The Aztecs knew Mars as Huitzilopochtli was a god of war in South America.
The Chinese know of Mars as Yin-Ho, the fire-planet.
The Celtic & Bantu people of Africa have legends of loading pregnant women onto ships escaping a Martian Holocaust.
Much of this is cited in many of David Hatcher Childress works.
From Wikipedia, which I'm usually loath to cite: "...Childress claims no academic credentials as a professional archaeologist nor in any other scientific field of study, having left the University of Montana after one year
to travel the world to personally research the subjects about which he would later write. Childress has appeared on NBC (The Mysterious Origins of Man), Fox Network (Sightings and Encounters), Discovery Channel, A&E, and The History Channel (e.g. Ancient Aliens), to comment on subjects such as the Bermuda Triangle, Atlantis, and UFOs
." Yes, your cited author seems all about "the facts", cannot be bothered with formal education, or the limitations that such a classical education might encourage such as peer reviews, facts, proof, or anything other than pure supposition. I love how you take his theories and the stories of old dead people, at face value, despite the entire lack of empirical proof, archeological evidence, or even imaged proof from NASA probes. Whats even stranger, is that his revisionist version of history, is not mentioned anywhere else other than his "works." Sure, the Aztecs and Chinese may have known of the planet itself, they were advanced peoples even for their time. But even if they said the moon was made of cheese, I'd want proof. So for any ancient people, peoples who were routinely superstitious, to say that they interacted with peoples from another planet...that's a stretch. And for anybody to throw in with somebody based on theories which lack any real proof, evidence, or anything other than pure supposition, that's just lunacy on your part, and it shows that you are willing to throw in with anyone who is willing to parrot your opinions, vies and theories. I come from a profession where evidence rules the day, and proves the case. When it comes to matters such as the ones you cite, it would behoove everyone to have similar standards in proof and evidence.