I think people fail to understand what Newton was even notable for (re: gravity specifically; Newton was notable for many things, but we're focusing on that right now), and it contributes to this sort of nonsense.
If you hear "Newton discovered gravity" and "Gravity is the force that attracts objects to planet Earth, making them fall", it might sound plausible to you that a sentence from Brahmagupta saying "A body falls towards the Earth as it is the nature of the Earth to attract bodies just as it in the nature of the water to flow" is the same thing. And then you get angry about people crediting a European with things an Indian mathematician was saying a thousand years earlier.
But "earth attracts things" is not what Newton is credited with discovering, and that discovery could not have come from reading someone else's work, because genuinely nobody knew that until he figured it out. (the apple story is also obviously false, btw, and tempting for very similar reasons)
Newton's law of universal gravitation says that any two objects with mass experience an attractive force that is proportional to their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them. Newton figured out that this law, combined with his laws of motion, says that if you two objects one much more massive than the other (like, say, a planet and the sun), the small one would orbit the big one in an ellipse exactly as described in Kepler's laws, and also make ordinary things fall to the ground.
There's a lot to be said about the significance of this, but I want to focus on the precision; Newton didn't just say "objects attract each other". If objects attracted each other but the law was not G*m1*m2/r^2 (1), then you would not observe the elliptical orbits of the planets, you'd observe something else. It is a crucial part of Newton's discovery that he had a very precise mathematical formulation of how strong gravity is, that he had the concept of what it means for something to be a force (an concept that only makes sense within Newton's laws of motion), that he had the mathematical ability to take that law and the concept of a force and derive elliptical motion from it.
Newton is not notable for saying "things fall to the ground because the Earth attracts them". People had said this before. If he'd stolen his actual discovery from an Indian or Arab scholar, you should be able to point to things in their work like, say, a heliocentric model of the solar system with the planets in elliptical orbits, and some expression of that whole G*m1*m2/r^2 law (not in those symbols, obviously, but it should be written out somehow). You would not be tempted to point at a sentence saying "Earth attracts things" if you knew what Newton actually discovered re: gravity and expected your audience to do too.
(1) yes, general relativity changes things, etc. Newton was approximately correct, and that approximation is good enough for safely landing robots on other planets.
baratheonpilled
jacobvanloon
discoholicmusic
theartofmadeline
stormborns
tangentwithtanner
izzy806
titsay
yousharknotpass
germansingergirl
romaincrisis
