The sun doesn’t always set red, I’m sure you know that.
When the sun sets, it sets redder in colour. When there is particulates in the air its colour is even redder. So whilst the sun is close to the horizon, it is reddish in colour.
For three thousand years?
It may be possible. Coemtary dust is very fine, and atmospheric loading can effect sunset colours for years. The reason being is that the cometary dust is kept aloft in the upper atmosphere for longer than the dust that is produced in volcanic erruptions.
If the progenitor of the dust, was a large active comet, then the dust stream that the earth moves through can be dense, to repopulate the concentration of dust in the sky. If the progenitor was Comet Encke, then the earth passes through the dust stream twice a year, in June and in November, giving ample oppertunity to reload the atmosphere. Such a large comet would also create a large amount of dust that could last for millenia. So yes it is possible. But one question is that why does the sun have to be red all the time upon sunset. Would not it appearing periodically to be red in June and November not be enough to make the egyptians take note.
That’s fare enough but where is any of this written down in ancient history.
The argument is that it was written down in ancient history, but in the form of myth. It can be argued that the stories of the gods and half gods are all inspired by this one or more(?) large comets.
I think it is important for your thesis to stand up to scrutiny is for evidence in many ancient cultures of consistantly red suns. that will be the ultimate test.
????.... where’s a moderator when you need one!!!
LOL. Right here!! you are discussing with one :P
I only recomend the books because they are interesting, and worth looking at. I am not claiming that they speak the ultimate truth. In fact they are probably plain wrong. The point is though, I think that in order to set your thesis out as being the definitive model, you need to examine other possible competing models.
So please dont get me wrong. I am not ridiculing your idea, but just cross examining it with questions, just as any scientific method affords. This is how one bullet proofs a theory, by subjecting it to questions and scrutiny. Strong theories which make convincing arguments tend to survive such a bombardment of questions reasonably intact.
This post was created using 100% recycled electrons