I can't be any more specific.
You could start by using the correct words to describe the correct things.
I'm sat in my chair. I'm not accelerating anywhere. t=0 is the same as t=15 seconds.
There is a force of acceleration exerted on me, But I'M NOT ACCELERATING.
You experience no acceleration in the direction of the Earth's surface because you are resting on a chair. The force of the chair opposes equally the force of gravity. The ISS is not resting on a chair. There is no force opposing the force of gravity for the ISS. Again, if there were, then the ISS
could not be in orbit. I don't think you actually read my posts. I've explained this like five times now. You're just like PP. You just read a couple of sentences and skip over responding to the substance of what anyone says. Just hit reply and start typing something. And you think for some reason that it's a mark of intelligence. You're fucking weird.
There isn't a legitimately licensed pilot on the planet who could possibly have this kind of trouble applying and speaking intelligently about Newton's laws. Get out with that nonsense. What a joke.
e: you also don't seem to get what an inertial frame of reference is, which would also be super troubling if you were actually a licensed pilot. You are not accelerating toward the surface of the Earth when seated (or accelerating at all in your local, rotating inertial frame. Everything around you is moving at the same rate under the same forces). But, you
are being accelerated in a non-rotating inertial frame (say, from the point of view of someone looking at the whole Earth from a stationary position in space). Your velocity vector changes as you rotate around the globe on the Earth's surface. Just as with the ISS, if it didn't, then you would travel at a constant speed and direction and fly off the surface as it fell away below you.
Any change in the direction or magnitude of a velocity vector is called acceleration. By definition. That's what the word means.