I guess the earthquakes freaked me out because they project around 15 a year…and there's already been 2 on the first 2 days of 2011.
Projections, estimates, averages, expectations, they're all funny words to describe such things. There isn't some committee who gather around a table every year and write up a bunch of numbers for expected Earthquakes. There are however, scientists the world over, studying different areas of geology and recording different pieces of data that, when looked at globally and over lengthy time scales can give you a ballpark figure for what an 'average year on Earth' is. An average year on a geologically active contains an awful lot of Earthquakes, the vast majority of which you're never even aware of, but it's all part of the game of living on this planet.
The celebrities talking about it worries me because they are influential people, in that, they have a way of getting people to believe them.
Of course they do, but to listen to them because of who they are is to be biased towards a certain view, not what the evidence says. And it happens exactly the same with science by the way - if Einstein's theories were to be proved wrong tomorrow, Einstein will become that scientist with the funny hair who did a few damn cool things before we found out something cooler. We wouldn't stick with Einstein just because he's Einstein, we don't stick with Darwin just because he's Darwin, and so on. We stick with the evidence, wherever that testable evidence leads, not the voice whose talking about it.
I'm scared that my life is going to end next year by something we don't know about.
Would you know about the bus that hit you if you weren't paying attention to the traffic when crossing the street? Granted, the fact that 2012 is portrayed as bigger than a bus stretches this analogy a bit, but where do you draw the line? At what point is one unknown not worth worrying about, but another unknown is? We don't know how or if the Universe will end, is that something to be scared of?
Patrick Geryl seems like a loon, but didn't he accurately predict a flare in October??
To accurately predict a flare in October requires you to pick one of 31 numbers. Seeing as flares take a few days to leave the Sun and reach the orbit of Earth, you could argue he's got an good few days of error margin too, so even if he didn't get that 1 in 31 date correct, his odds of predicting the correct three day window would be 1 in 10, the correct week merely 1 in 4. That's not really a strong prediction, more like playing the odds.
In science, a prediction is a hypothesis that gets laid out, detailed, and tested by multiple people in multiple tests until there is a clear conclusion, and even then it isn't declared correct until more people do more tests to check or expand on that initial prediction, and so on and so on… all Geryl did was get a date right or near right.
Why can't NASA do a TV show on why it is a bunch of crap if History Channel and NatGeo can run one's on why it is true???
Because they spend what little money they have doing far, far better public service elsewhere, and when they do speak about it, 2012ers don't listen and use it as fuel to fire their cover up conspiracy theories - just look for some of the reaction David Morrison's 5 minute video got. I've seen it reuploaded to YouTube with titles regarding him being a reptilian disinformation agent, hardly how he wants to be portrayed if he wants to help people.
Of course that doesn't stop anyone else from doing documentaries, I'm sure there are quite a few out there, certainly plenty of blogs and websites, radio shows combating the nonsense, it's not like it's not being looked into skeptically and critically - after all, that's what this site is for.