All the so-called "evidence" such as apples falling on your head while lost in thought under and apple tree, could be explained by density, a Flat Earth, etc.

It's not as though we've BEEN to any other planets where "Gosh! We're 1.5X heavier, due to the increased mass of the planet relative to Earth!"
Yes, I've heard thousands of times talk about different planet densities, how much you'd weigh on this or that exo-planet, etc. That's all over the Discovery channel, the mouths of lying scientists like Neil Degrasse Tyson and Bill Nye, NASA, etc. -- but THEY ARE ALL PROVEN LIARS so everything they say has to be thrown out. But more importantly, it's just their say-so, the argument of authority, the bandwagon fallacy, etc. They can't point to any experiments! You know, SCIENCE.

(The Moon doesn't count, of course, because we haven't been there and CAN'T go there. The evidence we haven't been there is legion.)

Gravity (defined as "large massive objects attracting smaller, less dense objects towards it) has not been observed in any experiments. You could take a 1-ton hunk of LEAD or other super-dense metal, and it wouldn't deflect the path of a speck of dust floating in the air -- or give the slightest tug on a helium/CO2 balloon, made to float statically in the air (neither sinking, nor rising). Obviously the Earth would dwarf the 1 ton block's gravity -- in the vertical direction. So OK, don't fight the Earth. How about try to move the speck of dust or balloon the slightest amount LEFT or RIGHT. Surely the Earth doesn't "tug" an object left or right? That's why wheels work so well. I can push a car forward with my own power, as long as it's on wheels.

Just like scientists have never proven (in any experiment) that the Earth moves, they've also never proven or observed Gravity in any scientific experiment.

For that matter, why does gravity pull some things down towards it (like humans and every other object, on a Globe Earth model) but other times gravity just causes things to "orbit" the large object instead?

Don't say "the planets started out as a spinning dust cloud orbiting the sun, and slowly coalesced into planets and moons..." because that's Evolution nonsense.

Remember, their theories about Gravity, the Earth, solar system, etc. ALL TIE IN CLOSELY with the Big Bang and atheistic evolution. The monkey typewriters typing the works of Shakespeare, given enough eons. That whole nonsense. Why should we buy into their nonsense at all?

Even most top physicists don't believe in gravity as its own thing.  There are several competing theories about what it is.

Now, with the "density" explanation of gravity, there does still have to be some force that determines directionality.  Could be electromagnetism, could be flow of either (I think that's what Tesla held).  But gravity as an independent force, I don't believe that most top scientists believe in it anymore.  I've posted some video from a top physicist who said that on film.

(The Moon doesn't count, of course, because we haven't been there and CAN'T go there. The evidence we haven't been there is legion.)

Should not the (non-spinning) moon just sit in a kind of locked position, somewhere between the tiny (spinning) earth and massive sun, if not being dragged completely away from the earth by the sun?  [Assuming bogus cosmology, of course.]  How does it make any sense that it would orbit earth, apparently unaffected by the sun regardless of being closer or further from the sun than the earth is?

Isaac Newton was a freemason with a very impressive looking nose.

 </end of thread>

What can anyone say about that?  

If it's still an (unproven) theory after 40, 50 or 100 years, it's not likely to ever be proven. Toss it