Okay, let's have a looksee…
Roland Emmerich’s 2012 movie pretty depicts what is to happen only the cause of the cataclysm is wrong.
I read that as "I like the way the movie looks - it's just like I imagined it to be, except the initial cause where I believe something completely different will happen instead."
He, unknowingly, has done a great public service by the making of his movie to create public awareness of 2012.
Must. Resist. Sarcastic. Response. Apologies all, but the only service the movie has done was rake in some cash, give work experience to a lot of cast and crew and something about petrifying select members of the public…
The Maya were not the only ones who knew about 2012 as most of the ancient world did from 3,000 BC up till the 1800s when the knowledge was lost.
And so another culture who did know about '2012' are… who? Are you going to tell us? Nope, because that would require research, and lots of it, and it would no doubt conflict with the views of the Maya, and seeing as they are the only views that oh so incredibly loosely support this flimsy theory, we're not going to add anything to help debunk it in an instant. Keep it as vague as possible and you can claim anything will happen, and anyone in particular knew about it.
Washington DC was laid out to reflect 2012 as a reminder to visitors. Monuments carved in stone were left world wide to warn our generation of 2012.
Which monuments? How was it laid out to remind us? Do we get an explanation? Course not, got to keep it vague…
Christ taught it in the Bible but few today have understood it.
Few Christians understand the Bible full stop.
The ancient world understood 2012 very well; the modern world, lest of all the modern Maya, lack the correct knowledge and understanding thereof, and are stumbling in the dark for answers to 2012.
Again, no examples, lots of vague phrasing. Who? How? Show they understood it. Is that too much to ask?
Even this website doesn’t have the facts right about the Galactic alignment in 2012. True the sun’s ecliptic (path) does cross the Galactic Equator near mid-point at least yearly without incident. What astronomers fail to notice is that for the last 5,125 years the sun has been advancing steadily toward the “dark rift” of the Milky Way as it crosses the Galactic Equator( an imaginary line) at mid-point yearly until on Dec. 21, 2012, when the sun crosses the Galactic Equator at mid-point, it will be positioned in the vaginal opening of the “dark rift” of the Milky Way. When this occurs, it marks the end of the age, Precession of 26,000 years, also called A Great Year.
I bet it does, but that'd mean more Googling. Isn't it funny how astronomers, every single one of them, fail to notice something and yet these people - whom I have doubts could identify Venus if they were looking straight at it - have all the answers. Myeah. Exactly. The Dark Rift is a cloud of sorts. This Solar System was born of a cloud. As poetic as that is, it's not a case of "crikey, we're heading full speed into the Dark Rift, we're going to crash"
And so we need some maths to make it look somewhat more scientific, so we'll chuck in numbers about the precession, where the north celestial pole of Earth will appear to trace a circle in the sky that takes 26,000 years to complete. Conveniently, we can say this 26,000 year cycle finishes any year we want. How? It's a circle. I can say it started 26,000 years ago, which means it will finish this year. 2010 is the End of the World, you've heard it here first…
Many cycles of time end on that day for good reason. On that day, the Earth will be positioned to start a 3 day transit through the “dark rift” of the Milky Way.
Wow, 3 days to cross a rift, how fast are we traveling exactly? This rift being 300 light years away from us an all, so we've got to get there within two years, cross into it (I guess it has a really straight edge where, upon crossing into it, it's as if walking into a dark room… you know, just like those straight edged clouds you see everywhere…), and spit out the other side in precisely 3 days, no more, no less.
Now wrapping your head around spacetime is damned difficult. Trying to explain to someone that the galaxy does not operate on the concept of 'days' is equally difficult, especially if they are so adamant that it will all happen in these incredibly short amounts of time, and within their lifetimes to boot.
It is what lurks there that causes the cataclysm.
Slightly darker skies?
Earth will survive but one-third of the world’s population will perish.
Earth will survive what exactly? Oh no, silly me, keep it all vague…
Read the non-fiction 2012 trilogy, The Ark of Millions of Years, by E. J. Clark, the most comprehensive 2012 books in the world, for the answers.
To quote an Amazon reviewer of one of the books:
I will never look at the stars the same again., 15 Feb 2005 By A Customer
"This book has it all. How the earth was created. Where it was created. How it was moved here and placed into orbit. How mankind was placed on it, and what happened to them. Atlantis, Mu, the Nephilim, the Freemasons…it's all in here. If you ever were fascinated by the subject of earth creation, you need to read this book. I am convinced this is the missing link between creation and evolution everyone's been looking for."
Do I need to expand on that? The Nephilim and the Freemasons, creation and evolution… riiight.
The ancient Maya believed 2012 was the end of the true Earth or original creation in this universe, therefore they said that they would not restart their calendar because there would not be a need for it as time will be measured differently there. The physical Earth is not the true Earth. Have to read the books in order to understand that statement. Read and prepare for the time is short….Thanks
I have to read the books to understand that statement? No I don't, I understand it quite well thanks. Insert a bit of magic and everything is possible. The magic in this case is that somewhere is a true Earth, and we're not on it, and so cannot confirm or deny it's existence, and until we do every idea, no matter how utterly ridiculous should be given equal validity, especially ones which have no evidence to support themselves, like all of this 2012 malarky.
I'd argue it doesn't need to addressed because it doesn't have any substance. It's just reeling off ideas and choice little soundbites that are too vague to form any solid theory. It boils down to one persons opinion of how they are right because of their beliefs, whatever they may be, as oppose to doctors being right because of the evidence found in their studies, for example.
And with it being a wall of text on the Internet, it may well have just been ignored as a tl;dr - it happens.
Tony (guest) 05 Oct 2010 20:14
