So what are you saying? Professional scientists cannot be wrong? Amateurs are of necessity wrong? Were you there when they argued why the Earth has to be at the center of the universe, with the Sun going around, along with the rest of the heavenly host? On what premises were built their arguments? Ptolemeic epicycles? Were you there when Galileo had to retract his statments that he saw mountains on the Moon? Or when Bruno was burned at the stake in Rome for saying that the universe is infinite, with many worlds, and that there may be people on them? Has the dogma of the past hundred years become so strong that to challenge it means persecution, cut off funding, bypassed promotions or dismissals? But you may be there when they announce that there is an inherent flaw in Relativity's first postulate. Even professionals can make mistakes, if the basic premise on which the whole theory is base has an error in it. That's what testing is supposed to do, not confirm over and over again how Einstein was right, but test for why there is evidence that perhaps he was wrong. No, not my "theory" to be proven right, but any hypothesis to be tested in a non-circular-reasoning way. What are the double blind tests for gravity? What are they for distant locations on site? Nothing against professionals, mind you, but because they had achieved a lauded status does not absolve them from error. A title does not suspend reason.

__________________
Caveat Lector. Experimentum summus judex...