I am an engineering student and currently taking a class on kinematics and dynamics. I study at a German university so it may be that I don't translate everything correctly.
In the first module of the course we have studied the kinematics of rigid bodies and relative motion. We learned how to describe the motion of a point or particle from an absolute reference frame via a moving reference frame. We would decompose the absolute position vector to a point into a vector to another reference frame(which may be moving, accelerating or rotating) plus a relative vector from the second reference frame to the point(particle). We would then do differentiation and different cross products to find the velocity and acceleration of the absolute vector via the other two. Now in the second module we are learning about newtons laws and inertial reference frames; and the big statement here being that every reference frame that is moving with constant velocity and no rotation relative to an absolute reference frame is also an inertial frame. My confusion arises here: we are using accelerating and rotating reference frames to find the velocity and acceleration of a particle in the absolute reference frame, but, then we use the acceleration that we find to find the forces on the object. This doesn't make sense to me, and seems to contradict the condition of inertial reference frames, since the reference frames we use to find the acceleration of the particles may be rotating or accelerating.
I think I have a big misunderstanding relating kinematics with newtons laws.