End of the world: 12/21/2012
How many people really believe something catastrophic is going to happen on the date of 12/21/2012? Why would people be inclined to believe that one particular Mayan calendar cycle is indicative of a cataclysmic shift, when so many previous apocalyptic predictions based on other calendars failed to deliver.
Here is a great video by the great DR Neil Degrasse Tyson discussing this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJjQMwEjC1I
People like sensationalism, even if it might mean their death and he mentions in another video that people actually look depressed when he tells them that the world is not ending in 2012.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJjQMwEjC1I
People like sensationalism, even if it might mean their death and he mentions in another video that people actually look depressed when he tells them that the world is not ending in 2012.
The world as we knew it was going to come to an end when the last millennium rolled over. Remember the great y2k panic. It probably would have if anyone had been able to agree on what day the new millennium actually started. If people predict enough dates for the next great catastrophe somebody will be right eventually. If it is as big and devastating as the hints sugget then there won't be enough people around to be impressed by the prediction. Mayan's, Jehova's Witnesses or flying saucer passengers, I won't believe any of them until I see it, and I will probably be very lucky if I am able to do that.
ASKER
y2k panic was a crisis based on reality. true, the panic level didn't match what actually occurred, but that was due to a number of factors including widespread preparation and a general ability of organizations to self-resolve y2k related computing problems on-the-fly.
however, if we survive the Mayan apocalypse, we will be doomed for certain on Jan 19, 2038. that's the day time runs out.
however, if we survive the Mayan apocalypse, we will be doomed for certain on Jan 19, 2038. that's the day time runs out.
"y2k panic was a crisis based on reality."
actually it was based on perceived consequences of unknown reality in multiple flavors.
the possibility of worldwide computer failure was "possible" but not real (as evidenced by the all the stuff that did fail and yet we're still here), there were steps taken to resolve some issues, but the panic was still for the "what if" as well as the artificially induced hysteria about the number 2000. There was a Y1K panic too, why people are afraid of sequential zeroes I have no idea. As if the universe (or a divine being) would actually care how people choose to number things.
the Mayan calendar is real, in some ways even MORE real than the y2k bug because it has a constant implementation. There is no software fix to extend it.
actually it was based on perceived consequences of unknown reality in multiple flavors.
the possibility of worldwide computer failure was "possible" but not real (as evidenced by the all the stuff that did fail and yet we're still here), there were steps taken to resolve some issues, but the panic was still for the "what if" as well as the artificially induced hysteria about the number 2000. There was a Y1K panic too, why people are afraid of sequential zeroes I have no idea. As if the universe (or a divine being) would actually care how people choose to number things.
the Mayan calendar is real, in some ways even MORE real than the y2k bug because it has a constant implementation. There is no software fix to extend it.
maybe "unknown reality" was bad wording
"ambiguous reality" might have been better. :)
"ambiguous reality" might have been better. :)
Maybe, if there is so little time left, we better get on with it!
You missed my extra 'y2k' point about the lack of agreement over whether the millennium actually started on Jan 1st 2000 or Jan 1st 2001. That event was so recent and yet there was and probably still is a great confusion over which date to celebrate. My point is that a prediction from an ancient calendar could fall almost anywhere on our present day calandar (the one that had 23 extra days bunged in it about 300 years ago), and the likelyhood of that great prediction falling on such a pretty looking date seems quite unlikely. In the UK we write that date as 21/12/2012, so if you want a really good pattern then we probably have another hundred years left anyway.
... or it might run out on the 20th December.
also, regardless of 2000 or 2001, when did Jan 1st occur? The Gregorian calendar skipped 10 days in 1582. Does the apocalypse obey a papal bull?
I might have got the 23 days and the 300 years a bit out, I think I meant the 10 days and 1582, but it sort of backs up my point a bit :7)
Another thought I had was that the end of the world falling on a single date would be either hard to control or a little unfair to most of the world. Some parts of the world will reach that date a full 24 hours before others, so picking a time when everybody has had a full share of their last dawn and nobody gets to see the day after is going to be a bit hard.
Another thought I had was that the end of the world falling on a single date would be either hard to control or a little unfair to most of the world. Some parts of the world will reach that date a full 24 hours before others, so picking a time when everybody has had a full share of their last dawn and nobody gets to see the day after is going to be a bit hard.
The funny thing is that the Mayans did not even believe that the worls would end on 21/12/12. To them it was simply when the long count would roll over to 0, just as 31/12 rolls over to 1/1.
Of course the Mayans also believed that the gods needed to be persuaded to pass the count over to the next god in line, so the world could continue on. Now that required sacifices, in other words human blood. If they were still around, they would slaughter tens of thousands of prisoners on 21/12/21. Slaughtering implied ripping their living hearts out - they were not exactly sqeamish....
Of course the Mayans also believed that the gods needed to be persuaded to pass the count over to the next god in line, so the world could continue on. Now that required sacifices, in other words human blood. If they were still around, they would slaughter tens of thousands of prisoners on 21/12/21. Slaughtering implied ripping their living hearts out - they were not exactly sqeamish....
> however, if we survive the Mayan apocalypse, we will be doomed for certain on Jan 19, 2038. that's the day time runs out.
And if we survive that one, we might still get wiped out by a 'massive asteroid hit'!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1298285/Massive-asteroid-hit-Earth-2182-warn-scientists.html
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/07/28/massive-asteroid-hit-earth-warn-scientists/
But of course 2012 is also suppose to be when our solar system passes through the center line of the galaxy.
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/esp_2012_03.htm
I assume that means our probability of being smacked by a wandering star will be multiplied by a factor of one hundred. (Of course, because this is also a math/science question, I should probably include: approximately zero times multiplied by one hundred is approximately zero.)
And if that misses us, I'm sure there will be other doom predictions behind it too!
http://discordia.wikia.com/wiki/Great_Green_Arkleseizure
And if we survive that one, we might still get wiped out by a 'massive asteroid hit'!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1298285/Massive-asteroid-hit-Earth-2182-warn-scientists.html
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/07/28/massive-asteroid-hit-earth-warn-scientists/
But of course 2012 is also suppose to be when our solar system passes through the center line of the galaxy.
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/esp_2012_03.htm
I assume that means our probability of being smacked by a wandering star will be multiplied by a factor of one hundred. (Of course, because this is also a math/science question, I should probably include: approximately zero times multiplied by one hundred is approximately zero.)
And if that misses us, I'm sure there will be other doom predictions behind it too!
http://discordia.wikia.com/wiki/Great_Green_Arkleseizure
> however, if we survive the Mayan apocalypse, we will be doomed for certain on Jan 19, 2038. that's the day time runs out.
Actually, that's the day the clocks on unix (or linux) systems go back to 0. It's the unix equivalent of the Y2K bug. In unix, the time is given in seconds from 1 Jan 1970. It's a 32 bit number and in 2038 it'll wrap back to 0 - which is 13 Dec 1901...
See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_2038_problem
Actually, that's the day the clocks on unix (or linux) systems go back to 0. It's the unix equivalent of the Y2K bug. In unix, the time is given in seconds from 1 Jan 1970. It's a 32 bit number and in 2038 it'll wrap back to 0 - which is 13 Dec 1901...
See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_2038_problem
Yes, anyone still using a 32 bit *nix OS or using a time-sensitive application in 32 bit compatibility mode in twenty-eight years will have a problem. Twenty-eight years ago the Intel 286 was introduced. :-)
I don't think any sane person really believes the world will end in 2012, its just good fun.
The problem with this question is that few seem to understand what the World is. Many have this ingrained idea of what they think it is. The World is your creation, and you carry it on your shoulders.
Nothing is going to happen overnight, but rather, 2012 can be viewed as a epicentre for what is to take place. As Peter Russell pointed out, an earthquake has far reaching effects, and though it theoretically has an epicenter, this epicenter has little meaning.
For those who know what I am saying here, my words are superfluous. For those who don't, my words are useless.
Nothing is going to happen overnight, but rather, 2012 can be viewed as a epicentre for what is to take place. As Peter Russell pointed out, an earthquake has far reaching effects, and though it theoretically has an epicenter, this epicenter has little meaning.
For those who know what I am saying here, my words are superfluous. For those who don't, my words are useless.
Wow.
ASKER
^^ interesting. expand please. what do you think the 2012 epicenter represents? what will be the shock waves?
there will be no shock waves.
A few people out of the billions on the planet will feel silly and or disappointed.
The vast majority of the people will either not even be aware of the day when it happens or will find it an amusing bit of trivia.
A very few "true believers" (i.e. crazy people) might do something irrational.
But, they, like the "heaven's gate" crowd of y2k will be small and while possibly tragic, largely irrelevant in the grand scheme of things.
It will be a non-event.
A few people out of the billions on the planet will feel silly and or disappointed.
The vast majority of the people will either not even be aware of the day when it happens or will find it an amusing bit of trivia.
A very few "true believers" (i.e. crazy people) might do something irrational.
But, they, like the "heaven's gate" crowd of y2k will be small and while possibly tragic, largely irrelevant in the grand scheme of things.
It will be a non-event.
Agree with him. ^
ASKER
^, ^^ : yeah, all you guys saying "fuggitaboutit", i think i already know where you stand in your personal opinion on the issue.
but Jason210 ^^^ is the only one so far who has hinted at another perspective. I'm interested to hear more of this.
This is what my OP is driving at: I'm trying to get my head into the space where people are who believe that there's something real behind the hype. apparenly a lot of people believe something is going to happen. I want to know what they believe and -- more importantly -- why they believe this.
If you're a skeptic, please certainly do post relevant facts that support your case for this being a "non event" ... but please dont bash anyone who has the cajones to support an alternate belief. i did not create this for choir-preaching and back-patting.
but Jason210 ^^^ is the only one so far who has hinted at another perspective. I'm interested to hear more of this.
This is what my OP is driving at: I'm trying to get my head into the space where people are who believe that there's something real behind the hype. apparenly a lot of people believe something is going to happen. I want to know what they believe and -- more importantly -- why they believe this.
If you're a skeptic, please certainly do post relevant facts that support your case for this being a "non event" ... but please dont bash anyone who has the cajones to support an alternate belief. i did not create this for choir-preaching and back-patting.
I've already given the reason why the date is meaningless. As to why some people believe in it: people can be made to believe anything.
Let me tell you a real story.
I know a woman who thinks she is suffering from "electronic harassment". A neighbour supposedly blasts her with all kinds of radiation, lasers, etc. She moved her bed away from the wall, to be away from the laser which otherwise might burn her! She claims proof is in her frail health, and also because of funny lights on the guy's flat, some funny growth in her aquarium, etc. Photos she takes of the guy's flat sometimes show strange blobs (seems like lens flare to me), sometimes the flat is out of focus, etc
She found something to fight it though: someone who sells an "orgone generator" - whatever that may be. She contacted the conman and he told her that her problems are due to "positive ion resonance", which is caused by underground radioactivity.
When she sent him an email asking for the cost of the generator, she let me include these questions:
- what is positive ion resonance?
- what do you use to measure it?
- if the radioactivity is not natural, has he warned the government that the site may need cleaning up?
The reply was brilliant. The guy did not explain "positive ion resonance" but said that there was no point in telling the government. The reason? The radioactivity comes from an underground nuclear power station, which will be the power source for a huge underground prison that the government is building to house all citizens.
She bought it hook, line and sinker...
PS. I live in Australia, and we have *no* nuclear power stations anywhere above ground.
Let me tell you a real story.
I know a woman who thinks she is suffering from "electronic harassment". A neighbour supposedly blasts her with all kinds of radiation, lasers, etc. She moved her bed away from the wall, to be away from the laser which otherwise might burn her! She claims proof is in her frail health, and also because of funny lights on the guy's flat, some funny growth in her aquarium, etc. Photos she takes of the guy's flat sometimes show strange blobs (seems like lens flare to me), sometimes the flat is out of focus, etc
She found something to fight it though: someone who sells an "orgone generator" - whatever that may be. She contacted the conman and he told her that her problems are due to "positive ion resonance", which is caused by underground radioactivity.
When she sent him an email asking for the cost of the generator, she let me include these questions:
- what is positive ion resonance?
- what do you use to measure it?
- if the radioactivity is not natural, has he warned the government that the site may need cleaning up?
The reply was brilliant. The guy did not explain "positive ion resonance" but said that there was no point in telling the government. The reason? The radioactivity comes from an underground nuclear power station, which will be the power source for a huge underground prison that the government is building to house all citizens.
She bought it hook, line and sinker...
PS. I live in Australia, and we have *no* nuclear power stations anywhere above ground.
Understood rwj04.
This is a case of people just believing what they are 'fed' rather than learning about it and questioning the validity of something. "The masses" often think if enough people say it is true (which is easy to portray on the Internet) then it must be true.
The 'thinkers' question why. The thinkers ask further questions and want to understand. My wife criticizes me for questioning her when she tells me to do something and I explain to her I need to know why. I cannot just do/believe/say something if I do not understand what is behind it.
Too many people's minds don't work this way and if a movie company says that the world will end enough times and puts a bunch of 'referenced' websites on the Internet to sell tickets, the masses all too easily believe it.
As posted earlier, the master of explaining to the masses things that they might not otherwise understand, Dr Neil Degrasse Tyson:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-HghEBxHvgg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7uE1UBs1mlA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJjQMwEjC1I
Anthony
This is a case of people just believing what they are 'fed' rather than learning about it and questioning the validity of something. "The masses" often think if enough people say it is true (which is easy to portray on the Internet) then it must be true.
The 'thinkers' question why. The thinkers ask further questions and want to understand. My wife criticizes me for questioning her when she tells me to do something and I explain to her I need to know why. I cannot just do/believe/say something if I do not understand what is behind it.
Too many people's minds don't work this way and if a movie company says that the world will end enough times and puts a bunch of 'referenced' websites on the Internet to sell tickets, the masses all too easily believe it.
As posted earlier, the master of explaining to the masses things that they might not otherwise understand, Dr Neil Degrasse Tyson:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-HghEBxHvgg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7uE1UBs1mlA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJjQMwEjC1I
Anthony
The end of the world can happen any moment, but it won’t happen at the same time for all of us, because the world is different for all us. This is the essential point to grasp.
If you don’t think this is true, consider, how many actually share the same world you do? (By you I mean anyone who is reading this). I would say the answer is no-one. If they did, you would not be an individual.
Compare, the world of medieval peasant, and the world of Isaac Newton? Consider that in each case, the “world” experienced is a manifestation in their consciousness, created during their lifetime. The medieval peasant lived in fear of it, while Newton lived knowing it for what it was. Compare again, the world of a remorseless killer on death row, and the world of Gandhi…
We talk about the World as if it is an absolute thing, yet no-one sees the same world. The world we see and experience is a manifestation within the conscious mind. This is aanother essential point to grasp – that the world is in the mind, and that this is all we can know. We may infer that there is something outside the mind, but even that inference is inside the mind! Anything that we think, feel or experience, we do so because it became part of mind. Our sensations are shaped by the senses, then by our perception mechanisms and finally processed by our conceptual ideas.
Yet we talk about a physical world beyond the senses, as if it is some kind of absolutely reality, conveniently overlooking the fact that we conceive of this physical world from a human viewpoint. It would be silly to deny that there is something out there, but how many stop to contemplate that this physical world is shaped largely by us? While many refer to it as the absolute, any conception of it, any measuring of it, is relative to us. We cannot imagine of the absolute, for by so doing, we create a relative fragment of it.
All of the worlds that exist in the minds of men have one important thing in common – locality. They each have an epicenter – a point in space time we can call here and now. A centre of a particular form of consciousness. We all exist in differerent positions and at different times. But does the absolute have such a point? If so, what would it be? How? Without mind, there is no reference point against which to measure any world. There can be no objective reality without a reference point, or mind. Mind provides us with that. And since part of our mind is unique, then the world is different for each of us.
Therefore, I refer again to the idea that the world is a human creation, and as such, is subject to change. As we evolve and grow, so does mind, and so does the world. Simply to be convinced of what I’m saying here, would in some sense mean the end of the world as you know it. But that would not be the whole story. There is a secret which is waiting to be realized. It cannot be grasped with the mind, but when realized, well truly mark the end of the world as we know it. It has been referred to throughout history, but just to throw the spanner in the works, I'm going to write a couple of quotes from Jesus. You won’t find these quotes in the New Testament, because the early Christian Church sought it fit to remove the Gospel of Thomas from the New Testaments’ canon, in line with their erroneous idea that central themes of Christianity ought to be the sacrifice of Jesus and the resurrection. Here are the quotes:
2. Jesus said: the seeker should not stop until he finds. When he does find, he will be disturbed. After having being disturbed, he will be astonished. Then he will reign over everything.I have thousands of quotes if you want me, not just from this source, but for any source you like. The trouble is, the meaning gets misinterpreted. Fortunately, this is an evolutionary process with an inevitable outcome. It is a process that has been accelerated by mass communication technology that has exploded during the last 50 years.
3b. When you understand yourselves you will be understood.
18a. The disciple asked Jesus: Tell us about our end. What will it be? Jesus replied: Have you found the beginning, so that you now seek the end? The place of the beginning will be the place of the end.
113. They asked him: When is the Kingdom coming? He replied: It is not coming in an easily observable manner. People will not be saying “Look, it’s over there.” Rather, the Kingdom of the Father is spread out on the earth, and people aren’t aware of it.
There are many thinkers of today who attempt to explain this shift in consciousness. Listen to them. Don't take what the same as Gospel, but listen to their interpretation. I'm currently uploading Peter Russells lecture on this subject to You Tube. I'm not done yet having uploaded only 3/10 lectures, but others have got there before me so you ought to be able to find the rest.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0cjAd2b32cc
Dan Brown is another thinker who has latched on to this way of thinking. He is riding on the wave, but his ideas are sound. Though his works are fiction, and his plots simplistic formula plots, there are two things about his books that warrant interest. Firstly, most the historical references are true which can be something of an eye-opener, and secondly, the stories challenge the established worldview of the religion and church, inspiring and daring us to think differently.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0cjAd2b32cc
Dan Brown is another thinker who has latched on to this way of thinking. He is riding on the wave, but his ideas are sound. Though his works are fiction, and his plots simplistic formula plots, there are two things about his books that warrant interest. Firstly, most the historical references are true which can be something of an eye-opener, and secondly, the stories challenge the established worldview of the religion and church, inspiring and daring us to think differently.
I've already explained my thoughts on both why some "do" believe it as well.
If you're looking for a real survey of the "believers", you will have a hard time, they are a small, small, small minority of people.
Had there not been a bad movie about it, most people wouldn't even know the date had any significance.
Yes, every once in a while it appears in the news or comic or some vague reference in other media, but since most people do not believe
and have good reason to not believe it's nothing.
I do not have a solid measurement on this, but I'd hazard a guess that the vast majority of humans on the planet, even despite the movie and other smaller media mentions
still have no idea what the day is about. Good luck in your search.
If you're looking for a real survey of the "believers", you will have a hard time, they are a small, small, small minority of people.
Had there not been a bad movie about it, most people wouldn't even know the date had any significance.
Yes, every once in a while it appears in the news or comic or some vague reference in other media, but since most people do not believe
and have good reason to not believe it's nothing.
I do not have a solid measurement on this, but I'd hazard a guess that the vast majority of humans on the planet, even despite the movie and other smaller media mentions
still have no idea what the day is about. Good luck in your search.
All of these philosophical opinions and facts about 2010 are interesting and many may have merit, but almost none of them have to do with the date in 2010 or the Mayan calendar as the question is asking. Everyone's life will end differently and everyone's world is different compared to their own life and experiences and surroundings, but to believe that on a date in a specific year, according to an ancient calendar that the "world" will have catastrophe for so many people is ludicrous and just media propaganda and film marketing.
Obi Wan: Luke, you're going to find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view. — Star Wars Episode VI - Return Of The Jedi
This has nothing to do with point of view or perspective. This is the idea that on December 21st 2012 there will be major changes in nature that will cause events in the world that will cause it to dramatically change. That is just ridiculous philosophically or in any other aspect.
Anthony
Obi Wan: Luke, you're going to find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view. — Star Wars Episode VI - Return Of The Jedi
This has nothing to do with point of view or perspective. This is the idea that on December 21st 2012 there will be major changes in nature that will cause events in the world that will cause it to dramatically change. That is just ridiculous philosophically or in any other aspect.
Anthony
The question we should be asking is WHY has the date in the Mayan Calendar has become significant in the collective consciousness of mankind? The answer is because we are expecting something. We have a predisposition for change. The 2012 date has become a symbol for this change.
I have to disagree Jason210.
The date is significant because of a few reasons:
1 - The date is getting closer
2 - People love sensationalism
3 - Hollywood wanted to sell more tickets so pumped it up
As the asteroid Apophis get closer to the Earth in 2029 you will hear the same kind of hype (and another movie will be made along the lines of Deep Impact/Armageddon to capitalize on that hype). Then it will happen again in 2032 as it closes in on us again.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/99942_Apophis
In my opinion, there is not a big philosophical reason for the interest in the date, and certainly not a scientific one.
Anthony
The date is significant because of a few reasons:
1 - The date is getting closer
2 - People love sensationalism
3 - Hollywood wanted to sell more tickets so pumped it up
As the asteroid Apophis get closer to the Earth in 2029 you will hear the same kind of hype (and another movie will be made along the lines of Deep Impact/Armageddon to capitalize on that hype). Then it will happen again in 2032 as it closes in on us again.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/99942_Apophis
In my opinion, there is not a big philosophical reason for the interest in the date, and certainly not a scientific one.
Anthony
So I guess the question comes in 3 parts...
1 - Is it real? (as in physical calamity to the planet) - consensus=no, but of course, we might be wrong
2 - "has become significant in the collective consciousness of mankind" - no, a tiny portion of mankind is even aware of the prediction and of those that are aware, it's not significant. I'll hazard another guess, that this thread is the most thought/discussion any of the participants have had on the subject. As a collective conscious it has not become significant. When this thread is over, most if not all of us will laugh and then promptly forget about it.
3 - of the small minority that are aware and actually care in any kind of "significant" way. Why do they care? As already mentioned, for various reasons, some people latch on to any sort of prognostication with even the most tenuous thread of credibility and again, for whatever reason, apocalyptic predictions seem to be one of the more common or at least more publicisized. Although in this case the "publicity" is trivial or maybe I just don't participate in those news channels.
I want the asker to get his answer though, so what I'm suggesting is rather than ask a bunch of skeptics why a non-event might be important, it might be more fruitful to find some people that actually think it will be important. We can give our theories, and no matter how well intentioned I and others are. Since we don't believe in it, we can't really give a valid answer.
1 - Is it real? (as in physical calamity to the planet) - consensus=no, but of course, we might be wrong
2 - "has become significant in the collective consciousness of mankind" - no, a tiny portion of mankind is even aware of the prediction and of those that are aware, it's not significant. I'll hazard another guess, that this thread is the most thought/discussion any of the participants have had on the subject. As a collective conscious it has not become significant. When this thread is over, most if not all of us will laugh and then promptly forget about it.
3 - of the small minority that are aware and actually care in any kind of "significant" way. Why do they care? As already mentioned, for various reasons, some people latch on to any sort of prognostication with even the most tenuous thread of credibility and again, for whatever reason, apocalyptic predictions seem to be one of the more common or at least more publicisized. Although in this case the "publicity" is trivial or maybe I just don't participate in those news channels.
I want the asker to get his answer though, so what I'm suggesting is rather than ask a bunch of skeptics why a non-event might be important, it might be more fruitful to find some people that actually think it will be important. We can give our theories, and no matter how well intentioned I and others are. Since we don't believe in it, we can't really give a valid answer.
AnthonyRusso
ItI have to disagree with you. Youre missing the significance aspect. There was a similar event 2000 years ago that became popularly known as the star of Bethlehem. Most likely a unusual astronomical event, whether coincidence or not the event served as a symbolical focus for the birth of Jesus. I haven't explored this but it is an intriguing story worthy of investigation.
The thing you're missing is WHY has do such dates become important? Could it not be that human mind latches on to cosmological events that coincide with events in consciousness? Why is that hard to accept for you?
ItI have to disagree with you. Youre missing the significance aspect. There was a similar event 2000 years ago that became popularly known as the star of Bethlehem. Most likely a unusual astronomical event, whether coincidence or not the event served as a symbolical focus for the birth of Jesus. I haven't explored this but it is an intriguing story worthy of investigation.
The thing you're missing is WHY has do such dates become important? Could it not be that human mind latches on to cosmological events that coincide with events in consciousness? Why is that hard to accept for you?
December 21st 2012 will probably be another catastrophic day for me. Like every year running around buying last minute Xmas presents. So if the world ends on that day it'll be a relief!
I actually celebrated 19 November 1999, because that day will not come again for at least a thousand years.
I actually celebrated 19 November 1999, because that day will not come again for at least a thousand years.
Yes what if the Mayan's saw an astral object and worked out that it will hit Earth in 21/12/12. I understand that they were quite good at astronomy.
After all we didn't see the Shoemaker-Levy 9 meteors until a few months before they hit jupitor.
Also there has been another hit to Jupitor we didn't even see till it hit. http://news.cnet.com/8301-19514_3-10291824-239.html So the stones are coming
After all we didn't see the Shoemaker-Levy 9 meteors until a few months before they hit jupitor.
Also there has been another hit to Jupitor we didn't even see till it hit. http://news.cnet.com/8301-19514_3-10291824-239.html So the stones are coming
Actually Jupiter will be hit by more asteroids than earth because of it's immense mass and gravity. It is pretty much a giant eraser of the solar system pulling in random celestial objects with it's intense gravity and cleaning out debris which keeps us and the other planets from getting hit as often.
Thanks Jupiter.
Thanks Jupiter.
Yes but it only takes one to slip by, maybe the Mayan's worked out the trajectory of one that will hit Earth 21\12\12. We won't know about it till its too late. BANG.
>>maybe the Mayan's worked out the trajectory
If they actually had done precisely that, which is really quite a difficult feat since one needs to take into account tiny perturbations of the heavenly bodies, solar wind and so on, they it would have been such a feat that it would have been central to their mathematical and religious culture. Since there is no trace of such mathematics, it is hardly likely to have been the case.
If they actually had done precisely that, which is really quite a difficult feat since one needs to take into account tiny perturbations of the heavenly bodies, solar wind and so on, they it would have been such a feat that it would have been central to their mathematical and religious culture. Since there is no trace of such mathematics, it is hardly likely to have been the case.
But that's your opinion, conjecture on your behalf. They were good with Astronomy I believe and are pretty mutch a mysterious race of people. No one really knows what they knew.
even if we assume they did somehow have the ability to see and measure astronomical bodies with the same degree of accuracy that we do today
and if we assume they knew all we do about the mechanics of those bodies
and if we assume they could perform all of the calculations necessary that we can with our high speed computers.
That would still entail such a large margin of error that even if they are correct a large asteroid could still miss the planet by many many miles.
and if we assume they knew all we do about the mechanics of those bodies
and if we assume they could perform all of the calculations necessary that we can with our high speed computers.
That would still entail such a large margin of error that even if they are correct a large asteroid could still miss the planet by many many miles.
>But that's your opinion, conjecture on your behalf.
So we go from "quite good with astronomy" (without any qualifications about what specific knowledge of astronomy that they had, and without any physical evidence of their advanced capabilities or instruments) to them being better than modern astronomers, who are armed with modern physics and all manners of instruments that can actually take measure of astronomical distances, etc. That's way beyond speculation.
As for why ideas like this get popularized, I think ultimately you have to look to religion. Many religions popularize the idea that we are living in the "end times" and I think it is through that pathway that it enters the mainstream of mythology. But it has been a false statement for thousands of years, and I don't see any rational reason to believe differently now.
So we go from "quite good with astronomy" (without any qualifications about what specific knowledge of astronomy that they had, and without any physical evidence of their advanced capabilities or instruments) to them being better than modern astronomers, who are armed with modern physics and all manners of instruments that can actually take measure of astronomical distances, etc. That's way beyond speculation.
As for why ideas like this get popularized, I think ultimately you have to look to religion. Many religions popularize the idea that we are living in the "end times" and I think it is through that pathway that it enters the mainstream of mythology. But it has been a false statement for thousands of years, and I don't see any rational reason to believe differently now.
>>No one really knows what they knew
That's very true. But we have a damn good idea of what they didn't know!
That's very true. But we have a damn good idea of what they didn't know!
I didn't say they were better at Astronomy than we are today, but still may have been advanced enough at Astronomy to predict a metiors trajectory that they had seen in their day. Why go to all the trouble of making a calander then why end it at a certain period in time unless they knew something.
I am not saying the world will end on 21\12\12 just putting forward some thoughts on the matter.
I am not saying the world will end on 21\12\12 just putting forward some thoughts on the matter.
"Why go to all the trouble of making a calander then why end it at a certain period in time unless they knew something."
Why does the Unix clock end on Jan 19, 2038? Why go to the trouble to program this and have it end at a certain period unless they knew something?
Why did most 20th-century computers measure the years in 2 digits instead of 4?
Why did the Julian calendar not take into account years divisible by 100 when calculating leap years?
The answer to all of these is most likely because humans can account for only so much. Unix systems don't really need to worry about years past 2038, just like early computers didn't need to worry about the 21st century. And Julius didn't know (or didn't care) that his calendar would be wrong centuries down the line. Heck, our current calendar is still not 100% precise, but that won't affect us until civilization is gone (which may be what Julius thought).
Put simply, the Mayans had more important things to worry about than what happens after 2012. Considering they're dead now, it stands to reason that they were justified in their worries.
Just because somebody didn't have the foresight to look beyond his immediate needs doesn't mean that he has prescient knowledge.
Why does the Unix clock end on Jan 19, 2038? Why go to the trouble to program this and have it end at a certain period unless they knew something?
Why did most 20th-century computers measure the years in 2 digits instead of 4?
Why did the Julian calendar not take into account years divisible by 100 when calculating leap years?
The answer to all of these is most likely because humans can account for only so much. Unix systems don't really need to worry about years past 2038, just like early computers didn't need to worry about the 21st century. And Julius didn't know (or didn't care) that his calendar would be wrong centuries down the line. Heck, our current calendar is still not 100% precise, but that won't affect us until civilization is gone (which may be what Julius thought).
Put simply, the Mayans had more important things to worry about than what happens after 2012. Considering they're dead now, it stands to reason that they were justified in their worries.
Just because somebody didn't have the foresight to look beyond his immediate needs doesn't mean that he has prescient knowledge.
>but still may have been advanced enough at Astronomy to predict a metiors trajectory that they had seen in their day.
And predicted that this particular comet would collide with the earth hundreds if not thousands of years later? Please. That would be difficult if not impossible even with the sophisticated techniques available today. The 2012 thing is only modern day mythology; there is no evidence or rationale to back it up.
And predicted that this particular comet would collide with the earth hundreds if not thousands of years later? Please. That would be difficult if not impossible even with the sophisticated techniques available today. The 2012 thing is only modern day mythology; there is no evidence or rationale to back it up.
> Why go to all the trouble of making a calander then why end it at a certain period in time unless they knew something
As I pointed out in an earlier post, the Mayan calendar does not end in 2012, no more than our calendar ends on 31 December, or at the end of 1999 (or should that be 2000?). It's simply that it rolls over to 0 again, in the same way that numbers go from 9 to (1)0. Our calendar rolls over as well, but unlike the Mayans we don't have a day 0, so from 31/12 we go to 1/1.
As I pointed out in an earlier post, the Mayan calendar does not end in 2012, no more than our calendar ends on 31 December, or at the end of 1999 (or should that be 2000?). It's simply that it rolls over to 0 again, in the same way that numbers go from 9 to (1)0. Our calendar rolls over as well, but unlike the Mayans we don't have a day 0, so from 31/12 we go to 1/1.
Well Nostradamus predicted only one more pope before the world ends...and this falls just around this moment in time. He also predicted a lot of other things like the great fires of London in 1666. But...then again, people didn't look into the future from his predictions and say "Ah, London will burn in 1666." But they looked back and said "So THAT'S what he meant."
Meaning...humans adjusted their interpretations to match history possibly.
Didn't some Central Americans believe that Quetzalcoatl would come to them the same day that the Spanish arrived and began their invasion?
It's pretty strange and interesting.
Me, I feel like it could end at any time....but I'm not so sure if December of 2012 is the time that it will if it does any time soon.
Best,
Bordeaux0113
Meaning...humans adjusted their interpretations to match history possibly.
Didn't some Central Americans believe that Quetzalcoatl would come to them the same day that the Spanish arrived and began their invasion?
It's pretty strange and interesting.
Me, I feel like it could end at any time....but I'm not so sure if December of 2012 is the time that it will if it does any time soon.
Best,
Bordeaux0113
>Me, I feel like it could end at any time
No. it won't end any time soon. We may destroy ourselves, that is possible, but no matter what we do, we won't destroy life on earth. Even a dinosaur-killer asteroid won't do that. Of course, if a gamma-ray-burst were to go off within a few hundred lightyears of earth, the planet would be fried to a crisp, but the chances of that happening are extremely remote - it has not happened in the last 4.6 billion years or more. And, the Mayans or Nostradamus certainly did not know anything about it.
As you said, "humans adjusted their interpretations to match history possibly". That's what we're also doing with the Mayan "prediction": we're adjusting their belief system to match our fears. And as with all previous predictions about the end of the world, nothing will come of it. Want to bet?
No. it won't end any time soon. We may destroy ourselves, that is possible, but no matter what we do, we won't destroy life on earth. Even a dinosaur-killer asteroid won't do that. Of course, if a gamma-ray-burst were to go off within a few hundred lightyears of earth, the planet would be fried to a crisp, but the chances of that happening are extremely remote - it has not happened in the last 4.6 billion years or more. And, the Mayans or Nostradamus certainly did not know anything about it.
As you said, "humans adjusted their interpretations to match history possibly". That's what we're also doing with the Mayan "prediction": we're adjusting their belief system to match our fears. And as with all previous predictions about the end of the world, nothing will come of it. Want to bet?
If we had a massive nuclear war, or if some nutjob got power over a nation with nuclear weapons and he/she wanted to blow up the planet, they totally could in the future... :(
>>If we had a massive nuclear war, or if some nutjob got power over a nation with nuclear weapons and he/she wanted to blow up the planet, they totally could in the future... :(
I would have to disagree with that. The possibility of ruining the planet for human life might be there, but the ability to blow up the planet entirely is not within human technological grasps, or will it ever be within the next thousand years even.
Our level of energy production is so insignificant to what would be required to "blow up" the planet, that I think we will long ruin the planet for ourselves way before we ever get remotely close to the chance of blowing it up.
If we do have a chance to get to the technological level to blow up the planet, we will do something stupid to kill ourselves long before we get there.
Anthony
I would have to disagree with that. The possibility of ruining the planet for human life might be there, but the ability to blow up the planet entirely is not within human technological grasps, or will it ever be within the next thousand years even.
Our level of energy production is so insignificant to what would be required to "blow up" the planet, that I think we will long ruin the planet for ourselves way before we ever get remotely close to the chance of blowing it up.
If we do have a chance to get to the technological level to blow up the planet, we will do something stupid to kill ourselves long before we get there.
Anthony
Hehe...can anybody say...Fallout 4??? :P
I think the Mayan's got tired and just stopped tapping into the calendar tablet.
This reminds me of a story
There is a woman who chops off part of a ham before putting into the broiler pan and then puts it into the oven. She is asked why she chops off that part of the ham before putting it into the oven. She says she doesn't know except that her mother did it that way. Her mother is then consulted and she also says she doesn't know why she does it that way except that her mother did it that way as well. The grandmother is produced and asked why she chopped off the end of the ham before putting it into the broiler pan. It turns out that the grandmothers pan was smaller and a chopped ham was all that would fit into it.
I think the Mayan grandmother's calendar holder was just smaller.
This reminds me of a story
There is a woman who chops off part of a ham before putting into the broiler pan and then puts it into the oven. She is asked why she chops off that part of the ham before putting it into the oven. She says she doesn't know except that her mother did it that way. Her mother is then consulted and she also says she doesn't know why she does it that way except that her mother did it that way as well. The grandmother is produced and asked why she chopped off the end of the ham before putting it into the broiler pan. It turns out that the grandmothers pan was smaller and a chopped ham was all that would fit into it.
I think the Mayan grandmother's calendar holder was just smaller.
If the Maya don't get us then Nostro and his last Pope might. If that don't work then the Alien invasion might, or the Asteroid in 2038. If that don't work then Nuclear weapons might do the job.
But all in all, the Sun will get us I can prophesy this, we are doomed no matter what. BANG!
Hee hee.
But all in all, the Sun will get us I can prophesy this, we are doomed no matter what. BANG!
Hee hee.
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
Pray to the spaghetti monster at least 3 times a day and ull be spared.
spaghetti monster!? Cool! Does he fly?
He flies with all his noodly appendages.
> I would have to disagree with that. The possibility of ruining the planet for human life might be there, but the ability to blow up the planet entirely is not within human technological grasps, or will it ever be within the next thousand years even.
Well now... http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/rocket3x1.html#boom
Lets see... to reduce the whole planet to gravel ad move the pieces to infinity = 2.9 x10^32 J, or a mere 69 zettatons of tnt. Would only be 20% of that to leave the gravel in the same orbit.
Roughly two orders of magnitude less energy to just strip the crust off the planet.
Drops to an energy need of 3.2 x 10^26 J or 77 petatons of tnt to blow the atmosphere away, which seem to be the smallest fairly comprehensive place holder for 'blow up the planet'... yeah, it isn't really blowing it up, but it's would be close enough enough for the purposes of any evil geniuses out there. Mankind might reach that kinda energies within a thousand years at the present rate of technological advance.
:-) Okay, this whole post was just an excuse to include a link to that table, which I think is just the coolest table I've seen in a very long time.
Well now... http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/rocket3x1.html#boom
Lets see... to reduce the whole planet to gravel ad move the pieces to infinity = 2.9 x10^32 J, or a mere 69 zettatons of tnt. Would only be 20% of that to leave the gravel in the same orbit.
Roughly two orders of magnitude less energy to just strip the crust off the planet.
Drops to an energy need of 3.2 x 10^26 J or 77 petatons of tnt to blow the atmosphere away, which seem to be the smallest fairly comprehensive place holder for 'blow up the planet'... yeah, it isn't really blowing it up, but it's would be close enough enough for the purposes of any evil geniuses out there. Mankind might reach that kinda energies within a thousand years at the present rate of technological advance.
:-) Okay, this whole post was just an excuse to include a link to that table, which I think is just the coolest table I've seen in a very long time.
ASKER
No, i'm not ready to abandon this.
how does the Mayan calendar work, exactly?
was it like the Aztec calendar where there are "sheaves" of 52 years grouped into larger collections of cycles?
when did the mayan calendar cycles start and end?
how does the Mayan calendar work, exactly?
was it like the Aztec calendar where there are "sheaves" of 52 years grouped into larger collections of cycles?
when did the mayan calendar cycles start and end?
yes, the original question is about the psychology of myth adoption.
Maybe that wasn't the intent but that's what the wording asked
I think the first two posts answered that, then it went into amusing diversions on why we most think the believers are silly, and while those were fun, probably aren't worthy as answers (including my own posts)
This recent addition has turne into a historical/astronomical question. Clearly a new thread
Maybe that wasn't the intent but that's what the wording asked
I think the first two posts answered that, then it went into amusing diversions on why we most think the believers are silly, and while those were fun, probably aren't worthy as answers (including my own posts)
This recent addition has turne into a historical/astronomical question. Clearly a new thread
ASKER
no i want to leave this open. i just had shelved it temporarily and lost track of it..
my question about how the cycles work is relevant to the psychology of how and why people believe in this or not.
because the way (i think) i understand it, is that it's just a new cycle of "sheaves" in a sequence of many such cycles, that it technically doesn't even "end" in 2012, but just starts a another cycle like our 2000 (2001) millennium started a new 1000-year cycle.
and interestingly, that there is an actual "end" (i think after 20 such cycles), but that we'll be entering like the 13th cycle and so there'd still be another 6 such cycles after this new one.
So, essentially that the Mayan calendar does in fact have an end, but that we're not even at it.
Now i remember reading this, but i cant remember where. So can someone confirm how the Mayan calendar cycles actually work?
then i will be able to coherently follow up on a post specifically relevant to the OP and thread question.
thanks
my question about how the cycles work is relevant to the psychology of how and why people believe in this or not.
because the way (i think) i understand it, is that it's just a new cycle of "sheaves" in a sequence of many such cycles, that it technically doesn't even "end" in 2012, but just starts a another cycle like our 2000 (2001) millennium started a new 1000-year cycle.
and interestingly, that there is an actual "end" (i think after 20 such cycles), but that we'll be entering like the 13th cycle and so there'd still be another 6 such cycles after this new one.
So, essentially that the Mayan calendar does in fact have an end, but that we're not even at it.
Now i remember reading this, but i cant remember where. So can someone confirm how the Mayan calendar cycles actually work?
then i will be able to coherently follow up on a post specifically relevant to the OP and thread question.
thanks
This explains how to calculate
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesoamerican_Long_Count_calendar
Other than the most basic aspect of all beliefs, I don't see how this helps this question.
By most basic aspect, I mean....
When a person fails to understand how something works you can either reject it or accept it with either path being a leap of faith.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesoamerican_Long_Count_calendar
Other than the most basic aspect of all beliefs, I don't see how this helps this question.
By most basic aspect, I mean....
When a person fails to understand how something works you can either reject it or accept it with either path being a leap of faith.
Wait doesn't everyone believe it?
"We are designed from birth for survival more than for freedom." which somowhat explains why survival-horror fascinates us a lot - especially when it can be narrated well, for "we only accept as true what can be narrated."
Isnt it so that the popularity of 2012, is more popular than 2012 itself? If it were not for the already-sufficient interest on the topic I would probably not have cared to take interest. If you were the first person to discover Mayan-cycles, would you have started "End of the world" on EE?
Isnt it so that the popularity of 2012, is more popular than 2012 itself? If it were not for the already-sufficient interest on the topic I would probably not have cared to take interest. If you were the first person to discover Mayan-cycles, would you have started "End of the world" on EE?
More something to support my claims about 2012 psychological-juggler-feat
http://www.livescience.com/culture/mayan-apocalypse-miscalculated-calendar-101018.html
http://www.livescience.com/culture/mayan-apocalypse-miscalculated-calendar-101018.html
When I hear Maya I think also at Aztecs even if they were different geographically and time period:
http://www.differencebetween.net/miscellaneous/difference-between-aztecs-and-mayans/
If you want to dig a bit about their calendar then http://www.world-mysteries.com/sar_3.htm
Then I am wonder if there is at least one person here that visited Yucatan to speak with the Mayan people around about Kukulkan and they present belief regarding this subject.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kukulkan
As my point of view over the main question, I rather give credit to Jesus words:
Matthew 24:36 "No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.”
ASKER
what the heck, WaterStreet? you gave all 500 points to one person? there's like 100 different replies. how on earth do you think that is reasonable?
look, i was just coming in here to close this question. My internet access has been down at home for the past few weeks while my computer was being worked on. and i'm not able to access EE at work.
if you check my activity, you'll see that I just logged in for the first time in a long time today, and closed several open questions just now.
please reopen this question so i can distribute points in something that at least TRIES to be equitable
look, i was just coming in here to close this question. My internet access has been down at home for the past few weeks while my computer was being worked on. and i'm not able to access EE at work.
if you check my activity, you'll see that I just logged in for the first time in a long time today, and closed several open questions just now.
please reopen this question so i can distribute points in something that at least TRIES to be equitable
Considering that this question has been open for far too long and you asked for it to be extended while not returning to conclude the question adequately, I don't think it's fair to take it out on WaterStreet. Something had to be done. And, if the administrator is forced to do what the poster would not, then it's natural for him to perform the task with as minimal an effort as possible. If I were in his shoes, I would do the same thing. It wasn't his question, so why should he worry about being equitable when cleaning up after someone else?
I support your desire to distribute the points in a different manner, but I would not blame the administrators one bit if they choose not to reopen this can of worms.
I support your desire to distribute the points in a different manner, but I would not blame the administrators one bit if they choose not to reopen this can of worms.
The Mayan's were WAY ahead of their time in math and astronomy, so it makes them "appear" to be experts. But "expert" and "omniscient" aren't nearly the same thing. Plus, "expert" centuries ago doesn't mean you're still an expert today.
Assuming the Earth is still here and we're all fine in 2013 there will be some other ancient authority that someone else will declare as absolute.
Furthermore, many people, from their respective religious beliefs feel a cycle will end "soon", or an apocalypse/judgement or other great change. These beliefs may or may not be based on fact and may or may not come true, but the single piece of information many of these beliefs seem to lack is a definitive date.
So, if you believe ragnarok (for example) is coming shortly but can't find a source to give you a solid date, but see someone else with quasi-authority naming a date that is "coming shortly." It's not a huge leap to assume the two prognostications coincide.