You don't get it: the piece was not about "big secondary craters" and made no mention of them
Space/Science » in reply to You still don't get it: there are no big secondary craters
The whole thread (20 posts)
- Crater count led Mars historians astray
- Does this mean many ages are older or younger than thought? (n/t)
- This correction should affect crater-counts...
- Let's be straight about who was wrong here - There are no Mars "historians"
- re: Crater count led Mars historians astray
- Uhhh, ejections did not produce the "secondary" craters
