Proof – Mars Orbited close to Earth 1350 BC

[AlexandrKushnirtshuk]

They write here that around 1350 BC, Mars was in geostationary orbit, and they give good evidence.
Proof – Mars Orbited close to Earth 1350 BC (Updated)
 
But if about 3350 years ago Mars was in a geostationary orbit, then its diameter cannot be 6.7 thousand km., but just about 15-20 km., as I suppose in my New Model of the Universe.

[beecee]

58 minutes ago, AlexandrKushnirtshuk said:

They write here that around 1350 BC, Mars was in geostationary orbit, and they give good evidence.
Proof – Mars Orbited close to Earth 1350 BC (Updated)
 
But if about 3350 years ago Mars was in a geostationary orbit, then its diameter cannot be 6.7 thousand km., but just about 15-20 km., as I suppose in my New Model of the Universe.

Sorry, you actually signal that this was going to be another "nothing argument" by the use of the word "proof" 

And in actual fact, I see it as about reliable as the claim from a bloke called Brandenburg and the following....

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/340952315_EVIDENCE_OF_A_MASSIVE_THERMONUCLEAR_EXPLOSIONS_ON_MARS_IN_THE_PAST_The_Cydonian_Hypothesis_and_Fermi's_Paradox

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/John_Brandenburg

John E. Brandenburg is a plasma physicist who went somewhat off the rails in 2012 and started proclaiming that he saw clear evidence of a thermonuclear war on Mars in the distant past. This off-beat idea attracted the attention of woo-peddlars and gave a mighty boost to sales of his books—both the non-fiction books and the science fiction books that he wrote using the nom de plume Victor Norgarde.

In his 2015 book, Brandenburg declared himself a devout Pentecostal Christian.

 

Another out to sell his books, namely John Ackerman.

And who could ever miss the paradox that you have created by using some pseudscientific  nonsense, to support more speudoscientific nonsense.

[AlexandrKushnirtshuk]

Hidden Pyramids? - Mars Mountains Match Pyramids on Earth

The Pyramids of Giza, the Belt of Orion and Three Volcanoes on Mars

[swansont]

3 hours ago, AlexandrKushnirtshuk said:

They write here that around 1350 BC, Mars was in geostationary orbit, and they give good evidence.
Proof – Mars Orbited close to Earth 1350 BC (Updated)
 
But if about 3350 years ago Mars was in a geostationary orbit, then its diameter cannot be 6.7 thousand km., but just about 15-20 km., as I suppose in my New Model of the Universe.

!

Moderator Note

1. without reading the link, I can say that they do not give good evidence

2. You must present evidence here, not just give links (see rule 2.7)

3.  Advertising your other threads is also against the rules

 

 

[Janus]

Of course no mention of the fact that if Mars had been at geostationary orbit distance from the Earth it would have pulled all the Earth's oceans into 6 km high tidal bulges.

[John Cuthber]

10 hours ago, AlexandrKushnirtshuk said:

But if about 3350 years ago Mars was in a geostationary orbit, then its diameter cannot be 6.7 thousand km., but just about 15-20 km., as I suppose in my

The more sensible way to look at that is that, since Mars is about 6,700 km in diameter, your idea is wrong. 

[AlexandrKushnirtshuk]

Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter contradicts planetary science

Jupiter and Venus Papers

[John Cuthber]

14 minutes ago, AlexandrKushnirtshuk said:

Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter contradicts planetary science

Jupiter and Venus Papers

Did you understand what was meant by

 

9 hours ago, swansont said:

. You must present evidence here, not just give links (see rule 2.7)

 

[beecee]

20 minutes ago, AlexandrKushnirtshuk said:

Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter contradicts planetary science

Jupiter and Venus Papers

Always referencing back to the same pseudoscience nonsensical acksblog!

[Area54]

17 minutes ago, AlexandrKushnirtshuk said:

Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter contradicts planetary science

Extract from your link:

MRO is good at  finding new craters. Such “fresh” craters can be identified by the new-looking ejecta blanket of rocky debris around them. Many more of these can be seen on Mars due to the planet’s very thin atmosphere, which doesn’t burn up larger meteors as easily as Earth’s atmosphere. More of them therefore actually impact the planet. MRO has found over 800 new impact craters so far during its mission. The one pictured in Fig. 1 is about 98 feet (30 meters) across. The impact was strong enough to throw ejecta as far as 9.3 miles (15 km).

The only problem is, we are used to seeing images like the outflow channels in Fig. 2, claimed by Mars ‘experts’ to be billions of years old. If the  Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter has discovered 800 new ones in the 15 years it has orbited Mars, then in 1 billion years Mars would have received 368 such impacts on every square kilometer of the planet and the flow features would be barely detectable. Note that in the images there are a number of impacts, but there are no impacts on the flow features.

1. What evidence do you have that these "new" craters were formed during the period after the work of the MRO began? It seems much more likely that the improved optics of the MRO allowed previously unrecognised geologically recent craters to be identified - the article even notes "MRO is good at finding new craters".

2. To what extent does the example impact represent a typical impact? Are they all this large? What is the smallest detected? The average size?

[swansont]

!

Moderator Note

Since we can’t seem to follow the rules, we’re done here

Don’t bring this topic up again