According to ChatGPT 


1. People have circuмnavigated north-south from Antarctica to the arctic by going in a straight line, it cited ranaulph fiennes 

2. Refraction is not distorted because it is weak refraction, the reason superior mirages are distorted is because they are the result of strong refraction. It cited snells law.

3. Railguns, and instruments used to measure the levelness of water all take the “curvature” of earth into account, and actually “prove” the glove. when I called it out for making this claim which it provided no evidence for it just contradicted me.

4. That lazer tests don’t prove flat earth because the lazers refract exactly enough to make them look like the earth is flat (oh really?) 

5. The “eight inches per mile squared” is a rule of thumb to determine the drop height due to the curvature of the Earth. It does not account for the observer’s height and atmospheric refraction. And therefore, the rule is unsuitable to determine the amount of obstruction of a distant object due to Earth’s curvature.
Many Flat-Earthers often use the “8 inches” rule to reach the conclusion similar to “X is visible, but at the distance of Y miles, X should be Z feet below the horizon, so the Earth is flat.” They are wrong. The “8 inches” rule is the wrong tool for the purpose as it does not account for the height of the observer and atmospheric refraction.

Using the “8 inches” rule to calculate the obstruction due to Earth’s curvature would give us a much higher value compared to the real-world situation. Using the rule to calculate the obstruction from Earth’s curvature will erroneously lead us to the wrong conclusion. It can appear that the object is visible, but should have been completely obscured.
After accounting for the height of the observer and atmospheric refraction, everything will be consistent with the spherical Earth model.
The “8 inches” rule is also an approximation. It remains usable until up to about 100 miles. After that, it deviates from the correct value very quickly. (I got this from a website but this is basically what ChatGPT told me)




I know I look like a spam artist but I genuinely need to know is anybody able to reply to these? Also has this website - https://flatearth.ws Been debunked? 

This is an example of exactly what ChatGPT has told me. I copy pasted this from ChatGPT 




1. 
Long-Distance Photography and Globe Curvature


Yes, there are photographs showing objects from distances that seem surprising, even implausible, under basic Earth curvature math. However, this is often due to atmospheric refraction, which is a well-understood phenomenon in physics and used in everything from astronomy to surveying.

• Standard Refraction: In most cases, the atmosphere is denser near the surface and less dense higher up. This causes light to bend downward slightly, allowing you to see “over” small portions of the curve.
• Variability: Atmospheric conditions do vary. But even with slight inconsistencies, long-range refraction can still produce surprisingly clear views for brief periods (so-called “superior mirages”).
• Professional Validation: Many of the record-breaking photos were taken without the intent to challenge the globe model. That’s true. But the scientific explanation for why such views are occasionally possible (e.g., looming, ducting) is already well established.

So while these images are real and impressive, they’re not unexplained or globe-debunking.




2. 
Dr. John D and Laser Experiments


Dr. John D (likely referring to John D. from the FE community) has indeed done some meticulous work. But:

• Laser Experiments: The idea that lasers staying level over long distances debunks curvature overlooks the reality that lasers also refract — especially when they’re just above the surface, where temperature and density gradients are strongest.
• Two-Way Refraction: Refraction doesn’t always need to behave symmetrically; downward bending can dominate both directions if the gradient favors it. It’s not a simple inverse for each direction — light paths are governed by gradients, not just direction.
• Real-World Surveying: Engineers and surveyors constantly account for refraction and curvature over large distances. If Earth were flat, none of their models or corrections would work — yet GPS, tunneling, and surveying systems function with extraordinary accuracy.

3. 
Refraction Clarity Over Miles


While extreme refraction can distort images, under specific atmospheric conditions it can also transmit incredibly clear images — sometimes even clearer than on “normal” days due to atmospheric focusing. This is rare but docuмented (e.g., Fata Morgana effects).

I did catch flatearth.ws engaging in sophisms such as claiming that water is curved by multiplying water in a glass which had teh most minuscule amount of curvature, of which we all know it the meniscus and then timesing it by intervals of ten. Anybody with half a brain can tell how deceptive that is.

In regards to polar circuмnavigation it either wupould have been faked or he would have gone to Antarctica then gone east or west then due north arfter circuмnavigating half way east of the circuмference of the sphere to the prime meridian and then would have gone due north to the arctic which would have given the illusion that he was circuмnavigating a globe because he went through Antarctica when in reality he was just circling eastwards and then inwards. Railguns obviously don’t account for cuirvature because they are completely level, lazers and the horizon certainly cannot refract to such a perfect level where they look as if they were on a flat earth when they are really “hugging the curve” and mirages do not look like that, not to mention how If the light if refracting diwnwards, on a globe it should be able to reach my eyes because I would be upwards of the curve. The “actual” curvature formula According to ChatGPT was d^2/2R, the globes act like this is such an aha when it really don’t because it still posits curvature, which is unable to be found. 




They want you to beleive that under all conditions andno matter what the horizon itself lazers and objects past teh horizon ALWAYS refract in a way which makes them act as if teh earth was flat when in reality they are behind teh curve, that is not how refraction works, these experiments are done in places with wildly different pressure and temperature gradients and the so called mirages are always perfect, not to mention that if they were really mirages they should be able to be seen by the naked eye not needing some zoom in lenses, and refraction cannot account for as many miles as we can see past the imaginary curve.



Flat earth ws has already been caught out making ridiculous sophisms and shouldn’t be taken seriously, as if they can ascertain whether or not water is level from a glass with a meniscus!

Refraction is 100% debunked by the two-way laser experiments.  If there's increasing density in one direction causing downward refraction around the "globe", then there's upward refraction due to decreasing density in the other direction.  Lasers were at the same height about the water about 10 feet apart.  There's on way that on those relative paths there's increasing density in one direction and then decreasing in the other.

Also, the longer the "see too far" the more impossible refraction becomes.  Why?  Take a photo from 250 miles away.  Unless you have the exact same rate of refraction for the entire 250 miles, the different refraction angles would cause images at different distances to be refracted at different rates, whereupon the images would run into one another, causing the blurring and haziness that's characteristic of refraction even at closer distances.  But we have many crystal clear photos from hundreds of miles away.

Simply not possible.

I invite the globers to propose other theories, but refraction is Dead On Arrival as an excuse.

Refraction is 100% debunked by the two-way laser experiments.  If there's increasing density in one direction causing downward refraction around the "globe", then there's upward refraction due to decreasing density in the other direction.  Lasers were at the same height about the water about 10 feet apart.  There's on way that on those relative paths there's increasing density in one direction and then decreasing in the other.

Also, the longer the "see too far" the more impossible refraction becomes.  Why?  Take a photo from 250 miles away.  Unless you have the exact same rate of refraction for the entire 250 miles, the different refraction angles would cause images at different distances to be refracted at different rates, whereupon the images would run into one another, causing the blurring and haziness that's characteristic of refraction even at closer distances.  But we have many crystal clear photos from hundreds of miles away.

Simply not possible.

I invite the globers to propose other theories, but refraction is Dead On Arrival as an excuse.

Unless I'm mistaken, refraction isn't just about shining light straight into varying densities, but at an angle, more or less a shallow angle into varying densities. That could involve density that changes vertically, such that a laser shined horizontally would be affected in both directions, especially if the density gradient curves with the earth so it isn't perfectly horizontal. This would involve a density gradient symmetrical in both directions, similarly to how a clear sphere will bend light the same no matter which direction it is looked at.

The problem with using lasers over long distances is that they diverge a lot, so the precision of the experiment goes way down. The experiment would need to use a laser with a known divergence that is within the level of precision required by the experiment. A high quality beam expander can help in this case, and the bigger it is the better.