The Mayan Calendar?

[rigney]

I was watching an interesting documentary on the History Channel last night having to do with the year 2012, and possibly; "The End of Time".

Having glanced at several articles over the past few months I saw nothing to peak my interest until hearing and seeing that it might be the end of our world as we know it. Well, you know how that goes??

Seems that some of these Myans, supposedly their astronomers and such, sailed out into the middle of the Pacific Ocean hundreds of years ago and thousands of miles from home just to carve a statue out of a rocky formation on the mountain side of a small island. How they found such an island is just as much a mystery? The statue is about 150 ft. tall, looking like a "man god" with a jaguar crouched behind him. And all of this work just to witness an event to happen at a future date hundreds of years hence; 2012?

Well, it did get my attention to realize these people had been doing this data for five, six or seven thousand years, with some of it as exact as what we do today. Tried to read some "google" on it this morning but found it over my head.

Anyone liking to reply, please do; since I don't have a clue?

Edited June 26, 2010 by rigney

[Moontanman]

I'd like to see some back up on the statue thing, i wasn't aware the Mayans were seafarers at all. The Mayans calender simply restarts, it's not the end of the world any more than 1999 was the end of our world. What's with the double posts dude?

 

 

"party like it's 1999"!

[ydoaPs]

Information is beautiful.

[rigney]

I'd like to see some back up on the statue thing, i wasn't aware the Mayans were seafarers at all. The Mayans calender simply restarts, it's not the end of the world any more than 1999 was the end of our world. What's with the double posts dude?

 

 

"party like it's 1999"!

 

 

Actually if you look close, it's a triple post. I screwed up. If some one can, please delete all but the latest post. Thanks!

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

Was just watching this episode last night Moon. Even though these people supposidly had boats that could carry a hundred people, there seems to be no evidence of that now. Me, I don't know.

[Moontanman]

A rogue planet would be cool!

[Mr Skeptic]

People who are really worried about the Mayan calendar should perform the New Fire ceremony to help prevent the end of the world, as the Mayans did before them.

[swansont]

2010 is the problem, not 2012. My calendar runs out on Dec 31 of this year! Obviously Scott Adams is predicting the end of the world.

[rigney]

2010 is the problem, not 2012. My calendar runs out on Dec 31 of this year! Obviously Scott Adams is predicting the end of the world.

 

 

 

I sure hope he isn't even "close". I believe we still need at least another 100 billion years to get it right.

[Moontanman]

People who are really worried about the Mayan calendar should perform the New Fire ceremony to help prevent the end of the world, as the Mayans did before them.

 

I like fire, what do we need to burn?

[Mr Skeptic]

It's done at the end of every calendar cycle (every 52 years), and involves putting out all fires, then cutting out the heart of a human and lighting a fire in their chest, which is then used to relight all the fires in the city. Also they get rid of all their old stuff.

 

The purpose of this ceremony is to prevent the end of the world, which is why the folks who fear the year 2012 need to do this ceremony.

[rigney]

Sort of a rigid formality. But Hey!, this thing has been going on for thousands of years. Wonder if they already have someone in mind for 2012?

[Klaplunk]

Mayans created the calender using a different mathematic system to us; rather than 1-2-3-4-5~ the Mayans would 1234- 1234-- 1234---

 

During its later stages it began to show lower amounts, as if it was going back in time.

So they could pinpoint the exact time of... 'time', by analysing their own. It makes a lot of sense and I will be studying it quite often over the next few months.

 

I think, on first sight, what it's blatently saying is the core of the earth is 'something' tryiing to escape. It seems that way through image it is showing. Then its construction, and how it had predicted, 'chance', how it knew happenings in the future. It could be a pattern in 'highlights of time, like wars or changes in power. There is always something going on the most in the world, isn't there? Like an amount of energy in one place, there will always be a most and a least? Right? Maybe it was predicting this. Revelations even gives 19 signs of the antichrist, and that seems to be happening now.

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

Information is beautiful.

 

I love that picture post with the 'Believers view' and 'Skeptic', because when the Skeptic tells the believer he's wrong, he's using things that aren't proven themselves, as evidence - pretending for it to be evidence.

 

For example, the geomagnetic reversal; how it takes 5,000 years to complete. Thats never happened to us, or at least we weren't around to examine it. There is no evidence there, you're making a prediction, and then saying that prediction is correct, without witnessing it. That's not science, that's guessing and making a suitable judgement based on what you have seen; because you believe life is this one lane thing, where nothing else is possible but the rules of humanity. There is no evidence there; I have just as much right to believe it will, because I would be guessing aswell, and things in life may not be what you believe them to be.

[padren]

I love that picture post with the 'Believers view' and 'Skeptic', because when the Skeptic tells the believer he's wrong, he's using things that aren't proven themselves, as evidence - pretending for it to be evidence.

 

For example, the geomagnetic reversal; how it takes 5,000 years to complete. Thats never happened to us, or at least we weren't around to examine it. There is no evidence there, you're making a prediction, and then saying that prediction is correct, without witnessing it. That's not science, that's guessing and making a suitable judgement based on what you have seen; because you believe life is this one lane thing, where nothing else is possible but the rules of humanity. There is no evidence there; I have just as much right to believe it will, because I would be guessing aswell, and things in life may not be what you believe them to be.

 

Do you think that anything less than knowing something as an absolute personal truth is a "guess" with all the same merits of any other guess?

 

Nothing is known for sure, however it seems kinda strange to me to "believe" rapid geomagnetic reversal is a threat then, humans weren't even aware of the concept until it was studied scientifically. Striations in deep seabed rock and such that had shifting polarity in their iron components if I recall correctly was how it was originally studied.

 

But sure - hijack a concept discovered by geologists, "guess" it could be dramatically catastrophic and then declare your guess as having just as much merit as the people who have exhaustively studied the process.

 

 

And for the record no one witnesses anything. We respond to reflected light converted to electric signals that implies something about the world around us as with other nerve stimuli. That might sound pedantic, but it is no less pedantic than saying anything not "witnessed" is a guess.

 

I am not saying geologists get everything 100% accurate on the first go, but I'll take a geologist's "guess" over a baseless guess any day.

[Klaplunk]

Do you think that anything less than knowing something as an absolute personal truth is a "guess" with all the same merits of any other guess?

 

Nothing is known for sure, however it seems kinda strange to me to "believe" rapid geomagnetic reversal is a threat then, humans weren't even aware of the concept until it was studied scientifically. Striations in deep seabed rock and such that had shifting polarity in their iron components if I recall correctly was how it was originally studied.

 

But sure - hijack a concept discovered by geologists, "guess" it could be dramatically catastrophic and then declare your guess as having just as much merit as the people who have exhaustively studied the process.

 

 

And for the record no one witnesses anything. We respond to reflected light converted to electric signals that implies something about the world around us as with other nerve stimuli. That might sound pedantic, but it is no less pedantic than saying anything not "witnessed" is a guess.

 

I am not saying geologists get everything 100% accurate on the first go, but I'll take a geologist's "guess" over a baseless guess any day.

 

What I don't get is, how you sit there in complete glibness and assume that only you're opinion is correct. You're making a judgement, on personal preference - remember, you're you; and we're us. If you believe your opinion is correct, then do so; but it doesn't give you the right to ridicule another because you don't except that it could go wrong. You always bring up 'lack of evidence', when all your evidence of time is guesses. "600 million years ago, they were here," "This star is 28 million light years away," All the while you haven't experimented on it. I imagine that if it was close enough to be tested, we would; what exactly would you expect to find? Something contructed differently to every other star? or every other planet? And you think in your minds, yes, there has to be other stuff; still with no evidence. Things take years to study properly when you're close up, and you can mess with it daily; you have had no imput with stars, some planets, even a 'light year'; you've never experienced one, yet it exists.

 

'Dark matter' 'Antimatter' - both unproven.

 

You have no evidence, to say it exists. You have 'scientific evidence' which 'suggests' it exists. Well I'm sorry sir, you look at life through a human view, as if we're the center of it; rather than the universes perspective. You treat the universe as a host, rather than a organism. Maybe you should look at the universe, from its perspective.

 

Dismissing people who believe otherwise as 'Pseudo', is correct in your eyes; that's how enslaved you are to these rules. Here's something using the Mayan case, imagine 'Maths' being conducted in a different way. Rather than our 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and so on. We would have 1, 2, 3, 4 - 1, 2, 3, 4, - 1, 2, 3, 4 -. What is there to tell you it's not like that, because you as a human can make a choice to write 5? And carry on as if time was singular. Everything you are living could be wrong; you could just be a pawn to civilization; you're yet to proove claims of this as wrong, but you dismiss it as supid or very unlikely - never 100% evidence, just your view; through your dull, unimaginative, imprisoned, view.

[padren]

What I don't get is, how you sit there in complete glibness and assume that only you're opinion is correct.

I don't. As I said before, nothing is certain, only suggested. The evidence regarding geomagnetic reversals suggests they do not happen rapidly. This is suggested strongly by the evidence.

 

Iron, among other elements present in minerals comprising the bedrock below the oceans are affected by the Earth's magnetic field as the molten rock cools. Molten rock, just like melting a magnet causes it to loose it's magnetic properties, as it becomes scrambled and no longer polarized.

 

As the sea floor spreads, new material pushes out as new sea floor, and hardens. This leaves an imprint on the minerals telling us about the magnetic field of the Earth at the time of this spreading.

 

It's literally written in stone. I won't go into the dating technology and such, since there is more than enough material out there describing it. Do you know what analyzing the imprinted minerals uncovered? The polarization effects of the Earth's magnetic field appears to shift, reversing at times.

 

This happens to be how we know about geomagnetic reversals in the first place. In addition to that, we not only see that it "changes" but changes "over time" as the polarity gradually shifted from one direction to the other. Based on the age of the rock, it appears to take many thousands of years for a reversal to occur. Or, at least it has in the past. It doesn't say it's impossible, just that it doesn't appear to have happened quickly before.

 

 

So, out of curiosity, what do you dispute with regards to this methodology? Do you take issue with the age determination of the sea floor itself? Do you take issue with the magnetic imprint readings within the minerals?

 

I'm not just throwing out some "wild guess" based on an opinion - there's a whole process that went into determining this information. Where is the flaw that caused them to "get it wrong" and not catch it?

 

You're making a judgement, on personal preference - remember, you're you; and we're us. If you believe your opinion is correct, then do so; but it doesn't give you the right to ridicule another because you don't except that it could go wrong. You always bring up 'lack of evidence', when all your evidence of time is guesses. "600 million years ago, they were here," "This star is 28 million light years away," All the while you haven't experimented on it.

You can't experiment on a star - only with the light that comes from a star. You can't experiment on anything you see with your eyes - only the light that comes off of it, even if it's 5 feet away.

 

Likewise, you can't actually touch anything, the atoms in your hands repel the atoms in whatever you try to touch, and you feel the repulsion force - it's not like the nuclei are colliding.

 

All observation is at a distance. That is pretty fundamental, but if you disagree with it let me know - I'd like to know what we can agree on, it makes it easier to reconcile where we disagree.

 

The point of mentioning that all observation is at a distance, what varies, is the quality of the observations.

 

When it comes to the distance of stars, people have built experiments quite independently that reinforce those measurements. The fact it may be 28m light years away can be a challenge, but in the case of measuring the distance of most stars, it is not. Quality observations can still be made, often easier than some observations we try to make on Earth, even with our hands.

 

I imagine that if it was close enough to be tested, we would; what exactly would you expect to find? Something contructed differently to every other star? or every other planet? And you think in your minds, yes, there has to be other stuff; still with no evidence. Things take years to study properly when you're close up, and you can mess with it daily; you have had no imput with stars, some planets, even a 'light year'; you've never experienced one, yet it exists.

 

'Dark matter' 'Antimatter' - both unproven.

 

What is "proof" in your view? The closest thing we have to proof of anything is "I think, therefore I am" and even that is an assumption, albeit a pretty decent one. I don't understand what you are trying to get at with this.

No one is saying there is absolute proof of anything, ever. Just that a lot of predictions have successful results when we view the world in certain ways. You can detect and predict particle/anti-particle spin. You can build internets and cellphones, and go to the moon.

 

I don't really care if it's "true" or not, it works. It makes life better.

 

You have no evidence, to say it exists. You have 'scientific evidence' which 'suggests' it exists. Well I'm sorry sir, you look at life through a human view, as if we're the center of it; rather than the universes perspective. You treat the universe as a host, rather than a organism. Maybe you should look at the universe, from its perspective.

I am looking at the universe from it's perspective. It has multiple perspectives scattered most notably on Earth, of which I am one. It may be fun to think of the universe as an "organism" but what does that even mean? What does "organism" even mean to you? Do you see some sort of metabolism working away over celestial time? It's a "pretty idea" but you can't even describe it. It doesn't tie into anything anyone can relate to observationally.

 

As far as models go, it's not very useful.

Dismissing people who believe otherwise as 'Pseudo', is correct in your eyes; that's how enslaved you are to these rules.

I have no problem with people believing whatever they want. I'm not interested in telling people how to live their lives. I am challenging one assertion on your part:

I love that picture post with the 'Believers view' and 'Skeptic', because when the Skeptic tells the believer he's wrong, he's using things that aren't proven themselves, as evidence - pretending for it to be evidence.

 

For example, the geomagnetic reversal; how it takes 5,000 years to complete. Thats never happened to us, or at least we weren't around to examine it. There is no evidence there, you're making a prediction, and then saying that prediction is correct, without witnessing it. That's not science, that's guessing and making a suitable judgement based on what you have seen; because you believe life is this one lane thing, where nothing else is possible but the rules of humanity. There is no evidence there; I have just as much right to believe it will, because I would be guessing aswell, and things in life may not be what you believe them to be.

 

That's your assertion. You are asserting that skeptics are applying a double standard, because they both just "guess" about stuff that wasn't witnessed, yet the skeptic asserts their view is more valid.

 

The skeptic asserts there is evidence to support a model, that describes how these events occur. There is a lot that goes into these models. Your lack of research doesn't diminish the work they have put in. You can believe anything you want - it doesn't bother me.

 

But at least acknowledge that they aren't "guessing" how things were, they are doing considerable work with intense scrutiny to determine the most likely explanations of how things were.

 

Lastly, those aren't "the rules of humanity" that science tends to address. It's the rules of the Universe. No one wants to get sick and die because of a dirty water supply at the center of town. That isn't part of any "rule of humanity" when an epidemic spreads - those are the rules of life. When someone, without even the concept of bacteria cleans a spigot and ends an epidemic they are acting on a theory to save lives, to improve living conditions. These things you call "rules of humanity" are really just cause and effect observations about living and dying within this Universe.

Here's something using the Mayan case, imagine 'Maths' being conducted in a different way. Rather than our 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and so on. We would have 1, 2, 3, 4 - 1, 2, 3, 4, - 1, 2, 3, 4 -. What is there to tell you it's not like that, because you as a human can make a choice to write 5?

We also have "0,1 - 0,1" and other bases. There are many ways to do math, even many ways to count. Different systems have different applications and usefulness, though I don't see much use to a base4 system. It's not a question of whether it works, it's a question have what use it is.

And carry on as if time was singular. Everything you are living could be wrong; you could just be a pawn to civilization; you're yet to proove claims of this as wrong, but you dismiss it as supid or very unlikely - never 100% evidence, just your view; through your dull, unimaginative, imprisoned, view.

 

That's pretty offensive to be honest, you really don't know anything about me. It may surprise you, but I've actually studied a lot of Mayan stuff (albeit casually) when I was younger. Aside from that, I studied (through experience) all kinds of interesting new age models of reality. I'm a trained lvl 2 Reiki practitioner, by immersion (to varying degrees) I've studied Celtic shamanism, various eastern philosophies, lucid dreaming, astral projection, various native and Toltec philosophies, just to start. I've literally hitchhiked thousands of miles with no home and nothing but a backpack and $5 on nothing other than an omen. When I say "immersion" I mean as "not a side project" but as an entire basis of living - no backup home, no backup job or backup schooling - just straight up immersion. I've seen things and experienced things that are exceptionally hard to explain. That hasn't stopped me from getting many explanations from people of course, ranging from ghosts to demons to aliens to inorganic beings to blue people living under mount Shasta, to Christ, Loki, karma, to spinning merkabah fields spinning at "3/4 the speed of light" (not sure how a velocity relates to a measure of rotations) and just about everything else you can imagine.

 

I have a very open mind, but one thing I've come to learn over the years, is what models and concepts are beneficial, and which ones only explain abstract constructs that can't even be seen anyway. I don't think science explains very much about the universe at all - just what we observe. We happen to be moving through time in a very specific way, which also kinda limits what we can observe. It is however, exceptionally useful for understanding what we observe. It is so useful, that people dedicate truly amazing amounts of time to the endeavor. They risk their lives riding rockets into space and returning against superheated plasma. They spend entire lifetimes dedicated to at times incredibly mundane research just to ensure it's sound. It's not an endeavor to justify an arrogant self-centric view of the universe - it's to understand as best we can, where and what we are. To be able to better stop epidemics that kill so many people and in general improve the quality of life on Earth.

 

All I ask, is appreciate what science is, and the selflessness and sacrifice people have put into it over generations. When it comes to science, be a little more open minded.

Edited June 30, 2010 by padren

[Phi for All]

The off-topic posts regarding earth's hemispheres and the human body's satanic symmetry have been split off to this thread. Be advised that the thread is closed temporarily pending moderator action (not by moderators involved in the thread, by the way).

 

Please feel free to continue discussing the Mayan Calendar, but for no more than two and a half years.

Edited July 1, 2010 by Phi for All
inserted hyperlink

[rigney]

I have read through the entire content four times now and wonder what brought on this wrath of the moderator? Personally, I find nothing more than two guys having different opinions. Perhaps I'm stupid; but what does this have to do with the price of rice in China? Would someone explain?

[Klaplunk]

I don't understand either =P It's probably because I don't talk science and this is a science forum. Only because I'm tired with being agree'd with on the conspiracy forums - I just wanted to get a debate going.

 

On terms of the Mayan calander; I think it's a very intelligent piece of work, seeing what technology was available at the time. I doubt it will be the end of the world, but I think it will be the end/beginning of something new. What that is? I'm not too sure, and if I was sure of something, it would be something non-science and probably to do with the illuminati.

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

I have read through the entire content four times now and wonder what brought on this wrath of the moderator? Personally, I find nothing more than two guys having different opinions. Perhaps I'm stupid; but what does this have to do with the price of rice in China? Would someone explain?

 

It's not the stuff here that was the problem -- it's what we cut off and moved over here:

 

http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/showthread.php?t=53555

 

It wasn't related to this conversation, so we split it off. It also became decidedly uncivil at points, particularly when Klaplunk started calling people psycho and told them to check in at a psychiatric clinic.

[Phi for All]

I have read through the entire content four times now and wonder what brought on this wrath of the moderator? Personally, I find nothing more than two guys having different opinions. Perhaps I'm stupid; but what does this have to do with the price of rice in China? Would someone explain?

As Cap'n said, this thread is fine. We had 5 other pages that diverged from the original topic, so to be fair to you, we split them off into their own thread. I just forgot to put a hyperlink in where I said, "this thread".

 

Fixed now, so sorry, carry on, how about those Mayans?

[rigney]

Thanks Cap'n. I did the post, but not for consternation. I've glanced at it perhaps three or four time before today. YdoaPs pretty much said it all with his input. Sorry that this happened.

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

As Cap'n said, this thread is fine. We had 5 other pages that diverged from the original topic, so to be fair to you, we split them off into their own thread. I just forgot to put a hyperlink in where I said, "this thread".

 

Fixed now, so sorry, carry on, how about those Mayans?

 

 

Went over there and looked through some of the stuff. Wow! Thanks for getting things straightened out. The Myans? Oh! yes, the Myans.