2011 eh?

2011 eh?

DieselHorseLAW 12 May 2011 09:05

I was watching a video about the real calendar correlation being Dec. 24, 2011 earlier. I was reading through the comments and quite a few people were saying that back before the mid 90's any talk of the Mayan long count correlation was said to be 2011 and that 2012 didn't start showing up until after the mid 90's. I know Calleman has pushed his Oct 28th 2011 date as the real correlation, but I hadn't heard the Dec 24th one. Anyways, I was just wondering if any of ya'll had heard about this, was going to look more into it since I haven't been following this for a long time, especially not since the 90's, but I am about to get some sleep.

---

“In all matters of opinion, our adversaries are insane.” - Oscar Wilde

Re: 2011 eh?

bikenbeer2000 12 May 2011 22:05

If you look at this Wikipedia page you will see a list of no fewer than 27 versions of correlations between the Long Count and the Gregorian calendar, giving dates ranging from the years 1493 to 2532.

The dates either side of 21st December 2012, together with the authorities on which they're based are as follows:

Stock: 27th August 1936
Goodman: 18th December 2012
Martinez-Hernandez: 19th December 2012
GMT: 21st December 2012
Modified Thompson 1: 22nd December 2012
Thompson (Lounsbury): 23rd December 2012
Pogo: 11th November 2024

Many of these dates were published well before 1990. Research on this was being carried out over 100 years ago.

There are no doubt many other dates being pushed by people with their own agendas and who use little more than numerology and other contrivances to arrive at a (convenient) date in the near future. I doubt if Calleman, for example, can cite any archaeological references to back up his date.

Re: 2011 eh?

Awesomeee 12 May 2011 20:47

Well does it matter , not like they predicted anything

---

No man knows the day nor the hour when the world will end.

Become a debunker and help out those that are being fed up with lies spread by False scientists going after you'r money.
Practice what you want to and dont give up on you'r dreams my dream is to become a basketball player 'NBA'

Re: 2011 eh?

RickardM 12 May 2011 23:46

So you mean that anything that doesn't involve predictions of doom and gloom is more or less useless, even from an historical perspective?=)

---

Facts are stubborn things.
- Ronald Reagan

Re: 2011 eh?

DieselHorseLAW 13 May 2011 01:00

I didn't ask this out of any curiosity involving "predictions", I was simply inquiring about different correlations that I had found. It is a curiosity as to why seeing as there are so many dates that are claimed correlations that a lot of proponents settled on 2012. My guess has always been that a lot of the other dates wouldn't work as well for them since they have already either happened or are to far in the future to make a fuss about now in their eyes.

---

“In all matters of opinion, our adversaries are insane.” - Oscar Wilde

Re: 2011 eh?

bikenbeer2000 13 May 2011 03:32

It's my understanding that 21st December 2012 was always the preferred correlation date, with 23rd December 2012 running it a close second. My own personal belief as to why the 21st has got the vote is that at least there's an astronomical event (the solstice) on that date whereas on the 23rd there's nothing. This means that the doomsday nuts have an astronomical event (albeit regular and unremarkable) on which to lump their ridiculous predictions.
After that, it's just a case of bandwagon-jumping. Most doomsday nuts just want to add to the fear which has already been generated by the proponents of 21st December.