Location Joke...You Had To Be There.

Okay, not really a joke but you did have to be there or so the reply claims.  It goes something like this.

I present a well-known, well understood experiment in a discussion on gravity.  One that is taught in standard science text books, performed in physics lab classes, and is accepted as scientific consensus.

The reply will be something akin to “If you didn’t do it yourself then you are just repeating what someone told/taught you?  I will only accept tests or experiments you performed yourself.”

This is usually followed up with things like “all you have is blind faith in what you read in a book”, “all you have is blind faith in what you were taught by your teachers”.  All of which almost always ends with some version of “you are indoctrinated from early age to blindly accept whatever science says and to believe you are getting and education”.  

IOW, a whole bunch of hand waving nonsense specifically designed to dismiss scientific consensus without actually having to refute it.  A very common tactic in the science denying communities.

Is there a logical fallacy in any of this or is it just denialism?

“If you didn’t do it yourself then you are just repeating what someone told/taught you?  I will only accept tests or experiments you performed yourself.”

This is just an unreasonable demand. We laypeople don't have the knowledge, skills or equipment to carry out our own experiments. We have to rely on scientific research, which is carried out by people other than ourselves - they're the only ones with the ability to do so.

Also, it's not just "repeating what someone told/taught", because that implies dogma. What happened is that scientists carried out experiments, made observations, and drew conclusions from those. We're appealing to the evidence they collected, which stands/falls on its own merits.

 “all you have is blind faith in what you read in a book”, “all you have is blind faith in what you were taught by your teachers”

See above. It is 'faith' (as in, confidence), but not "blind faith" (since it's based on observations and evidence, not mere belief or hope).

“you are indoctrinated from early age to blindly accept whatever science says and to believe you are getting and education”.  

ad hominem (abusive).

Is there a logical fallacy in any of this or is it just denialism?
 

Denialism mostly, in my opinion.