In Florin Diacu's own words: "Fomenko, Nosovski, and Kalashnikov have come up with some interesting methods that can extract new information from the almagest. like any other historical dating, theirs is based on certain assumptions, different from the ones traditionalists have made. without forcing the data, and taking three independent approaches that use valid mathematical methods, they have obtained consistent results that have been published in respected journals. Fomenko's results are obviously not perfect and do not explain everything, but their integrity cannot be denied." ("The Lost Millennium", pp. 144)
Although "Chronology 3" is composed of 2 main parts, that is the Egyptian zodiac datings and Ptolemy's almagest datings, i can only defend Fomenko with the almagest datings, they are sound, they are truly possible. i believe however that the zodiak datings still need to be worked out, i can't find any possible scenario for such late datings.
I strongly recommend this book regardless what any angry historian could say about it. anyone who believes that the chronology of world history is well documented and sound should read as a starter "Centuries of Darkness" by Peter James and his team. Truly, don't believe anyone, simply read, learn and see for yourself. This is history, not math.
When reading Fomenko, one does not have to take everything he says at face value, but one must have an open mind to a field that is dominated more by its general tradition than by its sound proof. just like most believers preach the bible without ever reading it many historians preach chronology without ever having asked the question: what if chronology is all wrong?
Ask yourself the question and dare to explore.