Reply to “Unscientific behavior of the YARK theory of gravitation” by C. Corda T. Yarman 1 , A. Kholmetskii 2 , O. Yarman 3 and M. Arik 4 1 Okan University Istanbul, Turkey 2 Belarus State University, Minsk, Belarus 3 Istanbul University, Istanbul, Turkey 4 Bogazici University, Istanbul, Turkey Abstract. We respond to one more attempt by Corda (vixra: 1709.0190v1) in criticizing the Yarman-Arik-Kholmetskii (YARK) gravitation theory, and show the fallacious character of his aggression. Recently, Corda located his paper [1] against Yarman-Arik-Kholmetskii (which, for brevity, we call, YARK) theory of gravity, where he persistently demonstrates his failure to understand the essence of our approach, claiming instead that we made elementary errors in its development, etc. In fact, the major part of [1] contains the repetition of Corda’s previous attack against YARK theory [2], that we had already answered in our papers [3-5]. Below we present our comment only with respect to some new points of his criticism on the basis of our seven assertions collected by Corda on p. 5 of [1], where though he distorted some of them as usual. Point 1 (Claiming that Corda does not understand the Mössbauer effect methodology). He replies “Point 1 is false. In [20] (which is herewith ref. [6]) we have shown that it is instead the YARK club which understand neither their proper Mössbauer effect methodology, nor the clock synchronization in relativity theory”. In this respect, we first of all have to remind that one of the authors of the present paper (AK) headed one of the most effective scientific groups working in the field of Mössbauer effect methodology at the end of the past century and at the beginning of the present century, which substantially contributed to further development of this topic (see, e.g., refs. [7-15]). We like to add that the accumulated rich experience in the methodology of the Mössbauer effect had been directly used by us in the development and performance of the Mössbauer experiments in a rotating system achieved first in Minsk in 2008 [16, 17] and later in Istanbul in 2014 [18, 19]. Thus, when a pure theorist such as Corda claims that we do not understand the methodology of these experiments, this only gives us smiles. Concerning his claim that we do not understand the clock synchronization in relativity theory; we, by the way, never argued against the additional component that comes into play with respect to the energy shift between a spinning source and a resting detector due to their clock synchronization as derived by Corda [6]. The problem (which remains outside the scope of Corda’s understanding) is that such a component of energy shift cannot be captured by our measurements, as we have explained several times in the past (see, e.g. [3, 4]). On the other hand, Corda keeps ignoring the fact that our team has provided a sound quantum mechanical answer to the extra energy shift detected in the Mössbauer rotor experiments [20]. In fact, Corda systematically avoids touching on this point, fearing no doubt to unwillingly invite awareness of the audience with regards to the fact that YARK indeed works in natural symbiosis with quantum mechanics. Point 2 (where we emphasize that in YARK theory, the gravitational force is real). A major part of Corda’s excoriation of this aspect of YARK theory does not contain any novelty in comparison with his previous publication [2], and we already commented against it in refs. [4, 5]. At the same time, he now adds something new: “Clearly, even admitting that this static binding energy does not violate the LLI (which is already unscientific), the “fictitious