Ok I see this is a different argument about the horizon. The answer: The devil is in the details.

1 - On that very website, it says

any attempt to increase the distance is still possible if atmospheric conditions are especially favorable refractive exceptional transparency

Implying they took advantage of some refraction. So what's that? Let's find out. Take a look at this picture:

The sun here is in fact below the horizon.

Since the density of the atmosphere varies at different altitudes, light and other electromagnetic waves are refracted (denser air has a higher refractive index).

Again it's easy to accuse us of lying about refraction, but then you're denying a whole field of physics again, which is absurd. You can read more about refraction here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refractive_index

Refraction is very real and substantial, which is why sailors, when navigating with stars, don’t use stars below 20 degrees to the horizon, for example.

It's also why astronomers and photographers schedule their plans accordingly. These people in the video planned their photo in order to get the world record. If it was an every day phenomenon, it wouldn't be much of a world record, would it?

You can actually use my video to demonstrate this exact photo. As stated, there is no atmosphere on Google Earth so no refraction. The mountains are accurately placed including altitude, so if you read up on exactly how much refraction, compensate by closing the distance accordingly on google earth, you would see roughly the same peaks as the photo.

The weird thing is, is the guy in the video is actually admitting that there is a curvature of the earth by showing how you can only see the peaks of the mountains. Take a look at some of the mountains, they aren't small!