Robin Edgar Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The "unusual series of solar eclipses" that is
> described in considerable detail in my eclipse
> lore web site that shows how the Nazca Lines and
> geoglyphs were almost certainly a religious
> response to the total solar eclipse "Eye of God"
> and other eclipse phenomena.

I read it. I still didn't see any "unusual set of eclipses." I see data for standard eclipses that would have occured over the area since the moon first circled the Earth.


> The "math" is very straightforward. It is a well
> known scientific "fact" (dare I say "statistic"?)
> that "on average" or "usually" a total solar
> eclipse will only occur once every 400 years or so
> over any particular location on our planet. This
> highly misleading astronomical "statistic" makes
> it seem that it is "unusual" for human beings to
> witness a total solar eclipse in any one place on
> Earth.

"On average"?? You're talking about "unusual events." This implies you have a string of dates available that show how the number of eclipses deviates from the expected and predicted (that's what unusual means -- deviates from expected and predicted.)

Everyone accepts the general statistics. What I'm asking for is dates and the evidence that the dates deviated from the predicted.


> within a few years of each other. Indeed a
> civilization, such as the Nazca culture, might
> witness an "unusual series" of a dozen or more
> total solar eclipses within a millennia or two,
> with some of those total solar eclipses spaced
> very close together.

You're using a lot of "might haves" and "possibles" and "mights" in this message. Heck, they "might" have been hit by a meteorite or two. But theories don't deal in "mights" (they might have had a plague of flying llamas.)

What are the specific dates?


> present orbit at all. That is a misinformed
> assumption on your part. The fact of the matter is
> that concentrations (in time) of solar eclipses
> occur over different regions of the Earth with the
> moon in its present (dare I say "usual"?) orbit
> around the Earth.

But you were talking about "out of the ordinary"; the "unusual." Not "events that occur regularly in the region every xxx number of years."

The site also makes some assumptions about "eye of god" and similar designs and never addresses the idea that most solar designs are of the solar cross type (eye in cross) and as such they don't actually represent an eclipse.

Nor do I see any of your evidence that they responded to eclipses (solar and lunar or other celestial events) with geoglyphs.

The theory about water markers and clan totems has considerably more evidence. You haven't provided much that would overturn it. Naturally, I would be interested in seeing something other than a string of "supposes" and "might haves" and "probably"s.