The D4rk Kn1ght / October 28, 2011 / 10/28/2011 Mega Thread

page: 5
75
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 11 2010 @ 03:01 PM
link   
reply to post by kalisdad
 



if you actually looked at the chart instead of just spinning it in a negative light, you would see that it say 5,990,400,000,000 days...


If you actually looked at the chart you'd see that the time you chose is just the bottom row and neglected to pick up the rows above. Then you'd see that as I stated you have the chart showing the age of the Earth well older than the age of the universe. Also, the Earth is only 4.6 billion years old.




posted on Nov, 11 2010 @ 05:03 PM
link   
reply to post by stereologist
 


I do not believe anything you say. You talk about your "facts" but you post links of peoples theories, nothing 100% proven. Your not a Mayan, you didn't live in their times so you can do is speculate. Hundreds of documents and artifacts were destroyed and stolen over the thousands of years. Stop attacking people for what they think because they dont agree with you, better yet take a long walk off a short pier and well all be a little happier inside.



posted on Nov, 11 2010 @ 08:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Artorius
 


I couldn't care less if you don't believe anything I say. The evidence speaks for itself. You are welcome to be as close minded and as racist as you want. Thinking that someone has to be a Mayan to understand Mayan issues is a racist claim.

You request for censorship will be dismissed. I recommend to stop being closed minded about evidence that suggests issues one way or the other.



posted on Nov, 11 2010 @ 08:35 PM
link   
Addition:


Please Read- The Great Tribulation Time Code Has Been Cracked
by Stargate2012
started on: 11/11/2010 @ 08:44 PM
www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Nov, 11 2010 @ 08:35 PM
link   
All these "charts" about end dates and tribulations are a total load of rubbish.

Spend your time doing something more useful.



posted on Nov, 12 2010 @ 01:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Artorius
 


YOUR EVIDENCE= THEORY....the so called "truth" you post are people's interpretations of what the Mayans meant. Everyone else on this post is doing the same thing; trying to figure out what they meant, yet you think you have the "facts", the "evidence", and everyone else is wrong and incompetent??? notice your post....

Originally posted by stereologist
This was also written in 2009

New Solar Cycle Prediction

May 29, 2009: An international panel of experts led by NOAA and sponsored by NASA has released a new prediction for the next solar cycle. Solar Cycle 24 will peak, they say, in May 2013 with a below-average number of sunspots.

A PREDICTION
what a joke you are...get it through your thick hollow skull, its NOT fact its THEORY. I'm not even going to waste my time with you the pier is waiting go take a dive good day
edit on 12-11-2010 by Artorius because: (no reason given)
edit on 12-11-2010 by Artorius because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 12 2010 @ 03:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Artorius
 


I'm sorry but there is a difference between a fact and a theory and what you claim is a theory is in fact not one, but a prediction. The prediction is based on a theory and the accumulated facts that support the theory.

Before doing the harsh name calling you might want to consider finding out how these terms are used by people doing science.



posted on Nov, 15 2010 @ 12:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by kalisdad
 



if you actually looked at the chart instead of just spinning it in a negative light, you would see that it say 5,990,400,000,000 days...


If you actually looked at the chart you'd see that the time you chose is just the bottom row and neglected to pick up the rows above. Then you'd see that as I stated you have the chart showing the age of the Earth well older than the age of the universe. Also, the Earth is only 4.6 billion years old.


you should do a little more research into the idea of the different levels in the chart

while we are about to enter the 9th level, it and all preceding levels are part of the ones that came before it.

you dont add them all up.

and the chart has nothing to do with the age of earth, its about the age of the universe.



posted on Nov, 15 2010 @ 10:45 PM
link   
reply to post by kalisdad
 



you should do a little more research into the idea of the different levels in the chart while we are about to enter the 9th level, it and all preceding levels are part of the ones that came before it.

you dont add them all up.

and the chart has nothing to do with the age of earth, its about the age of the universe.


Of course you add them up. each level is a separate level unless you want to fudge the table. Even the bottom level by itself is so far off from the age of the universe that it is hard to believe that the upper dates are any more accurate.

This is nothing more than a table constructed by Calleman and others and is not based on the Mayans. It's silliness based on selling a hoax.



posted on Nov, 15 2010 @ 11:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by kalisdad
 



you should do a little more research into the idea of the different levels in the chart while we are about to enter the 9th level, it and all preceding levels are part of the ones that came before it.

you dont add them all up.

and the chart has nothing to do with the age of earth, its about the age of the universe.


Of course you add them up. each level is a separate level unless you want to fudge the table. Even the bottom level by itself is so far off from the age of the universe that it is hard to believe that the upper dates are any more accurate.

This is nothing more than a table constructed by Calleman and others and is not based on the Mayans. It's silliness based on selling a hoax.


1) how does 16.4 billion years equate to far from the assumed age of the universe?
the chart shows the number of years based on the 260 day Tzolkin(23,040,000,000 years) and years based on Tun days(16,640,000,000 years)
however if you use the number of days and divide by our solar year(365.25) it comes out to 16,400,821,355 years

what is the assumed age of the universe that you are aware of?

2) www.calleman.com...
If you actually read the information, you will see begining dates for each level, and the END DATE for all levels being the same date
all levels are compromised of the levels below it!

3) you continue to say that there is no prophecy associated with the Haab calendar, yet you refuse to acknowledge thet the Haab was a solar calendar used specifically for crops and tax purposes. and you also have refused to answer any questions on the Tzolkin and Long Count calendars...

they are the real question at hand when it comes to Mayan 'end time' beliefs



posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 08:14 AM
link   
reply to post by kalisdad
 



how does 16.4 billion years equate to far from the assumed age of the universe?

The age of the universe is 13.7 billion years. The age you're giving is 16.4 billion years. That's an error of 2.7 billion years or close to 20%. Now that's an error.

Does this enormous error affect Calleman's 2011 date?

Another issue is that Calleman has a cellular level. The Maya had no concept of cells. Furthermore, Calleman claims that this is when complex life appeared? Really? Do you know the state of the Earth at that time? Was it a hot tropical lush world ready for complex life or a frozen snowball or something in between? Remember that the earliest Cambrian fossils are sponges from 540Ma. Ediacarian fossils go back to possibly 630Ma.

Calleman's dates and claims do not match actual events - for any of his time periods.

2012: How to spot a prophet’s Maya hoax – designing a personal cosmology

However, as Nielsen and Reunert recently have shown, these are not multilayered heavens and underworlds as once thought. This is a creation by postcontact writers. Thus, Calleman’s whole hierarchical schema is based on Colonial period writers, not on Classic period beliefs.


So this layered scheme is not a part of the Mayan beliefs. The cellular levels and galactic levels are concepts unknown to the Maya. In fact, it appears that mammalian is a concept that was not known to the Maya.



posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 10:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by stereologist
The age of the universe is 13.7 billion years. The age you're giving is 16.4 billion years. That's an error of 2.7 billion years or close to 20%. Now that's an error.


"And so on. Literally overnight Sandage had expanded the Universe to unimaginable scales, just as Hubble has done before him, and this resulted in a more accurate assessment of Hubble’s Constant, which is the measure of the expansion of the Universe, of 75 kilometres per second per megaparsec (today’s best measurements give the Hubble Constant as 71 kilometres per second per megaparsec, showing how close Sandage was). This allowed him to estimate the age of the Universe as 15 billion years, not too far away from today’s established age of 13.7 billion years. "

www.astronomynow.com...


"Such estimates typically yield ages in the range 14-18 billion years "
"Reasonable assumptions for the value of the Hubble constant and the geometry of the Universe typically yield ages of 10-20 billion years for the age of the Universe. For example, H near 50 km/s/Mpc gives a larger value for the age of the Universe (around 16 thousand million years), while a larger value of 80 km/s/Mpc gives a lower value for the age (around 10 thousand million years). Therefore, we shall take this information, and additional information from other methods to estimate the age of the Universe that we have not discussed, to indicate an age of approximately 15 billion years for the Universe."

csep10.phys.utk.edu...


seems even the "experts" can't agree on the age of the universe, 16.4 billion is as accurate esimation as any




Another issue is that Calleman has a cellular level. The Maya had no concept of cells. Furthermore, Calleman claims that this is when complex life appeared? Really? Do you know the state of the Earth at that time? Was it a hot tropical lush world ready for complex life or a frozen snowball or something in between? Remember that the earliest Cambrian fossils are sponges from 540Ma. Ediacarian fossils go back to possibly 630Ma.


Hadean
4.5 Ga
formation of earth and continents, chemical evolution

Archean
3.8 Ga
origin of life, procaryotes flourish

Proterozoic
2.5 Ga
eukaryotes evolve, development of oxygenated atmosphere, some animal phyla appear

Phanerozoic
540 Ma
most animal phyla present, diverse algae; explosive evolution of higher life forms

www.globalchange.umich.edu...

"Not until the Cambrian explosion, about 600 million years ago, did complex life evolve -- or so scientists thought." - Complex Life Evolved One and a Half Billion Years Earlier Than Previously Thought, New Fossils Show

www.popsci.com...




on another note, I assume you are intentionally ignoring the fact that I corrected you on the fact that all levels are compromised of the levels below them...
and I am still waiting for your thoughts on your continued clain that the Haab calendar only predicts 'poor squash harvests' knowing that its a calendar used for crops and taxes. what do you know about the Tzolkin and Long Count calendar predictions?



posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 10:42 AM
link   
reply to post by kalisdad
 


The issue here is the uncertainty in the measurement, not quoting from a web page that tells students how the age is determined and providing examples.

Notice that the age is given as 13.7, not 13 or 14, but with 3 digits of accuracy.

Ageof the Universe

The estimated age of the universe is 13.75 ± 0.17 billion years, the time since the Big Bang. The uncertainty range has been obtained by the agreement of a number of scientific research projects. These projects included background radiation measurements and more ways to measure the expansion of the universe. Background radiation measurements give the cooling time of the universe since the Big Bang. Expansion of the universe measurements give accurate data to calculate the age of the universe.


Now I can hear that silly refrain, "That's just the wikipedia." True, but let's examine their reference.


S. H. Suyu, P. J. Marshall, M. W. Auger, S. Hilbert, R. D. Blandford, L. V. E. Koopmans, C. D. Fassnacht and T. Treu. Dissecting the Gravitational Lens B1608+656. II. Precision Measurements of the Hubble Constant, Spatial Curvature, and the Dark Energy Equation of State. The Astrophysical Journal, 2010; 711 (1): 201 DOI: 10.1088/0004-637X/711/1/201


There it is. The precision of the work has improve over the years. It shows that the Calleman claim is off by 20%. It's as worthless as the rest of his slop.



posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 10:53 AM
link   
Are you using these links to demonstrate that Calleman was wrong? It certainly appears that way. According to this web page complex life appears what, 1.7By before Calleman's claim.

It's this issue of the meaning of complexity that appears to be at issue. Here you force it back 2.5By. I put it at the earliest evidence of Vendian forms. Calleman inserts it during a massive ice age in which the entire Earth is frozen.


on another note, I assume you are intentionally ignoring the fact that I corrected you on the fact that all levels are compromised of the levels below them...

No. I adjusted my claims accordingly.


and I am still waiting for your thoughts on your continued clain that the Haab calendar only predicts 'poor squash harvests' knowing that its a calendar used for crops and taxes. what do you know about the Tzolkin and Long Count calendar predictions?

No. My claim has been that there are no predictions associated with the long count calendar. The only predictions I could find associated with the Mayan calendars was a poor squash and corn crop.

So far Calleman flounders on the age of the universe.
Your data shows he fails on the start of complex life.

No surprise. Calleman is wrong.



posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 10:56 AM
link   
Thank you for turning me on to that article about the fossils in Gabon. That was really a great read and I appreciate it. The way in which the fossils were discovered reminded me of the way fossil sponges were found in phosphate deposits in China several years ago. Great stuff.



posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 11:10 AM
link   
Regardless if the 'theories' regarding 2012 are true or not, isn't the point. The point is....at ANY given moment, we could be thrown back to the days without electricity. Imagine that! Imagine not having your lights on in your house, imagine not having your TV on, your radio, and all your other electronic goodies. What EXACTLY do you think people are going to do with themselves? How are people going to 'live' without electricity??? Have you ever thought of that? That could happen, at ANY GIVEN MOMENT.

Think about it....IF the sun were to throw an enormous CME our way, that would be it! Civilization will come to a COMPLETE HALT! And, the way the sun has been spitting these things out, as of late, i wouldn't rule it out.

I've already had my visions of life without electricity...and this i will tell you...that would be the 1st thing i'd be working on: how to get lights and power! Ive already started gathering the materials needed to build me a little wind-powered generator. Once i get me some light...then i'll work on getting me some POWER!

We, as a species, take things too lightly and without care. We 'act' like it's going to be this good, forever. And therein lies the problem. When people become complacent, and comfortable, they act like NOTHING can happen to them. I wouldn't take it for granted; because something COULD HAPPEN.

I'm not sure what lies ahead, regarding the Mayans and their calendar. What i do know is this: I cant see TPTB letting one of the biggest opportunities EVER, go to waste. They have the capability to make 2012 a reality...or APPEAR like it is real. They can knock out our power, fire weapons from space, play with our minds using their illusional toys, make us 'hear' things, etc.

I wouldn't put it past them to make 2012 one of the BIGGEST FALSE FLAGS EVER! IF, something natural doesn't occur before then! Keep this in mind, in the last days...there will come a time or an event that will challange EVERYONE's beliefs, faith, or religion. No one is exempt from this thing...not even the 'elite'! God uses the foolish things of the world to confound the wise. So......



posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 11:14 AM
link   
reply to post by stereologist
 


"The team measured the Hubble Constant to be 70 km/sec/mpc, with an uncertainty of 10 percent. This means that a galaxy appears to be moving 160,000 miles per hour faster for every 3.3 million light-years away from Earth."

science.nasa.gov...

that 10% uncertainty put the possibility of a 16.4 billion year old universe well within the range of the Hubble Constant.

"Sandage had expanded the Universe to unimaginable scales, just as Hubble has done before him, and this resulted in a more accurate assessment of Hubble’s Constant, which is the measure of the expansion of the Universe, of 75 kilometres per second per megaparsec (today’s best measurements give the Hubble Constant as 71 kilometres per second per megaparsec, showing how close Sandage was). This allowed him to estimate the age of the Universe as 15 billion years, not too far away from today’s established age of 13.7 billion years."

www.astronomynow.com...
*note: this article was published today(Nov 16th 2010)

your claim that Calleman definitively has a 20% error on his estimates, is 100% wrong.



posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 11:24 AM
link   
reply to post by jamiejames
 


my biggest issue with people claiming nothing is going to happen, is that they seem to forget that it has already happen multiple times in the past...

to think that some event couldn't wipe 90%+ of all life on Earth(again) just because we are human and we have technology, is preposterous.

whether is happens in the next couple of years or not, I don't know, but the fact of the matter is, it could happen tomorrow.



posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 11:48 AM
link   
posted on 16-11-2010 @ 11:53 AM

Originally posted by stereologist
No. My claim has been that there are no predictions associated with the long count calendar. The only predictions I could find associated with the Mayan calendars was a poor squash and corn crop.


posted on 6-7-2010 @ 11:44 AM

Originally posted by stereologist
There are all sorts of claims about the Mayan calendar. The most important of which is that there are zero prophecies associated with the end of the Haab calendar.


posted on 6-7-2010 @ 02:35 PM

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by Sator
 


Question is: "Will havoc, destruction and changes be in tune with this Cycle Ending?"
According to the Mayans, yes.

The Mayans have no predictions associated with the end of the Haab calendar.


posted on 6-7-2010 @ 07:34 PM

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by Sator
 


That is not true at all. There are no predictions associated with the end of the Haab calendar. There is another calendar that also cycles and I believe it predicts a drop in squash and corn production.


posted on 6-7-2010 @ 08:52 PM

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by Sator
 


Actually you are quite mistaken. If you have evidence of predictions associated with the end of Haab calendar you should post the evidence. As far as the squash and corn failures prediction I was not joking. That is an actual prediction concerning the end of Katun 4.


my point being, that everytime you talk about mayans and predictions, you mention the Haab calendar
and even then, you contradict yourself
and these examples are just from this thread alone....


so which one is it?? are there no predictions based on the mayan calendars, or do they PREDICT poor corn and squash yeilds?

and again, the Haab calendar was used by many mesoamerican civilizations as a solar calendar used for crops and taxation



posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 04:45 AM
link   
Addition
21 dec 2012 could actually be 28 oct 2011
by megabyte
started on 11/17/2010 @ 08:30 AM


www.abovetopsecret.com...





new topics
top topics
 
75
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join