There’s seemingly nothing wrong with Hickson’s argument about the Earth-Sun distance via the parallax of Mars.  There are serious problems with the way the measurement was done.  I find it frankly astounding that modern-day methods would somehow miraculously agree with the older, super-flawed math and reasoning.  And though I see in several places around the web that “Hickson has been thoroughly refuted”, I can find no record of that refutation.  I would very much like to see that.  I am no flat-earther, but I’m open-minded enough to want to see someone have to defend these old methods.  And saying, “Well, we’ve got expensive gear that tells us we were always right” doesn’t do it for me.  Show how Hickson was wrong.