The obvious follow on from that is to ask if you, or indeed any FET proponent, can show an example of stellarium being significantly wrong compared to a measured observation?
I think that does not make any sense. This would be a case for softwaretesters but not for any FET/RET/other debate.
If Stellarium is always correct, this does not automatically proof RET true.
If there are wrong events, it does not automatically proof RET wrong. Usually complex software has some bugs and limitations.
So any outcome is without additional value except potentially verifying the software quality.
IMHO it does not make any sense to insist on following this up.
This discussion showed me, that sometimes tools are used to demonstrate something without knowing what is actually under the hood. This does not matter if all parties involved in a discussion agree the tool as valid "authority" (which might be the case if you e.g. use Excel to build a sum), but if the underlying model is of question it matters.