Please do show us the experimental data that supports your conclusion here.
In FET, the stars move with the day and the season. Does your data support that move? Do the discrepancies move too?
What types of discrepancies does this explanation account? All of them? That objects weigh more on the equator than at middle latitudes? That object weigh less with just an increase in altitude? That Foucault pendulums rotate in the opposite direction in the NH than the SH? That discrepancies near oil fields allow the accurate drilling of those fields?
This isn't about Foucault pendulums. If you want to discuss that hoax then you should make a new thread.
And yes, the gravitational pull of the stars explains everything you've mentioned here. The fact that there are discrepancies to begin with suggests that the stars have a gravitational pull, as that is the only logical explanation with what we already know about the Earth disc and it adds up mathematically.
Wow! That's amazing wrong. Let me be lazy and just point out the larger mistakes.
1) Discrepancies by altitude alone is not explained by stars' gravity. The EP (and GR time dilation) explains all very well. Please learn to GR.
2) Discrepancies between the equator and the middle latitude is not explained by the stars' gravity as the stars move seasonally but the discrepancies do not.
3) FPs are not a hoax and have action to due with gravity.
4) You, again, fail to provide data to support your conclusions. How many times to we have to point out that failure?
5) Since the oil-field related discrepancies don't move, stars' gravity does not explain those either.
............ it adds up mathematically.
Would you mind showing the math?
I'm sure Vx could win big money if he published that data.