It seems that way, but actually it requires it! Velocity is a vector (i.e. includes direction). Whenever you change direction (or speed, of course!) you require (and experience) acceleration!

• I think you are missing one important factor. Gravity. We are held to the earth by gravity and we are spinning along with it at a constant speed. If the speed became inconsistent we would feel it.
• Can you prove the earth is still?

Minusculely, yes that is true. It just isn’t for the reasons we were taught. The primary cause for the difference in weight (and fall/rise time, as in many “gravimeters”) is buoyancy/the media it displaces. Of course, temperature, electrical charge, and many other things play a small role in such things as well.

• Boyancy can only exist with gravity if there is a specified direction giving it the Archimedes principle. In space boyancy pushes on all sides. So what would explain why we are only getting an obvious downward force?
• Gravity only exists with mass.

Weight is not imbued by magical fields that defy description, measurement, manipulation, and discovery (from invocation, not creation/invention, of the stupid idea by newton to now). Weight is merely an intrinsic and inexorable property of all matter. Mass and gravitation do not, in any way, exist outside of equation. Weight is all there is, and all there has ever been!

• Weight can only exist when there are two or more masses that exist and act upon each-other. Your theory that there is no gravity and its held up by buoyancy doesn't hold water (get it, cause buoyancy) It doesn't explain a single direction of force. Buoyancy would push on all sides without gravity. You can even demonstrate this while on earth.

I like assumption and speculation too, but I don’t call it science! I call it guessing!

• you can literally take photos and match them, its not guessing you are using observation and collecting data.

Again, I like guessing!

• Not a guess its observation.

So we are taught, and required to repeat in order to matriculate. However, it ain't necessarily so! What if I told you that “space” does not exist in any way, and if it did it would violate many of the scientific laws that we have established (unchallenged, mind you) for centuries? What if I told you the entire stupid idea was made up by the coimbra jesuits and then run with by newton due to his understanding of the permanence of the celestial cycles?

• When a new theory comes along and beats another theory it tends to become unchallenged until a new theory comes along that is more accurate to explain the observable universe. Flat earth has come and gone. It was once a theory but now we have theories that are better.
• We have observation, we can go to space and see the earth is round. If you think we cant, you can take a high altitude weather balloon with a camera and see the same thing.
• Explain and prove that it breaks modern scientific laws.

I think it is reasonable to do so, despite complicated mathematics - however it is unnecessary. The lights in the sky do as they do, the rest is mythology/religion/pseudoscience masquerading as science :( There are good reasons I make such apparently “flippant” statements, and good criteria available to discern between science and pseudoscience masquerading as it.

• Your definition of science is extremely narrow and strange. It appears that you only accept observation if it is with a human eye and not a mechanical or digital one.
• You don't accept observational science using a laser and distance to prove curvature
• You don't accept a laser gyroscope to prove rotation.
• you seem to only accept things that point one directions and ignore anything that points another.
• You expect me to prove the curvature without using anything that proves the curvature. Like, going to space.
• You state essentially that anything that cannot be directly observed by a person standing on the earth is not science in yet you are claiming the earth is flat but have not seen it in its entirety yourself. The most scientific approach using your sets of criteria is to say its no know the shape of the earth, not that its flat.
• we have vehicles that can fly. We also have vehicles that can go into low orbit. We also have vehicles that can go into low orbit and are commercial. I'm sure you are going to excludes any of these things that can go into space right?
• What exactly do you think happens when we get high enough to see the entire earth?