my theory on why the mayan calendar ends on 12-21-12

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 18 2005 @ 08:39 AM
link   
it started by debunking some an article like this...


According to Mayan Elder Carlos Barrios’ reading of the Mayan calendar, if war happens in November 2002 or after, then it’s bad, but not catastrophic. But if it happens between April and November 2003, it will be catastrophic. Really bad. It could eventually result in the death of two-thirds of humanity. “So stay active,” he says. “If we are active, we can transform the planet. The elders watch to see what happens.”


The very first culture known to have a writing system was the sumerian (5000bc-1300bc) culture. they had a model of our solar system that was the same as what we have today, exept for one small difference - a 10th planet. Pluto was not discovered by us untill 1930 publicly. it was first photographed at lowell observatory in 1915 but not discovered till 30. anyway, percival lowell was dedicated to the study of mars, but towards the end of his life he was looking for a 9th planet. the reason he was looking for it was becasue there was an unknown gravitational force effecting the orbit of uranus and neptune. in 1930 when pluto was discovered it was accepted that this was the case.

this WAS NOT the case. in 1960 (or close to not 100%) a moon of pluto was discoverd and plutos mass was calculated. pluto is not what was casuing orbital deviations.

the sumerians had correct knowledge of all of the solar system as we know it today plus this 10th planet called nibiru. they placed this yet undiscoverd planet on a 3600 year eliptical orbit.

my theory is this:

the recent earth related events are related to the relative closeness of this 10th planet. (tis is not the large asteriod/planetoid sedna that has recently been discoverd.) the fluxuations are not casued by gravity, but rather magnetic feilds from this planet.

in 1983 encyclopedia britanica stated that pioneer would travel another 40 years out to search for our solar systems second sun, a sun that never made it. it is alleged to be a brown dwarf.

i have a bunch of additional evidence.

1 the cycle of the sun is 1336040 days
2 the myan calandar is 1336560 days long and ends in 2012
3 thats just over 3600 years, 3741 to be exact. thats within 4%, an acceptable tolerance imho.
4 every 11 years and at the end of a cycle the suns magnetic feild reverses.
5 there have been mass exctinctions on earth at times coresponding to when this planet would be around, including the last ice age.
6 there was more solar activity last year (magnetism plays a huge part) than in the last 8000 years or so.
7 the earths magnetic feild is moving south at a rate of 60km per second, and the earths magnetic feild has been known to completely reverse. if you
placed a telescope on antartica, you would be able to see into a 'blind spot' in space that we cannot currently see.

it is my opinion that the mayans had the same knowledge as the sumerians
and had realized the planet got fuxored every time nibiru came close. thats why their calander ends on december 21st 2012. they ecpect nibiru to be in the vicinity and bring changes due to its magnetic feilds, and not that it will directly hit earth, but that it will bring along comets/asteroids that will.

anyway, a huge magnetic feild within our own solar sytem would definately
alter our weather/sun/geo kinetic activity.

`````````````````````````
Fixed title spelling/grammar


[edit on 4/2/07 by masqua]




posted on Jan, 18 2005 @ 09:01 AM
link   
I have been hearing about this "Nibiru" planet for a long time now. Is there really any evidence to suggest that a planet is heading our way? Surely, it would have been detected by now? There are only 7.86 years to go to December 2012

[edit on 18-1-2005 by Indigo_Child]



posted on Jan, 18 2005 @ 09:10 AM
link   
well, as i mentioned the margin of error in the data i collected was small in %, in terms of years it is give or take 140.

my thoughts on why we cant see it yet, we cant see past the outer edges of our solar system well becasue there is a dust cloud and no light source, so it could be on the fringe so to speak. also, it could be in a blind spot in the south. if it was on an eliptical orbit and the approach date was within the time frame i gave, it could very well still be out of reach of our optical sensors, but totally existant.

now if someone will (please) invent some super sensitive magnetic planet detector we can find out for sure...



posted on Jan, 18 2005 @ 09:48 AM
link   
So we can see this:


But we can't see something already well within our solar system (which this planet would be if it's less than 7 years away)?


How is that again?





(btw, there are going to be alot of dissapointed people in 2013)



posted on Jan, 18 2005 @ 09:52 AM
link   
The picture you put up is of distant galaxies. The reason we can see them is because of their stars (light). A planet is much harder to find (no light source). The way we can detect planets is either when they pass in front of a star (block the light) or by the variations of the stars "wobble". So yes, there still could be a 10th planet somewhere. I said could be so don't blast me.



posted on Jan, 18 2005 @ 10:11 AM
link   
I am not sure about the intracacies of astronomy. However, I am sure, if there was a 10th planet the size of Earth in our very own solar system, we would have detected it by now, in one way or another. If it is only 7 years from aligning with our orbit, I don't see why it could not be seen.

I am not trying to rule it out, but is there really any evidence to suggest or suspect a 10th planet exists, other than what some new-age prophets say?



posted on Jan, 18 2005 @ 10:17 AM
link   
the only part i got wrong was plutos moon. it was discovered in 78. the rest of the things stuff i mentioned is by no means proof but it is all researched well. if you realized how many outlandish/debunkable/just plain nutty pieces i had to sift thru to achieve this small bit of info, anyway, fell free to scrutinize away as long as its not personal thats why i posted it.



posted on Jan, 18 2005 @ 10:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by jprophet420
the only part i got wrong was plutos moon. it was discovered in 78. the rest of the things stuff i mentioned is by no means proof but it is all researched well. if you realized how many outlandish/debunkable/just plain nutty pieces i had to sift thru to achieve this small bit of info, anyway, fell free to scrutinize away as long as its not personal thats why i posted it.


Further, again if it is 7 years away and the size of Earth, and cannot be detected, how could it's magnetic field be affecting the sun?



posted on Jan, 18 2005 @ 10:40 AM
link   
Jprophet420 says:

Pluto was not discovered by us untill 1930 publicly. …. the reason he was looking for it {Ninth Planet] was becasue there was an unknown gravitational force effecting the orbit of uranus and neptune. in 1930 when pluto was discovered it was accepted that this was the case. this WAS NOT the case. in 1960 (or close to not 100%) a moon of pluto was discoverd and plutos mass was calculated. pluto is not what was casuing orbital deviations.

Not true. Pluto’s moon Charon was discovered in 1978. The reason that it was determined that Pluto was not causing orbital deviations was that the original calculations and orbital analyses of Neptune and Uranus were simply incorrect.

The supposed perturbations in Neptune's orbit were attributed to the gravitational tug of an unknown planet beyond Neptune, dubbed `Planet X'. Lowell predicted the position of Planet X based on these erroneous perturbations to Neptune's orbit, and the portion of the sky covered by the telescopic survey was influenced by these calculations.

However, At the time of Tombaugh's discovery of Pluto, astronomers had every reason to believe that Pluto was indeed the reason for the perturbations. It wasn't known until much later that the perturbations in Neptune's orbit did not exist; and even if the perturbations were correct, Pluto would’ve bee way too small to have caused the perturbations. However, Pluto was discovered relatively near the predicted position; and the size of Pluto, calculated based on its observed brightness and a reasonable assumption for the reflectivity of it's surface, was quite large. Of course, Pluto wasn’t as large as its observed brightness led the discoverers to believe.

Modern observations of Uranus and Neptune show no evidence for orbital perturbations that cannot be explained by the other planets. Also, the Pioneer and Voyager spacecraft have shown no inexplicable deviations that a tenth planet could explain.

…the recent earth related events are related to the relative closeness of this 10th planet.

If it’s “relatively close” how come no one has seen it?

”… the fluxuations are not casued by gravity, but rather magnetic feilds from this planet.”

Would you care to share with us your reason for believing that a magnetic field can cause a fluctuation in an orbital body? I am not aware of a single scientist in the world who believes that there is any basis, experimental or otherwise, for a magnetic field causing a planet to shift in its orbit or to physically move a portion of a planet, e.g., a portion of a tectonic plate.

Furthermore, if there were such a planet and if it were somehow giving off some kind of magic magnetic field, why hasn’t that magnetic field been discovered and recorded by scientists? Given the importance of our own magnetic field, we now have satellites that do nothing but measure the EM field of the Earth in real time, as well as observing and things like sunspots, which can change that field. If your assertion is true, why haven’t we seen such a change in the readings?

And finally, even if there were an invisible planet which was emitting these unheard-of magnetic emanations, wouldn’t it also be displaying a gravitational attraction as well?

“…in 1983 encyclopedia britanica stated that pioneer would travel another 40 years out to search for our solar systems second sun, a sun that never made it. it is alleged to be a brown dwarf.”

Maybe in 1983 they believed that there might be a brown dwarf out in the Oort Cloud, but it never found one. Besides, although you might not be able to see a brown dwarf at that distance, its IR signature would be incredibly bright, especially when recorded by today’s CCDs.

i have a bunch of additional evidence….1 the cycle of the sun is 1336040 days

What cycle of the sun? Certainly not the time it takes the sun to make a rotation around the Milky Way galaxy! That’s something on the order of 30 million years, not 3657 years, 10 months, and two weeks! Where did you get that information?

the myan calandar is 1336560 days long and ends in 2012… thats just over 3600 years, 3741 to be exact. thats within 4%, an acceptable tolerance imho.

Acceptable tolerance for what? If there is a 3657-year sun cycle, and if it somehow ties into a Mayan calendar of 3741, then what you’re saying – correct me if I’m wrong here – is that the so-called “end cycle” could come any time between 1929 and 2095. do you call that “acceptable tolerance”? I certainly don’t!

…there have been mass exctinctions on earth at times coresponding to when this planet would be around, including the last ice age.

Not true. if you look at mass extinctions, including the Post Archaeozoic Die-Off which came about as a result of the atmosphere transitioning from reducing to oxidizing, Permian/Triassic Die-off, and the Cretaceous/Tertiary Die-Off which almost everyone believes is a result of the Chicxulub Strike in what is not Yucatan, you will not find a common time-period between them

For years, some scientists have attempted to show that these die-offs are cyclical and corresponded roughly to the rotation time of the Sun around the Galaxy, but the numbers don’t work.

And, by the way, the last ice age was not a die-off; indeed, there was a greater biological diversity in the Pleistocene than other, warmer times.

…”there was more solar activity last year (magnetism plays a huge part) than in the last 8000 years or so.”

You have no way of knowing that – nor do I -- since we’ve only been taking measurements over the past 50 or so years, and there’s no way we can correlate solar activity to any records in the earth, including dendrochronology, dipole changes on Atlantic basalts, or fossil studies.

”the earths magnetic feild is moving south at a rate of 60km per second…

Rubbish. While the Earth’s magnetic pole moves around, the field does not. And the pole isn’t moving south at 60 km/sec; if it were it would have shifted every five minutes and 33 seconds. Do the math.

”…and the earths magnetic feild has been known to completely reverse.”

True, it does; on the average of about 70,000 years -- and we are statistically overdue for another. But there is no correlation between any of the magnetic pole shifts (which we have calculated quite accurately) and any die-offs, so it’s not likely that, even if there were a magnetic pole shift next Wednesday, anything bad would happen except maybe for the migrating habits of some birds and insects that use the earth’s magnetic field to help them navigate.

“if you placed a telescope on antartica, you would be able to see into a 'blind spot' in space that we cannot currently see.”

Well, duh! If you live north of 30 deg N lat, then the sky above Antarctica is hidden from you because of the Earth’s curvature. A telescope in Minnesota or Alberta can see a “blind spot” that someone living in Dunedin, New Zealand or Hobart, Tasmania or or Puerto Williams, Chile can’t see, either – and for the same reason.

What is your point here?

I’m sorry, Jprophet; I don’t mean to shoot you down personally, but your assertions seem to be built on evidence that is either non-existent or simply wrong. I can’t buy any of it.


[edit on 18-1-2005 by Off_The_Street]



posted on Jan, 18 2005 @ 10:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by MacMerdin
The picture you put up is of distant galaxies. The reason we can see them is because of their stars (light). A planet is much harder to find (no light source). The way we can detect planets is either when they pass in front of a star (block the light) or by the variations of the stars "wobble". So yes, there still could be a 10th planet somewhere. I said could be so don't blast me.

There could be more than one planet sized object out there.

Just not one 7 years away from coming close to the earth. You would be able to see it with a good pair of binoculars at this point.
Even pluto reflects some light, what is this planet made out of that the sun can't reflect light off of it?



posted on Jan, 18 2005 @ 11:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Indigo_Child

Further, again if it is 7 years away and the size of Earth, and cannot be detected, how could it's magnetic field be affecting the sun?


i don't think its size was ever established
it could be the size of chiron or maybe even mercury?

maybe its not a 'planet' but the collapsed nucleus/core of a brown dwarf
on a comet like trajectory. then the dense material could have the properties of a much larger body, including gravity & magnetic fields?

that might satisify the 'not visible' arguements
then with McCanney Science 'electro-magnetic plazma discharge model'
this small, distant, fast moving, powerful attractor, entering the inner solar-system could/might disrupt the time-space fields which are relatively stable for 3570 years of the interlopers 3600 year orbit.

? wonder why the Vatican quickly pressed for then quickly built an observatory in Arizona back in 2002?

* the only question i really have is:
->if theres a ~3600 year return, why is this approach a special end-time and cataclysmic event?...
->with only 5 known mass extinction events[that are apparent] since 750 million years ago?
-> that means there's been thousands of non-eventful approaches by this 'nibiru' ((planet/comet/dense core/brown dwarf/interloper..))



posted on Jan, 18 2005 @ 11:54 AM
link   
Udio says:

" don't think its size was ever established it could be the size of chiron or maybe even mercury?"

Regardless of its putative size, no one has ever seen it, and there is no evidence whatsoever for its existence.

"maybe its not a 'planet' but the collapsed nucleus/core of a brown dwarf..."

If you're familiar with basic astronomy, you should know that a Brown Dwarf is WAAAY smaller than Chandresekhar's Limit. There is no way that a Brown Dwarf could turn into a collapsed anything.

"...on a comet like trajectory. then the dense material could have the properties of a much larger body, including gravity & magnetic fields?

No. See above. Besides, what correlation is there between mass and magnetic fields?

"then with McCanney Science 'electro-magnetic plazma discharge model' ..."

No one believes the "McCanney Science 'electro-magnetic plazma discharge model' " except (maybe) McCanney.

"this small, distant, fast moving, powerful attractor, entering the inner solar-system could/might disrupt the time-space fields which are relatively stable for 3570 years of the interlopers 3600 year orbit.'

Except, of course, that there's no more evidence for a small, fast-moving, powerful whizz-bang than there is for the Little Fairies of the Moonlight in my back yard.

"...wonder why the Vatican quickly pressed for then quickly built an observatory in Arizona back in 2002?"

The Vatican involvement in the Mt. Graham telescope near Safford has been in the works for over twenty years.

"the only question i really have is ... that means there's been thousands of non-eventful approaches by this 'nibiru' ((planet/comet/dense core/brown dwarf/interloper..))



posted on Jan, 18 2005 @ 03:12 PM
link   
Interesting debate, one thing comes to my mind while going over the various posts. Remember how "they" all laughed at Jor-el. Well "they" aren't laughing anymore.



posted on Jan, 18 2005 @ 04:05 PM
link   
Maybe they stoppd because they got tired of makin calendars. Think about it if you alive a thousand years ago what use would you have for a 2013 calendar



posted on Jan, 18 2005 @ 05:15 PM
link   
read into sunspots off, the magnetic fluxuations are there and we have recorded them. scientists dont know what casue them so if you have some reason to believe you know what does please post.



posted on Jan, 18 2005 @ 09:12 PM
link   
I don't really buy the niburu thing, but I wonder if we would necessarily detect a planet orbiting on the suns Y axis instead of the X axis like most planets. Especially if it had a long orbit.



posted on Jan, 18 2005 @ 09:13 PM
link   
Hey what if its actually a black hole? Wouldn't that suck? I know it can't be be it would still really suck lol. Anyway if its not a "brown dawraf could it be an actuall collapsed something? If it were a planetoid of super heavy alloys somehow formed by its very long orbit and random events what would its effects be then. How would something like this have a 36-3700 year orbit without being pulled into something elses gravity feild and being shot off course. maybe it has been and will never return. Even more intriguing what if it is not a planetoid at all but the aliean mother ship that might have been responsible for helping ancieant civilizations to build the pyramids, or the atlantean civilizations infamous power source. hmmmmmm?



posted on Jan, 18 2005 @ 09:26 PM
link   
i dont think the brown dwarf is the planet at all, 2 seperate issues.



posted on Jan, 18 2005 @ 09:47 PM
link   
Jp420,
I tried looking up some of your facts:
1) What I found was the solar magnetic cycle is 21 then 22 years and here's the site arxiv.org...
2) Nowhere could I find anything on the "1336040", you called it the cycle of the sun, What do you mean?
3) You claim mass extinctions when this 10th planet orbits (3600 yrs). I'm pretty sure there wasn't a mass extinction about the yr 1600 BC.
4) It's probably only been within the last 120 yrs (stretching it) that we have kept measurements of solar flares, How do you prove it way back to 6000 BC?
5) The earths magnetic field has flipped, many times actually. But at 60 kilometers Per Second, it would be in the south in a couple of days. Being lazy and not doing the math right now. Off_the_Stree did it for me. thanks OTS
6) You spoke of a Hole in space... I believe that the Hubble Telescope would be able to 'see' past it.
7) And concerning the 'earliest writing system' it was actually pictographs, not necessarily the ability to form words and thoughts from symbols as you're saying the Sumarians did 5000 yrs ago, which would make it between the yrs 4000 and 3000 BC (different sources), you said 5000 BC.
8) I had a physics teacher selling raffle tickets one day, said there was only 100 tickets at $10 each. I said "1% chance on a $10 bet, that's not good eneough." He said, "finally, someone understands %s" A 4% error rate on a Space Launch, would probably cause a couple of Red flags to start waiving at NASA. Don't you think?
9) A solar system with two stars is called binary, and your source was a 1983 encylopedia !!

Detecting asteroids and planets are very difficult because they only give off reflected light, so it very well could be out there. Just fact checking.

There may be a 10th planet but the "mathematical facts" and 'assumptions' you presented don't make sense.

And, you gave an opinion at the end of your post, not a Theory.

Tuataras Third Eye


[edit on 18-1-2005 by Tuatara]

[edit on 18-1-2005 by Tuatara]

[edit on 18-1-2005 by Tuatara]



posted on Jan, 18 2005 @ 10:41 PM
link   
I have never believed in this 10th planet story because it seemed so improbable. After reading the thread though I decided to chime in. One would believe that if a 10th planet was only seven years away then why would we not see it? This is a good point but remeber there are examples out there that don't really reflect that much.

www.spaceflightnow.com...





new topics




 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join