What the Mayan Elders are Saying About 2012

One point I'd like to get across is that there is a difference between "knowledge" and "wisdom".

I don't trust anything I hear - from anyone. The thing is, you can quote all you want from scientific studies, for example. But I feel (and I know I'm not alone) that science that is known to the public is incredibly stunted. A scientist in America must only come to the findings that are associated with what is accepted by TPTW. Any scientist, including Rocket Scientists, Astrophysicists, Geologists, and Historians. If they should come to a conclusion other than what is accepted and they publish their findings for the general public to see, they know that their funding will be cut and they shall no longer find another job in their field for - forever. If, that is, they are still alive and they and their families haven't been murdered or tortured.

So, knowing this, I have trouble with believing anything a person might post as being a "scientific fact". Rather than believe in that, I like to go with what "resonates" with me. What theories to I think are plausible? And, at times, does it really matter what I think? Can I really improve the world by knowing certain things? Or can I improve the world by embracing the light that is me and then spreading it to people I meet every day?

Sometimes knowing everything doesn't really matter. And that, I believe, is wisdom.

There seem to be certain people who feel it necessary to bust up a perfectly fine thread with people who are trying to openly express their feelings on subjects, and that is too bad, in my opinion. There is no good reason for it. Except, if that person is getting paid to do it. If the person simply isn't open-minded and disagrees with the subject, I think it's perfectly okay to state their opinion and then move on to another thread which resonates with them. Not to stay on one thread and over and over again argue with posters there.

However, I digress. The world is made up of all kinds of individuals.

Don't take it personally angellicview, you happen to be right. The Universities are controlled and suppressed with a nefarious agenda the same way as the media, the music industry, Hollywood, etc. The Rockefellers took over the school system in the USA and rewrote the encyclopedia decades and decades ago. Today we see the results. The numbers don't lie. America went from having the best education system in the world to one of the worst in less than a hundred years. Nick Rockefeller bragged about this to Aaron Russo, who spilled the beans as he was dying. Keep up the good work and don't stop posting because of these Internet thugs. Otherwise they win.

reply to post by angellicview


In other words you have no proof of your claims. You just make them because science doesn't support your beliefs therefore there must be some nefarious cabal out to suppress scientific truth.

reply to post by Blarneystoner


You are much closer to reality than the others, but off a bit. Scientists look for ways to provide an objective measure of a situation. That is not always the case. A good example is biological research that often had been descriptive rather than quantitative. Biological structures or groups or distributions were labeled as being sparse, dense, or given descriptive names such as being rotundifolia. These are not quantitative values and they do exist. A famous example of non-quantitative claims is the n-rays tale. Another tale that might be of interest is the analysis of mesmerism by Benjamin Franklin.

So what's going to happen if/when nothing happens? Are people going to keep talking about it? Are the people who preached doom and cosmic enlightenment going to be properly ostracized? Or will it be like Planet X and every other predicted event, where it just keeps going on and on forever?

Originally posted by andreoutlaw
So what's going to happen if/when nothing happens? Are people going to keep talking about it? Are the people who preached doom and cosmic enlightenment going to be properly ostracized? Or will it be like Planet X and every other predicted event, where it just keeps going on and on forever?

I'll be honest with you - I don't know for sure whether it's going to happen or not. But for those who do say it's going to happen, there is much disagreement upon when it's going to happen. I have read one person predict the big shift in consciousness for Oct 28, 2011 (that was Carl Calleman). Many many people say it will happen "in the blink of an eye" on or around Dec 24, 2012, and others say it will take a few days to make the shift. Then I have heard others say that it won't happen in the blink of an eye but over a period of years, and that 2012 is just the beginning of the shift.

So, I guess we're just going to have to wait and see what happens (or doesn't happen

Some people say that they've been contacted by light beings or spirits or extra-terrestrials and they have gotten their information from them. Many people say that, in fact. I have not yet been contacted by any of the above. But if I did, I sure as heck wouldn't post it on ATS! (...with all the negativity here)... and really, how does one person believe another when they haven't had the experience for themselves?

Anyway, so to answer your question as to whether if nothing happens, will people then come out with yet another date for the prediction? My answer would be, "yes". The reason is because people who make these predictions seem to disagree on the time frame.

Peace

reply to post by andreoutlaw

So what's going to happen if/when nothing happens? Are people going to keep talking about it? Are the people who preached doom and cosmic enlightenment going to be properly ostracized? Or will it be like Planet X and every other predicted event, where it just keeps going on and on forever?

There are lots of people that make predictions and they deal with the failures in many ways.

As you point out there are those that simply deny the failure. They claim that the long dismissed notion of planet X is a cover up. Or they might claim that planet X is still there and can be seen if you look.

Then there are those that misrepresent the situation by claiming that other situations are the one they were referring to such as suggesting that the hypothetical Tyche is planet X. That's not true since the properties of Tyche do not match the properties of planet X.

A more prominent means of making predictions is to use the shotgun approach in which many, many predictions are made all over the place and then bringing to people's attention only the successes and sweeping the rest under the rug.

Then there is the hedge technique. That is where you make opposing predictions as in, "The world will end in 2012, but I'll it's a later year." This is used by politicians, radio personalities, and economic forecasters, and sports commentators. "The are in a tough spot staring at an assured loss today. I'd love to see the upset of the year." Then the underdog team wills or loses and the commentator says that they predicted the outcome.

The fact is that none of this is meaningful. What is meaningful is that there is no evidence to support any of the claims made for 2012. That includes the issue that 2012 is meaningful in any way.

Originally posted by stereologist
1. Please cite the discover of the teeth and their relevance to anything
2. Please tell me where Plato stated that the teeth would be located someplace - that's simply false

atlantisrisingmagazine.com...

In the “Kritias,” Plato tells us that “there was (on the island of Atlantis) every kind of animal, domesticated and wild, among them numerous elephants” (4b.114). There were so many, apparently, that their tusks were an Atlantean construction material. Describing the Temple of Poseidon, Plato stated that “inside, the roof was ivory picked out with gold, silver, and orichalcum [i.e., high-grade copper]” (4c.116). Until the late 20th century, Atlantis-deniers who dismissed the sunken city as nothing more than an allegory for Plato’s utopian dream, scoffed at the very notion of el­ephants out in the Atlantic Ocean. One of their most prominent spokesmen, the science and science-fiction writer, L. Sprague DeCamp, held up “Plato’s preposterous pachyderms” in the 1954 edition of his book, “Lost Continents,” as “a sure sign that the Greek philosopher was spinning yarn.”

But a 1967 issue of “Science” magazine reported the discovery of elephant teeth from the Atlantic Continental Shelf between 200 and 300 miles off the Portuguese coast at more than 40 different dredge-site locations, some from depths of 360 feet. The teeth were recovered from submerged shorelines, peat deposits, sand banks caused by surface waves crashing against a beach, and depressions that formerly contained freshwater lagoons. These features prove that the area was formerly dry land. The “Science” writer concluded, “Evidently, elephants and other large mammals ranged this region during the glacial stage of low sea level of the last 25,000 years.”

Moreover, elephants are known to have inhabited the northwestern shores of Morocco, which faces Plato’s loca­tion for Atlantis on a line parallel with Gibraltar. Geologists recognize that a land bridge long ago extended from northwestern Africa into the Atlantic Ocean toward the areas from which the elephant teeth were found. With the gradual collapse of this land bridge the animals, which had migrated across it into territories since claimed by the sea, found themselves stranded on a number of islands. Hence, elephants in Atlantis. Unless he actually had access to an authentic document about that “sacred isle,” Plato could have never guessed that the beasts once inhabited a re­gion of the world presently covered by the ocean. This fact alone supports the veracity of his account.

Originally posted by stereologist

4. The Bimini road is a natural feature with parallel joints. That's a common geological feature. It is not man made

Underwater ruins: The Bimini Road and The Theory That This Is Atlantis.
www.youtube.com...

Originally posted by stereologist

5. There is no sunken pyramid off Cuba

Underwater City Off of Cuba Part 1 (The Discovery)
www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...
www.morien-institute.org...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.freerepublic.com...
www.andrewcollins.com...

Originally posted by stereologist
Mayan astronomy is Mayan and not the result of a nonexistent Lemuria or Atlantis which has no evidence of its existence other than comments by Plato.

Lemuria: The Hidden History of Mankind's Motherland
www.youtube.com...

Atlantis: Underwater Ruins
www.youtube.com...

earth-history.com...

corroborating evidence on the reality of atlantis
www.atlan.org...

reply to post by SimontheMagus


On the one hand you have a reference to elephants and on another you have areas that were once land, but have been inundated due to the melting of continental glaciers.

Moreover, elephants are known to have inhabited the northwestern shores of Morocco, which faces Plato’s loca­tion for Atlantis on a line parallel with Gibraltar. Geologists recognize that a land bridge long ago extended from northwestern Africa into the Atlantic Ocean toward the areas from which the elephant teeth were found. With the gradual collapse of this land bridge the animals, which had migrated across it into territories since claimed by the sea, found themselves stranded on a number of islands. Hence, elephants in Atlantis. Unless he actually had access to an authentic document about that “sacred isle,” Plato could have never guessed that the beasts once inhabited a re­gion of the world presently covered by the ocean. This fact alone supports the veracity of his account.

So the significance of the fossils on the sea bed in terms of Atlantis seems coincidental. In other words, it has no bearing since the reason for the fossils is known. The next problem is that you are providing a location for Atlantis. Did Plato provide a location? You mention land bridges. They don't collapse. They are inundated. The idea of rising and sinking land bridges was an old idea proposed to account for fossil distributions. Plate tectonics explains the distribution. The fossil zone which you refer to is not associated with sunken land. It is associated with inundated land. Very, very different.

These fossils have absolutely nothing at all to do with Atlantis.

reply to post by SimontheMagus

Underwater ruins: The Bimini Road and The Theory That This Is Atlantis.

The Bimini feature is a natural feature. It is only 3500 years old rock.

en.wikipedia.org...

... they all concluded that it consists of naturally jointed beachrock.