Have you ever debated AI like ChatGPT on geocentrism?

Yes, I have had my debates, and it all depends on how you approach it, especially ChatGPT. If you come straight at it and say heliocentrism is false and geocentrism is true, it will shoot you down and do it quite well. But if you know how to approach it, you can point out flaws in the Copernican system and show how the geocentric system answers the objections leveled against it over the past four hundred years. You had better know your science, your math, and your history, or ChatGPT will chew you up. I have had sessions where I got ChatGPT to admit that geocentrism is a viable scientific position, so that issue is settled for me. Right now, and for the past couple of months, I have been working with ChatGPT about five hours a day on the math for my idea about the Planck medium. I have long argued that we cannot consider space to be nothing, because 'nothing' means nothing exists there, and if space were nothing there would be no distance between the earth and the moon; they would coalesce, and there could not be ninety-three million miles between the earth and the sun. Quantum mechanics has verified that there is something there, even if we do not know exactly what it is, and I have reduced that something to the Planck dimensions, the dimensions a single entity would need in order to compose the 'something' of space. When you get down to that level, remarkable things happen, and I am working with ChatGPT to show that this Planck-dimension space is the cause of gravity. The math is nearly finished, and if it holds up I will publish it and show the math, because the math is the only kind of proof society will accept. I am done arguing geocentrism versus heliocentrism with AI; I have moved on to using the Planck dimensions to explain gravity, which I could not have done without ChatGPT's math skills.