I don't dispute that the stars slow down and change configuration as they approach the horizon.
My point is that the Round Earth Theory appears to operate entirely on the basis of special pleading. There are many excuses for why prediction is not possible, and why this or that does not reflect a Round Earth, while simultaneously claiming that the evidence behind it is certain and mountainous.
There's no special pleading because there's no contradiction. Atmospheric refraction proves Round Earth. Let's separate the issue in two statements:
1) The Earth's rotation makes the sky rotate with a rate of 15° per hour.
2) Close to the horizon, light rays are refracted further away because they are tangent to the Earth's curvature.
Statements 1 and 2 aren't contradictory. If you think they are, you need to explain why.
The predictions resulting from 1) are verified every day.
Every time a star dips below the horizon and, according to 2), is temporarily refracted, it always reappears above the horizon after following the same rate of 15° per hour predicted by 1).
There's no need for excuses because predictions don't fail. If you have observational data failing 1), could you present it?