What do you think about the 2012 doomsday, I mean really.. it is different.

[Kettenmonster]

Now as we have found this Higgs thing, what is live on this planet good for anymore?
So simply save some effort and shut the experiment down.
That is what will happen at the end of this year.

[1714918556]

1714918556

[1714918556]

1714918556

[1714918556]

1714918556

[1714918556]

1714918556

[AndrewBUD]

At the end of a "bactun" I think they got up and moved, spreading them selves out very thin. OR, they killed each other off because only 1 in 50,000 was actually smart.... Just like in real life

[RodeoX]

I've scoped up on the Mayans many times. I just cannot see this happening in 2012, I don't believe they're even in the bible. If they are correct me.

The Mayans are not in the Bible because the people who conceived of the bible (the Romans) had no idea they existed. Just like they had no idea they were on a planet in space.

The bible was not exactly produced by the Romans, although one or more writers were Roman citizens. The bible was conceived in three languages:

The Bible was written in the languages of ancient Palestine: Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek. The Old Testament has been transmitted to us primarily in these languages. Written mainly in Hebrew, it was translated into Greek (the Septuagint) before the text became quite stable.

http://www.bible.gen.nz/amos/language/languages.htm

The Romans used to speak and write in Latin:

Latin is an Italic language originally spoken in Latium and Ancient Rome. Along with most European languages, it is a descendant of the ancient Proto-Indo-European language. It originated in the Italian peninsula.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin

I was oversimplifying. But it was emperor Constantine who produced "the Bible". Prior to that the cannon of religious writings used by Christians was much more diverse and without standardization. The Romans loved standards and upon adopting Christanity as the official religion they needed some rules and a book to keep it all strait.
So, church leaders and government officials reviewed the stories that were being told by followers throught the empire and picked what they liked. Stories not in line with Roman sensibilities were thrown out or changed. For example Lillith, Marry Magdalen, Thecla; These women were deemed too powerful to be a Bible. Their stories were changed or droped completely.
In any case the early Christians had no bible. It was created by a government from scraps of Sumarian and other cultural traditions.

[AndrewBUD]

So more or less the bible is a bunch of hogwash?

[RodeoX]

So more or less the bible is a bunch of hogwash?

I think it is an amazing work of philosophy from the ancient world. A document about how people should relate to one another, and for it's time, a very futeristic and powerful liberation theology. like the bahgvadgida, the Koan, the book of the dead, and too many others to mention they are compelling views into the minds of people from long ago. Much of the old testament is taken from even older civilizations, perhaps back to the very start of ciivilization. Consider the story of Noah and the ark. If you read the older story of Gilgamesh you can see it is the same. Gilgamesh is Sumarian. Who knows, but that flood story could go back to a real event in one of the first cities ten thousand years ago. I doubt floods were as troublesome for hunter gatherers, but if you build a city floods can sweep away the whole world. The end of the ice ages would have seen a lot of flooding. A story like that would remind future urban dwellers of the importance of preparing for floods.



The Bible is also a living doccument that influences our world view today. Concepts like "the golden rule" are basic to our understanding of law and justice. In the new testament Jesus serves as a model for our better selves. Kind, loving, helpful to the poor, sick, and misunderstood. The old stories, like the flood, are also powerfull and eternal metaphors. So I would say not at all hogwash. It contains important and priceless knowledge.

[augustocroppo]

I've scoped up on the Mayans many times. I just cannot see this happening in 2012, I don't believe they're even in the bible. If they are correct me.

The Mayans are not in the Bible because the people who conceived of the bible (the Romans) had no idea they existed. Just like they had no idea they were on a planet in space.

The bible was not exactly produced by the Romans, although one or more writers were Roman citizens. The bible was conceived in three languages:

The Bible was written in the languages of ancient Palestine: Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek. The Old Testament has been transmitted to us primarily in these languages. Written mainly in Hebrew, it was translated into Greek (the Septuagint) before the text became quite stable.

http://www.bible.gen.nz/amos/language/languages.htm

The Romans used to speak and write in Latin:

Latin is an Italic language originally spoken in Latium and Ancient Rome. Along with most European languages, it is a descendant of the ancient Proto-Indo-European language. It originated in the Italian peninsula.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin

I was oversimplifying. But it was emperor Constantine who produced "the Bible". Prior to that the cannon of religious writings used by Christians was much more diverse and without standardization. The Romans loved standards and upon adopting Christanity as the official religion they needed some rules and a book to keep it all strait.
So, church leaders and government officials reviewed the stories that were being told by followers throught the empire and picked what they liked. Stories not in line with Roman sensibilities were thrown out or changed. For example Lillith, Marry Magdalen, Thecla; These women were deemed too powerful to be a Bible. Their stories were changed or droped completely.
In any case the early Christians had no bible. It was created by a government from scraps of Sumarian and other cultural traditions.

Thank you for the update, I was not aware of this facts.

[Vandroiy]

They predicted the stupid EU on the other side of the planet would blow up.

ECB is now lending at 0. Yes, that's zero. Hollande is trying to fix France with tax raises instead of spending cuts. See how that'll work out. Italy is fucked on debt and out of luck, Spain's banks are broken, and now they all hit on Germany's last bastion to finally break it. Didn't work fast enough, so a few days ago, they took the ECB instead.

Well, whatever they wanted to predict, this one is going down.

[amencon]

For this 2012 prediction, you find nothing but time leading to this date, through many religions and the most popular one most people know of is the Mayans. Now, I'm not saying the world will end, but I am almost convinced now that something horrible will indeed happen.

Something horrible happens every day.

If we want to set the bar that low anyone here can predict the future.

Also even if the Mayan calandar ended on a certain day, why would that signify the end of the world?

I think I have a 2012 Dilbert day-to-day calendar laying around somewhere that ends on Dec 31 2012 .... oh my god panic!!!!!

[drakahn]

The end of the age of man, the start of the age of :
)the apes
)robot overlords
)reptillians
)zeitgeisters
)smelly hippy overlords
)right wing extremists
)left wing extremists
)militant moderates
)internet law

[myrkul]

The end of the age of man, the start of the age of :
)the apes
)robot overlords
)reptillians
)zeitgeisters
x)smelly hippy overlords
)right wing extremists
)left wing extremists
)militant moderates
)internet law

I put my vote with the smelly hippy overlords, for sheer absurdity factor.

[AndrewBUD]

^ me too.....

[hashman]

Which events are used to calibrate the calendar, i.e. synch it with our own so that we can convert 13.1.1.1.1 to Nov 1, 2011 (as some said) or other Julian calendar day? 

Not events, just pure mathematics:

Mayan Calendar Tools

http://www.pauahtun.org/Calendar/tools.html

You're not serious I hope. 
Here's some JS from your site:
 
      // snip ... 
      this.mayaday=Math.round(this.modSeconds);
      this.mayaday/=86400;
      this.mayaday+=2440588;
      this.mayaday=Math.floor(this.mayaday);
      this.mayaday-=584285;


Tell me where those integers come from please. 
You very much need an agreed upon event (such that we know the date of the event in both calendars) to synch them. 

Sure, it takes math to convert temperature from C to F also, but i you didn't know that 0C = 32F or 100C = 212F?   

[myrkul]

Tell me where those integers come from please. 
You very much need an agreed upon event (such that we know the date of the event in both calendars) to synch them. 

Sure, it takes math to convert temperature from C to F also, but i you didn't know that 0C = 32F or 100C = 212F? 

It's my understanding that the Mayan calendar is based upon certain astronomical events, though I don't recall which ones.

[augustocroppo]

You're not serious I hope.  
Here's some JS from your site:
 
      // snip ...  
      this.mayaday=Math.round(this.modSeconds);
      this.mayaday/=86400;
      this.mayaday+=2440588;
      this.mayaday=Math.floor(this.mayaday);
      this.mayaday-=584285;


Tell me where those integers come from please.  
You very much need an agreed upon event (such that we know the date of the event in both calendars) to synch them.

It is not my Internet page. Anyway...

In astronomy, a Julian year is a unit of measurement of time defined as exactly 365.25 days of 86,400 SI seconds each. The Julian year is the average length of the year in the Julian calendar used in Western societies in previous centuries, and for which the unit is named.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_year_(astronomy)

...and...

Julian Days can also be used to tell time; the time of day is expressed as a fraction of a full day, with 12:00 noon (not midnight) as the zero point. So, 3:00 pm on 1 Jan 1970 is JD 2440588.125 (since 3:00 pm is 3 hours since noon, and 3/24 = 0.125 day). Note that the Julian Day is always determined from Universal Time, not Local Time.

http://docs.kde.org/development/en/kdeedu/kstars/ai-julianday.html

...and...

The Long Count, an exact count of days from a zero point, usually referenced to Wed Aug 13, -3,113 (Gregorian Style), or Wed Sep 8, 3,114 BC (Julian Style). This assumes a Correlation Constant of 584285, the revised GMT correlation;

http://www.pauahtun.org/Calendar/basic.html

...this are the initial clues to answer your enquires.

 

Sure, it takes math to convert temperature from C to F also, but i you didn't know that 0C = 32F or 100C = 212F?  

It is "you" or "I" that "didn't know that 0C = 32F or 100C = 212F"?

 

[hashman]

Thanks for your answer.

However when they say it is  "usually referenced" it doesn't really answer my question.  What happened on that day that was written about using both calendars? 

 

[myrkul]

Thanks for your answer.

However when they say it is  "usually referenced" it doesn't really answer my question.  What happened on that day that was written about using both calendars? 

Well, I found this...

As Dr. Jose Arguelles writes in "Time and The Technosphere" -
"August 13, 3113 BC is as precise and accurate as one can get for a beginning of history: the first Egyptian dynasty is dated to ca 3100 BC; the first 'city,' Uruk, in Mesopotamia, also ca 3100 BC; the Hindu Kali Yuga, 3102 BC; and most interestingly, the division of time into 24 hours of 60 minutes each and each minute into 60 seconds [and the division of the circle into 360 degrees], also around 3100 BC, in Sumeria."

But that really doesn't provide a good reasoning for syncing the Mayan calendar with that date.

The Book Of Knowledge has this to say:

According to the correlation between the Long Count and Western calendars accepted by the great majority of Maya researchers (known as the Goodman-Martinez-Thompson, or GMT, correlation), this starting-point is equivalent to August 11, 3114 BCE in the proleptic Gregorian calendar or 6 September in the Julian calendar (−3113 astronomical). The GMT correlation was chosen by John Eric Sydney Thompson in 1935 on the basis of earlier correlations by Joseph Goodman in 1905 (August 11), Juan Martínez Hernández in 1926 (August 12), and Thompson himself in 1927 (August 13).

Following one of the references from that article, (specifically, #8) we find this:

the zenithal passage of the sun over Copán -- the major Maya astronomical center in the mountains of western Honduras, located at precisely the same latitude as Izapa -- occurred on August 13, the day that his own correlation originally indicated the Maya had believed was the "beginning of the world,"

We get a good reasoning for the date, if not the year.

The year correlation was apparently done via computer analysis, as found later in that same article...

Sure enough, the only other time that a katun had ended on 8 Cumku was on September 13, 1675 B.C., when 1 Ahau corresponded with that date. I therefore was led to conclude that whoever had projected the time-count back into history had done so in the year 236 B.C., because this was the only time frame that would have been consistent with what we know of Maya history.

So there you go. The Mayans told us the date, by telling us the date (in long count) that it was enacted.

[hashman]

Thanks for your answer.

However when they say it is  "usually referenced" it doesn't really answer my question.  What happened on that day that was written about using both calendars? 

Well, I found this...

As Dr. Jose Arguelles writes in "Time and The Technosphere" -
"August 13, 3113 BC is as precise and accurate as one can get for a beginning of history: the first Egyptian dynasty is dated to ca 3100 BC; the first 'city,' Uruk, in Mesopotamia, also ca 3100 BC; the Hindu Kali Yuga, 3102 BC; and most interestingly, the division of time into 24 hours of 60 minutes each and each minute into 60 seconds [and the division of the circle into 360 degrees], also around 3100 BC, in Sumeria."

But that really doesn't provide a good reasoning for syncing the Mayan calendar with that date.

The Book Of Knowledge has this to say:

According to the correlation between the Long Count and Western calendars accepted by the great majority of Maya researchers (known as the Goodman-Martinez-Thompson, or GMT, correlation), this starting-point is equivalent to August 11, 3114 BCE in the proleptic Gregorian calendar or 6 September in the Julian calendar (−3113 astronomical). The GMT correlation was chosen by John Eric Sydney Thompson in 1935 on the basis of earlier correlations by Joseph Goodman in 1905 (August 11), Juan Martínez Hernández in 1926 (August 12), and Thompson himself in 1927 (August 13).

Following one of the references from that article, (specifically, #8) we find this:

the zenithal passage of the sun over Copán -- the major Maya astronomical center in the mountains of western Honduras, located at precisely the same latitude as Izapa -- occurred on August 13, the day that his own correlation originally indicated the Maya had believed was the "beginning of the world,"

We get a good reasoning for the date, if not the year.

The year correlation was apparently done via computer analysis, as found later in that same article...

Sure enough, the only other time that a katun had ended on 8 Cumku was on September 13, 1675 B.C., when 1 Ahau corresponded with that date. I therefore was led to conclude that whoever had projected the time-count back into history had done so in the year 236 B.C., because this was the only time frame that would have been consistent with what we know of Maya history.

So there you go. The Mayans told us the date, by telling us the date (in long count) that it was enacted.

Thanks for sharing your research!   Are you convinced that the synching of the two calendars is accurate?  I'm sure not.  A few years ago I did some research on this topic, and found that there were different researchers (you mention Goodman-Martinez-Thompson who are one set) who had different synchronizations and hence different Gregorian days for 13.0.0.0.0.0.  One group said that the new long count began in fall of 2011.  Each had some kind of extremely tenuous connection making the link between calendars.  The "computer analysis" there seems entirely obuscatory, only intended to impress idiots.  Similar to McKenna's timewave zero perhaps?  Anyway, thanks again and good luck in the new long count whenever it may begin  

[myrkul]

Thanks for sharing your research!   Are you convinced that the synching of the two calendars is accurate? 

For my money, it's close enough. Of course, I attribute no more significance to 13.0.0.0.0.0 than I do to Dec. 31st, or Friday the 13th, for that matter.