| The Great Rethinking and The Prophets Conference: A Negligent Elite that Answers to No One? |
 |
Introduction
We at 2012Hoax believe it’s contemptible to judge a movement by the actions of its fringe elements. Therefore, when we say that “2012” is a scam perpetrated by persons and organizations that make groundless claims either knowingly or negligently, we make that charge against those whom the 2012 movement itself considers “most credible” and “of the highest integrity”.
One of the organizations at whom we level this charge is The Great Rethinking and The Prophets Conference (TGRTPC).
About the Conference
TGRTPC’s purposes are stated in this excerpt from its “about” page:
Welcome to The Great Rethinking and The Prophets Conference, an international organization dedicated to assisting in the birthing of a new humanity, and thereby, the realization of the successful cultivation of a sustainable and workable world.
Unprecedented changes and challenges are facing the people of this world and we see these as a birthing process leading towards a tipping point for a personal and planetary renaissance.
The Prophets Conference programs, with many of today's trailblazing teachers, are designed to cultivate spiritual principles and scientific potentials, invoking oneness and deeper experiences for those who participate in this growing community.
Since 1999, the Prophets have met at least once a year for conferences and adventures, in places as diverse as Oxford, Egypt, South India, and the Peruvian Amazon1. Its first conferences devoted specifically to 2012 seem to be those held this year in Cancun (January) and Vancouver (July).
The Prophets’ views on 2012
As you can see from this page, the “Faculty” of those conferences are a Who’s Who of the 2012 movement. Their predictions for 20122 range from the apocalyptic
One of the predictions concerns how we’re going to have seven days of darkness. When this takes place, a lot of people that don’t have a spiritual basis are going to go nuts. I have been assured that this will not be the end of the world. It really means, according to the Maya, that the earth is going to go through a period of gestation and enter into a new period. I saw in a vision that we’re going to have two suns. We need to get ready.
—Flordemayo
to the puzzlingly bland3:
2012 is definitely not just about one day in 2012; it is about a sea change that probably won’t bear fruit for many decades. But I believe that 2012 could be seen by future historians as a temporal marker of a great renaissance that will raise a submerged continent of consciousness that has been suppressed by Western science and culture.
—John Major Jenkins
Why do we say that TGRTPC makes baseless statements negligently?
We made two especially interesting observations while examining the Faculty’s writings and TGRTPC’s promotional materials for the July (Vancouver) conference:
- An apparent admission that the Prophets' pronouncements on 2012 have no identifiable support in ancient Maya sources: the Maya recorded what the Maya only suspected would happen in 2012, and the Prophets don’t know what those suspicions refer to.
- Some of the Faculty (e.g. Daniel Pinchbeck, moderator of the Vancouver conference) have published statements about the astronomy of 2012 that could be refuted, easily and conclusively, by a bright high-school student. However, those same blunders appear to go undetected by Faculty members (Pinchbeck among them) who claim to communicate with gods, “masters of light”, and extraterrestrial intelligences.
Of course these observations, unless refuted, would damage TGRTPC’s credibility. To give TGRTPC an opportunity to respond to them, we sent the following letters about three weeks before the start of the Vancouver Conference.
Letter To Daniel Pinchbeck
Sent to Daniel Pinchbeck via the “contact” form at his on line publication Reality Sandwich (30 June)4
{I apologize if this is the wrong place to send this message, but I didn't see any other way to contact Mr. Pinchbeck.}
Dear Mr. Pinchbeck,
A friend allowed me to read a bit of "2012: The Return of Quetzalcoatl". I couldn't help noticing that Chapter 4 begins with the following statement:“On the Winter Solstice of December 21, 2012, the Sun will rise within the dark rift at the center of our Milky Way galaxy, an event that occurs once every 25,800 years.” (p. 238)
Actually, that statement is incorrect. Even if we restrict ourselves to the case of Izapa, Chiapas, the sun rises within the Dark Rift on the day of the Winter Solstice in almost every year from AD 2000 to AD 2070. It does so in a few years that are as early as about 1980, and as late as about 2120.
In about 10 of those years, the sun rises at Izapa at a time closer to the instant of the Solstice than is the case for 2012.
In summary, there is nothing noteworthy, astronomically, about 21 December 2012.
When I investigated the statement quoted above, I dug into the sorts of raw sensory information the ancient mesoamerican astronomers had available to them when they designed the Long Count calendar. What I learned was interesting, and gave me a whole new respect for those ancients. I plan to do a video on the subject, so I would appreciate reading any further reflections you might have on the statement quoted from your book.
Regards,
Letter to Tipping Point Conference organizers
To the organizers of the Vancouver conference (2 July 2010):
Dear organizers of the Tipping Point Conference,
I write articles on the 2012 phenomenon, so of course I’m interested in your upcoming Tipping Point conference in Vancouver. I learned of it on the home page of one of your faculty, John Major Jenkins (http://www.alignment2012.com).
I expect most of my readers to be skeptical about 2012 (as I am). Therefore, they’ll probably have questions like those that follow, which I’m sure you'll agree are reasonable. I'll be happy to publish any answers you might give.
Question 1.
On Jenkins’ home page, he makes the following assertion:“We are lucky that the brilliant skywatchers who devised the 2012 calendar left carved monuments for us to decode, and that they have survived the decay of centuries, so that we can know exactly what they prophesied and believed about 2012.”
Jenkins then explains what sort of messages the Maya left for us to decode:
“Naturally enough, with their uncorrupted intelligence intact, [the Maya] suspected that the world would go through a transformation when the solar and the galactic planes aligned [in 2012].”
Please note the word, "suspected". Taken together, Jenkins' words indicate that the information we gain through our exact decipherment of the monuments is what the Maya suspected regarding 2012.
Jenkins' home page also presents the following excerpt from your organization’s description of the Conference:
“The purpose of the 2012 Tipping Point Prophets conference in Vancouver is to explore a radically different, more optimistic interpretation of the Mayan prophecy – as referring to the end of the world as we have known it. Instead of predicting a physical destruction of the material world, the Mayan prophecy might refer to death and rebirth and a mass inner transformation of humanity.”
I’m struck by the phrase "might refer to". It seems to indicate that although the Maya tell us exactly what they suspected, they leave us in doubt as to what they were referring to. Moreover, the announced purpose of the Conference is to explore radical interpretations of what the Maya were referring to. Why, then, would it be unfair to characterize the Tipping Point Conference as follows?
“Explorations of radical modern-day interpretations of what the Maya might have been referring to when they recorded what they suspected 2100 years ago.”
Question 2.
Daniel Pinchbeck said in 2012: The Return of Quetzalcoatl that on 21 December 2012 the sun will rise within the Dark Rift for the only time in 25,800 years (p. 238). Of course this assertion is incorrect: a bright high-schooler could refute it in a few hours of work, using freeware astronomy programs. (I can send you the analysis if you wish.5)
How is it that your faculty, many of whom communicate with interdimensional beings and study for years with shamans, are not capable of detecting such errors? Does this failure not raise questions about intuitive discernment of truth?
In view of the above, people might reasonably ask why they should look to your organization for guidance when choosing a direction in which to “consciously evolve”.
What reasons would you give them?
Thank you for your time and attention. I look forward to reading your responses.
Regards,
Neither Pinchbeck nor the organizers replied.
We made no further attempt to contact Pinchbeck, but we continued emailing Conference organizers and four other Faculty until 20 July (the Conference started on 23 July). Details are given here. By our count, we emailed the four Faculty members three times each, and the Conference organizers five times. Each email repeated the offer to send the analysis of Pinchbeck’s inaccurate statement about the astronomy of 21 December 2012.
The Final Email
The final (20 July) email was carbon-copied to organizers and Faculty alike, with the following note:
Hello,
During the last few weeks, I have sent all of you the following letter [the letter of 2 July], with appropriate individualized questions. Unfortunately, I have not yet heard back from anyone. I'm especially disappointed that no one has taken me up on my offer to send the analysis refuting Mr. Pinchbeck's claim about the uniqueness of 21 December 2012.
I hope you will find time to send your answers to my questions. I would prefer not to give to my readers a stereotypical, "The Prophets Conference did not return repeated emails", since that could give readers the impression that your highly spiritual and selfless faculty will not answer such questions unless the asker travels to Cancun or Vancouver to hear the answer.
I look forward to reading your responses.
Regards,
This was the only email that received any replies (other than John Perkins’ automated acknowledgments of receipt). Andrew Harvey’s secretary replied that he had been too busy to reply. Lyn Roberts (who claims to communicate with extraterrestrials) replied that
I can simply respond to your question by stating that my own orientation and relationship with extraterrestrial intelligences has never concerned specific astronomical configurations and I certainly cannot respond for others.
Conclusion
We believe that the correspondence described here, together with the supporting materials cited therein, make TGRTPC’s negligence obvious.
Pinchbeck’s statement about the astronomical uniqueness of 21 December 2012 is inaccurate, and was made negligently. Other Faculty members had no clear responsibility to request the analysis we offered. However, Conference organizers did, especially since Pinchbeck was to have a key role (Moderator) in the upcoming Conference. The organizers’ failure to respond to any of the five emails in which the analysis was offered was willful negligence.
Regarding the persistent unresponsiveness of all those who received the letter of 2 July, no further comment is necessary.
