As a theoretical physicist I have a reasonable understanding of the mechanics and stability of Earth's orbit. The forces required to make any substantial change to Earth's orbit would be immense. Our very existence guarantees this never happened.
Please comment on real science as deduced from real scientists.
You will see that detailed simulations of the changes to Earth's precession constant and obliquity show that they are very stable on geological timescales.
Again, this statement proves that you have no understanding of the phenomenon of precession.
How can you honestly compare geologic data to astronomical data and assert a correlation.
Please provide proof!
Your error is in making a linear extrapolation (and using very old data). Earth's dynamics are not linear on long timescales.
Another BS statement.
No error whatsoever.
More proof that you have absolutely no understanding of my position. And you are an "expert".
Please provide proof of this bunch of codswallop.
It's quite telling that I have asked you to provide proof of all of your opinions, but have had no reply. Is it, as I have commented, that you have no such proof and are merely waffling on in the vain hope that someone might actually believe this nonsense?
Let's get to the "done deal."
You know, the proof which seals the assumption that you can really decode prehistory.
You allege in your video (Part 5 - hat tip to Corpuscles) that paleolithic cave paintings prove your hypothesis. You state that the preponderance of evidence relies on statistics (another field in which you are a self declared "expert").
You state that the Zodiacal Ages are reflected in the number of a particular type of animal or bird which are painted on cave walls in the area of South West France. I have also seen similar paintings in Asturias.
Majority rules. If bears, for example, are the majority of animals depicted, this is proof that they were painted in the Age of the Bear, which, according to you, is an earlier concept of the Age of Virgo.
Now, as you have become aware, I am not an advocate of the garden variety view of precession which is the basis of your hypothesis. However, for the sake of discussion, let's use your model.
The age of these paleolithic paintings, according to you can be attributed to the conventional Age of Libra - 13000 to 15 000 BC approx. Therefore, one should assume that the majority of animals painted on the cave walls in question should reflect the animal or motif associated with this age.
Obviously, no paintings of scales have been discovered.
But, using the new Sweatman Zodiac, you have reassigned the symbolic scales of Libra and substituted the duck.
Therefore, one should, upon entering Lascaux observe a preponderance of ducks painstakingly rendered upon the limestone walls.
If one bothers to research the number of paintings at Lascaux (as one example), one finds that there are 900 paintings in the cave. Of these paintings, 364 are horses, 90 are stags, 45 are bovines and seven are felines. Are there any ducks?
Now, for someone who makes a living out of interpreting statistics (until a decoder of prehistory became a possibility) can you honestly expect an educated public to buy into this gross manipulation of data?
If you wish, we can discuss the Age of Taurus in another post.
The age in which you substitute bulls for rhinosceri.
That should be fun.