1: Gravity does not exist; it is a product of a biased scientific community. Everything in observable physics can be explained through the laws of buoyancy, no gravity needed. The Universe, encased in the Celestial Ocean, accelerates upwards.
False. An attractive force between two masses is easily shown to exist. The simplest is the The Cavendish Experiment, of which literally hundreds of demonstrations can be found online, if you don't feel like taking the time to do it yourself.
There are other more complex demonstrations available that address the criticisms of The Cavendish Experiment, but generally require prohibitively expensive equipment to perform, my suggestion is based on cost effectiveness to give you something you can do in your living room to demonstrate that gravitational attraction between masses does exist.
2: The planets do exist. Or, well, they do not exist in the same way NASA tells you. In my Celestial Ocean Theory, which I find the most reliable, the planets - as well as meteorites - are simply debris generated by cracks in the Firmament. This debris floats above the Sun and the Moon as the laws of buoyancy dictate.
Which implies that the Sun, the Moon are less dense than air (it can't be a vacuum up there as buoyancy requires a fluid medium) while meteoroids are even less dense, right up until that point where they become more dense and fallen to Earth as a meteorite.
Also, how does cracks in the firmament, which you claim that Libyan Desert Glass are pieces of, 'generate' a solid iron object (which is less dense than air up to the point where it isn't anymore)?
3: The exact nature of the ice walls are unknown, but according to COT, they are not actually holding the oceans in; they are simply supporting the Firmament. We will probably never get to know the exact nature of the Ice Walls because Antarctica is heavily guarded and it is almost impossible for civilians to be allowed to reach the South Pole (Because it doesn't exist).
The South Pole is a tourist destination:
https://www.polarcruises.com/antarctica/destinations/south-pole-land-based
Not touching #4, because saying something like "because, you know, the success of total population control is totally dependent on the shape of the surface" would probably get me banned.
1: The Cavendish experiment is popular among globeheads, but has not yet been reproduced. There are a thousand ways to disprove it, here is just one:
Every one can witness, that no matter how large and massive of two balls, of steel you make and place them close together, that there never, ever was a perceptible attraction by Newtonian gravity of one for the other. But everyone can build the tiniest of bar magnets and notice that as you bring the two closer together, that the snap at one another in attraction.
Also, the asteroid Ida and its moon Dactyl. Anyone doing the Cavendish Experiment and believing it, should look at the asteroid belt, that all the asteroids should have moons based on Cavendish Experiment, but the fact is, that gravitational bonding is a rare phenomenon, because, well, gravity is not Newtonian and that gravity is EM-gravity.
2: Libyan Desert Glass is not made of iron. It is an entirely different material. It is denser than air, which is why it falls. The Firmament, which is made of Desert Glass, is supported by the Antarctic Ice Walls, which is why the dome does not collapse.
3: The South Pole is *allegedly* a tourist destination. By that I mean that tourists are shown a spot on a featureless plain which has been called "the South Pole". If you look at the Flat Earth map, however, you will find that there is no such Pole, and that the alleged "Pole" could simply have been placed anywhere in Antarctica. I reckon that one would be immediately stopped if one tries to go further into the continent than the Pole.