Astronomy vs. History

ALL solar, lunar eclipses mentioned in chronicles presumed to be written before XVI century could not and did not take place at the very time and exact location reported to us by the ancient authors thereof. Learned chroniclers did like so much to stress the importance of the event with some phenomena in the sky. Either they lied or were wrong, or both. Verdict: the celestial events took place some other time and some other place or there was nothing spectacular in the sky at that very moment. Voil "Astronomy vs History" crowns scores of years of meticulous and extensive research performed by the eminent mathematician Anatoly Fomenko and his colleagues. This research started actually as an anecdotical byproduct of Russian-American competition in Moon exploration. Chief astrophysicist of NASA Robert R.Newton discovered a very strange phenomenon in lunar mechanics proving irrefutably that the solar eclipses of Antiquity referred to in 'ancient' Chronicles were actually medieval. The author dissects every historical age and analyzed the data from every source imaginable - Ticho Brahe, Ptolemy, and Copernicus disguised as 'ancient' Ptolemy take the blame for creating the legend of a mythical Classical age that never was and misdating mediaeval events by hundreds and thousands of years as very ancient ones. In "Astronomy vs. History" we are reminded of the crucial role of eclipses in verifying the dating of major historical events, of Zodiacs from egyptian temples containing the true dates of such events. Our perception of history begins to change dramatically even before we're through with "Astronomy vs. History." On one hand, Dr Fomenko et al call everybody, historians including, to aplly the Occam's razor to the world history. On the other, the scientists Dr Fomenko et al are ready to recognize their alleged mistakes of New Chronology theory, to repent and to retract if and only if: - radiocarbon dating methods or dendrochronology pass the clear anonymous 'black box' tests; - astronomic data refutes their results on solar eclipses; - it is proven irrefutably that Robert Newton (NASA astrophysicist) was wrong calling 'ancient' Ptolemy the greatest con man in history in his book 'Crime of Claudius Ptolemy'; At present historians are not willing to apply exact sciences toolbox. Beware of the Occam's razor as their beautiful web of lies is too fragile The radiocarbon dating labs run their very costly tests only if is the sample to be dated is accompanied with an idea of age pronounced by historians on basis of...subjective..mmm...gutfeeling and the history books they have been writing for the last 400 years. The radiocarbon dating labs run their very costly tests only if the sample to be dated is accompanied with an idea of age pronounced by historians on basis of...subjective..mmm...gutfeeling and the history books they have been writing for the last 400 years. Radiocarbon labs happily bill for their fiddling and fine tuning with C14 hardware to get the dates 'to order' of historians. The demand to recalculate the calibration curve with an accelerator mass spectrometer is refuted absolutely. Why? The calibration of C14 curve valid now was made initially by the first radiocarbon lab of Arizona University on the basis of samples supplied and dated by the exploration team of Arizona University in Egypt. Circulus Vicious is perfect. Connect the dots... PS: Prescient Saint Augustine warned: 'be wary of mathematicians, particularly when they speak the truth '. Dr. Anatoly Fomenko is a Full Member (Academician) of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Full Member of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences, Full Member of the International Higher Education Academy of Sciences, Doctor of Physics and Mathematics, Professor, Head of the Moscow State University Department of Mathematics and Mechanics. Solved the classical Plateau's Problem from the theory of minimal spectral surfaces.