nothing in Newtonian understandings of gravity or F=MA etc that is at odds with what we observe in freefall, for example. Likewise, the hypothetical '1g lift' thought experiment is spot on - you would not be able to tell the difference between that scenario or what we experience on earth. To that end, your UA idea works on one level - if the earth was endlessly accelerating upwards, there would indeed be the same 'experience' for the people living on its surface. There are, of course, other reasons why that theory is utterly absurd - not relevant here - but the premise of equivalence is entirely sound.
You also describe Newtonian gravity as being 'discredited'. That is very unfair on poor old Isaac. His theory has been built on, but it remains an entirely valid model for most of what goes on in our lives - bridges, aircraft, boats, rockets etc are all built using Newtonian physics and ideas of gravity - it works. The issue isn't that it is wrong, per se, but rather that there is something more fundamental going on - it doesn't explain everything. For that, we need more modern tools - enter relativity etc.
I wasn't claiming that the science ends with Newton. My point is that if you don't understand the basics - which you clearly don't - there is little point in lifting the lid on the more advanced stuff.