The first theory to me assumes light has mass. Does it? Their experiment results suggest to me that light does not have mass or at least to the extent that the earths electromagnetism and gravitational pull don’t impose a humanly observable interference upon its projected path. It seems to me that what they discovered was was not what they were theorizing and that they failed to conclude an understanding of the forces or laws of nature that light is bound to and just jumped to a conclusion rather than verify it through their experiment. The second observation does not take into account the arc and orbital patterns we see with the stars. What we see by observing the skies are orbital patterns that can be calculated. A constant upward trajectory of the earth is a piss poor conclusion of describing gravity and the downward pull we feel and experience and leaves out the entire observation of heavenly bodies. I give both those experiments or at least their conclusions a c-. They pass the class based on effort. But what do I know I’m just a hillbilly.