It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


What i got out of the 2012 movie

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Nov, 21 2009 @ 07:48 AM
I hope the OP considers this to be on topic as I am not attempting to derail the thread, but rather expound on ideas by other posters.

Here's what I have trouble rationalizing regarding 2012, and frankly any catastrophic event that is or may occur anytime in the future:

We always talk about the elitists and the rich running the world and how they have managed to "control" the world with money, create a corrupt and greedy world, and how basically that's not how the world is supposed to work. Some even feel as if the real world good versus evil scenario plays out between the elitists (evil) and the average human being (the good).

Now, here's my problem. The truth of the matter is that if a catastrophic event WERE to take place, for a minute let's just assume that 2012 is REAL, then the rich will be the ones to survive -- thus perpetuating the elitists running the world, causing wars, etc. In order to survive such an event, one would need cash -- and lots of it. The cost of supplies, proper shelter, systems that won't be affected by loss of electricity (i.e. solar power, hydropower), weapons (one will need to be able to hunt efficiently and protect oneself for a long period), greenhouse-type building in order to begin growing since the ground and/or sun won't be stable, medicines, tools, and the like.

One could argue that "back in the day" they survived and didn't have all of that -- but that is not the world we live in today. One can no longer freely roam the plains and discover herds of free ranging animals, wild edible, unspoiled vegetation. Plus, with all of the roadways, bridges, dams, buildings, houses, and such that we have built up will make travelling difficult to say the least. Therefore, when most people survived by migrating, we will no longer have that option -- at least it will be much more difficult. The problem with man-made structures being that they are much more likely to not withstand mother nature's wrath when talking about an event such as this. Further, now add into the equation the sheer number of people currently inhabiting the world -- and the chance of survival without an abundance of personal supplies becomes MUCH LESS.

So, if the purpose of humanity was NOT greed, corruption, wars, money -- why is it that they are in fact the ones most likely to survive in the end? To me, it almost seems as if "evil" would prevail.

posted on Nov, 21 2009 @ 08:09 AM
reply to post by lpowell0627

Edit to add: actually what I got out of the movie is the thought, how would I survive such an event at short notice!


I quite agree, evil will always prevail since they are happy to go that extra mile to climb over the next person.... If they had told the general public earlier and given peoples will to survive, it would indeed impact the elites ability to survive, however if they had have done that I do beleive more would have survived, and many very unique ways.

I sat their grumbling through the end of the movie saying ah, they could have built some form of high flying airships that could filter out any dust particles thrown up, could have be cheaper than the arks, and may have had the potential to save more people...

I am sure that if they had told the general public and given the human will to survive that many would have found thousands of other ways to try to survive such an event, (obviously not all would be successful) so not meaning to derail the thread further, but what ways can you think of that might have been worth trying to survive this kind of cataclysm?

[edit on 21/11/09 by thoughtsfull]

posted on Nov, 21 2009 @ 08:42 AM
reply to post by thoughtsfull

In my humble opinion, the best chance of survival for this type of event is to move underground. For at least 2 - 5 years. Further, the absolute best way is in a group of like-minded individuals, with varying skills/knowledge, but limited to less than 12 or so. Too many people will cause problems down the road.

I've read many people that think ocean survival is the way, but I personally disagree. The problem with ocean survival is: instability (some claims have put waves/tsunamis upwards of 2500 - 3000 km), rising landmasses where previously there was just ocean, navigation/orientation (this would be a problem if there is a pole reversal), larger ocean animals that have survived before (sharks, crocs, etc), lack of food (the oceans face the possiblity of becoming overheated and killing a large amount of fish), plus contamination. Water / food storage tends to be a problem since, unless once again you are very wealthy, you more than likely wouldn't be floating around in something the size of a sub.

The problem with trying to survive above ground is going to be the number of unprepared people. Starving to death is a terrible way to go -- and a great number of people will be fighting to the death for whatever food they can find. Plus, of course, all of the natural catastrophies (i.e. earthquakes, volcano eruptions, tsunamis, etc.). The land would also look quite different -- when all of these buildings, bridges, skyscrapers, etc come crashing down, it is going to make travelling extrememly difficult and tiresome. As I said before, we are not going to be left with a wide open space simply devoid of people.

Further, if anything like this were to actually happen, much of North America would be covered in ice. Siberia, on the other hand, should become a beautiful temperate area. There are some that believe events such as this are what change the landscape of the Earth (desert to fertile, etc.). I've looked into a bit, and i think it's a possibility. Again, just my humble opinion.

As a final thought, the areas of the world that are "best" for survival are far and few between. In order to steer clear of nuclear power plants, volcanos, fault lines, coast lines, densely populated areas, but still stay close enough to natural water sources at a high elevation -- the choices dwindle considerably.

Think: South Africa / Ethiopia / Madagascar -- places like that.

Again, this is all just my opinion and I certainly don't claim to be an expert or an insider or anything -- just someone fascinated with the possibilty that has read a bunch of books and stuff.

PS - the other problem with a situation like this is that it is not going to take much for people to suddenly declare "oh my -- 2012 is real" -- and at that point, chaos will rule. For example, if Yellowstone erupts, people will see this as a 'sign' even if it's not necessarily. Once chaos begins, hoarding and looting will immediately follow, and with the general increasing political divide within the US at least -- it will all go downhill very quickly. That is why, again in my opinion, that one would need a 2 - 5 year window. Panic/chaos will most likely be the first issue to survive -- way before any actual massive world-wide catastrophe.

[edit on 21-11-2009 by lpowell0627]

posted on Nov, 21 2009 @ 09:23 AM
reply to post by lpowell0627

Thanks for your thoughts,
not sure if I am a high altitude or below ground person.. I guess it all depends on the scenario..

But in the scenario presented by 2012 the movie I would go for the high altitude route, as I'm not sure of the crush pressure some of the waves would exert on underground places, but then again I am unsure of the air pressure in front and above the wave would be either.

I would agree on your assumption of riot and mayhem should we be told an event like this is imminent, so I guess the best places is to be in the audience of the movie and hope it doesn't ever happen.

[edit on 21/11/09 by thoughtsfull]

posted on Nov, 21 2009 @ 09:51 AM
reply to post by thoughtsfull

I agree disclosure of something on the scale, if it was about to happen, would be catasrophic in itself. But would it not be better to let everyone know, at least, those who are not hellbent on rioting can do what they have to do, weither it is to accept thier fates, console what is going to happen with thier loved ones.

To keep this from everyone is an act of cruelty itself. But mind you it would not surprise one, if it was kept from us all after all TPTB are out for themselves and no one else.

posted on Nov, 21 2009 @ 10:20 AM

Originally posted by Laurauk
reply to post by thoughtsfull

I agree disclosure of something on the scale, if it was about to happen, would be catasrophic in itself. But would it not be better to let everyone know, at least, those who are not hellbent on rioting can do what they have to do, weither it is to accept thier fates, console what is going to happen with thier loved ones.

To keep this from everyone is an act of cruelty itself. But mind you it would not surprise one, if it was kept from us all after all TPTB are out for themselves and no one else.

I totally agree with you as I'd want to know, let the rioters have their fun, it's not as if they can take anything with them..

My thoughts on the movie were, how could I survive this particular scenario at such short notice.. and since then I have ran through some ideas as to what is around me..

The local hot air balloon field, was one option, and if I tried the sea route I'd probably borrow the local Severn lifeboat ;-) and if I tried to run for underground escape I guess I would aim for the Sussex Police underground training centre at their nuclear bunker in Crowborough.

but I'm sure I would come up with something even if it failed, it would be worth trying, which I think is a very human thing to do.. I just hope the TPB would at least give us enough time to try and save ourselves, tho I am guessing they wouldn't until their own plans are in place.

Still amusing to think of a whole world populated by the elite.. who would do the dirty work for them!

posted on Nov, 21 2009 @ 12:08 PM
reply to post by thoughtsfull

To me it is a personal question for everybody tothink about, weither or not it comes topass.

How would I react myself to disclosure if this has to happen. I would rather be with my loved ones, i.e my mother, my father and the rest of my family if, I knew I could not do anything to survive the comming catasrophic event. And try to accept death when it comes. Although it would be difficult one supposes.

It would be difficult for any human being to accept this fate, but I suppose it is something we might all face in the next two years or we might not. But to prepare oneself is the best solution one supposes.

Not knowing about it, would be the biggest sin for anyone to withhold.

But those elistists would not think of being guilty of withholding the information from us, that is for sure. I agree with your comment, who would they find to be slaves for them, or do thier bidding. No one would, unless they are invovled in it from the beginning.

posted on Nov, 21 2009 @ 12:37 PM

In the movie, near the end, there is a situation where the dignity of the humans is challenged by egoism of the elite. But because it is a movie the GOOD wins, but if it were the real world i would doubt it.
reply to post by crustas

I just love how you worded that.It pretty much sums up how I feel about this life it's people in general---every day it gets stronger,and I feel a little weaker.Or maybe I have that backwards?

Regardless-your summary was right on!

posted on Nov, 21 2009 @ 07:17 PM
How are boats supposed to save anyone from rogue wave like tsunamis? Sounds kind of ridiculous to me.

posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 09:37 PM
We would know, just by looking at the animals they are the first to know.

There are 6 billion + people on this planet and all are here to see and experience the events of a life time. 6 billion people did not come here to die just like that. There are a lot of people that think that but that is not our fate.

2012 may hold many fears, but the fear in its self is what is going to bring the most unexpected out come for all to see.

Just like heaven and hell are only the extremes of each other we are all heading to the same place to the center of all things back home

posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 10:28 PM

Originally posted by bkaust

Would i get flamed if i mentioned that i really liked that little dog? more then John Cusack anyways.

I'll join you in getting flamed: I liked the little dog, and although the death and devestation of millions of people didn't really touch me, I was really disappointed when the Hawt Russian Blonde Chick Died.

I thought the movie was a Hollywood Liberal's Wet Dream: Danny Glover took a break from humping Castro's Leg to perform as President. Woody Harrelson was typecast as the Doped-Up Conspiracy Theorist who must have been mindlessly spouting Reasons behind BushCheneyHalliburton's Destruction of the World Trade Center before a mountain blew out of Yellowstone and happily landed a-top his pointed head.

The Chinese, a nice communist nation, provides the "Arks" to Evul Capitalists willing to fork out 1 Billion Euros. A nice African American Scientist saves humanity, which must resettle in, ironically, Africa.

I was astonished that there were no Mexican Characters in the movie. Apparently, those that survive 2012 will have to do so without well groomed lawns. Very sad.

posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 04:28 PM
So many inconsistencies where to begin...I know its only a movie but they need to be addressed for anyone with even a ounce of intelligence, and for the script writers who oversaw 1 or 2 details in the script.

Why Build ships when they could have simply made bunkers in the Himalayan Mountains to house millions of People?..the rich corporate Americans will always sacrifice 99% of the "working class" for their own survival.

How did those ships end up so suddenly back out at Sea, considering the last position they were in was in the Middle of the Himalayas, and the Tsunami was "retreating quicker than expected" that account they should have ended up grounded in the middle of India.

When the AN125 (The Russian plane) was running out of fuel over Hawaii, it wouldnt have mattered if the continents had shifted 1000 miles, as Hawaii would have done so too. So they'd still been in the same place as they were (unless they magically flew 1000 miles running out of gas in just 10 minutes.) Not forgetting they still had another 3000 miles of Pacific to cross before even getting to China. Where they eventually landed was another 1500 miles ontop of that, so thats some magic Plane they have.

When Yellowstone was being blown away - cut to the scene with the tree's being shredded apart - yet the transit van didnt even feel a breeze, nor the lightweight plane blown to its side. The lol moment being the takeoff, instead of aiming for the valley, the idiot has to aim for the rocks just to make the kids scream that bit more (as if flying down towards rocks wasnt bad enough..there also losing speed somehow doing this and the Pyroclastic clouds made of 2000'c vapourised volcanic gas barely burns the plane yet destroys everything else.

posted on Dec, 4 2009 @ 10:42 AM

Originally posted by Rockstrongo37
It was surprisingly entertaining...I went in with the expectation that this was going to probably suck...but in the end I thought it was a good movie...Woody Harrilson, sorry I know I misspelled that, was my favorite nut, out on the rim of a super volcano excited about the end of the world, lol.

Conspiracy Trivia:

His (W.H.) father was a hit man, and killed a sitting US federal Judge in Texas?... anyway, when he turned himself in, (cause nobody can kill a sitting federal judge.. and live long.) The first thing he said on his arrest record was: "I was one of the men on the grassy knoll" (JFK assassination)
source: Peter Lavenda's book "Sinister Forces" < HIGHLY recommended

[edit on 4-12-2009 by seataka]

[edit on 4-12-2009 by seataka]

posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 01:11 AM
Im From California.

I already watched that movie. It's nice cause they believe that every 640,000 years there's something happen in this world and they said it's the end of the world. But the movie is more exaggerated i dont think it will really happen..

posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 12:37 PM
I learned from this movie, that you fill up all the remaining space on the ark with rich people, no matter if they are smart or idiots, good or bad. I guess it is for pure fun, because it probably won't make any difference if you were rich or not before, since you will be rebuilding everything from the start.

new topics

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in