What the Mayan Elders are Saying About 2012

members.tripod.com...

Above is alink to more info of the map in question - I think your references to Hapgood are discourteus.

Is Ptolemy also a fraud as his map is such a close resemblnace to Hapgoods who indeed did not claim originality for his map refering to Alexandre the Great

"What could this mean? Ptolemy is the most famous geographer of the ancient world. He worked in Alexandria in the 2nd century A.D. in the greatest library of the ancient world. He had at his command all the accumulated geographical information of that world. He was aquainted with mathematics and showed in his great work, the Geographia, a modern mentality. Is it to be assumed that medieval sailors of the 14th century, without any of this knowledge, and without modern instruments except a rudimentary compass, could have produced a more scientific product"

reply to post by artistpoet

Above is alink to more info of the map in question - I think your references to Hapgood are discourteus.

Hapgood had a good idea. I have previously explained that at the time Hapgood was thinking about his maps he was preceding important discoveries that would undo his work. Here are a few:
1. paleomagnetic studies
2. isostacy
3. mapping of the world's oceans
4. mapping of Antarctica

Within 10 years it became clear that pole shifts have not happened. That was seen in paleomagnetic data and ocean cores. Isostacy would prevent an imbalance due to ice build up. The ocean bottoms were unknown in the 1940s and very little was known by the 1950s. The 1949 expedition to Antarctica barely scratched the surface in determining the land under the ice.

Is Ptolemy also a fraud as his map is such a close resemblnace to Hapgoods who indeed did not claim originality for his map refering to Alexandre the Great

Not sure what you mean here. Hapgood was not the map maker.

"What could this mean? Ptolemy is the most famous geographer of the ancient world. He worked in Alexandria in the 2nd century A.D. in the greatest library of the ancient world. He had at his command all the accumulated geographical information of that world. He was aquainted with mathematics and showed in his great work, the Geographia, a modern mentality. Is it to be assumed that medieval sailors of the 14th century, without any of this knowledge, and without modern instruments except a rudimentary compass, could have produced a more scientific product"

The map of Ptolemy is less accurate. The later maps are better. In the time of dead reckoning maps were harder to make. More time and the product improves. Is that a surprise?

The problem for Hapgood and everyone else is they knew there was ZERO evidence for this civilization. The only thing they had to show was maps and that is fairly weak.

There is no art, no pots, no ceramics, no tools, no metals, no books, no writings, no statues, no cities, no unknown scripts, no outposts, no paintings, nothing left. Where is it? Hapgood realized he had a huge problem so he invented ECDs to place the city and everything else on the continent of Antarctica. The crust slips and moves Antarctica to the South Pole.

Not quite. A few years later plate tectonics comes into being and ECDs are recognized as impossible events. That leaves Hapgood with maps and no explanation how maps of all things are found, but nothing else.

Am I acquainted with Hapgood and his work. Yes I am. I do not scoff his work but see it in the context in which it was done. I am also aware how critical it was for him to come up with an explanation for the utter lack of evidence for this civilization he surmised from looking at maps.

Hapgood knew that his map claims were completely dependent on ECDs to explain how a civilization as advanced as he claimed it was could disappear without a trace.

You have to admit that there is land under Antartica - sure modern methods plot this well - Yet Ptolomeys crude maps do show land mass where now there is miles deep ice - In all honesty disregarding Atlantis do you not wonder how indeed Ptolomey knew though yes his map is crude by our modern standards - If it was covered in ice then how could they know of the land and roughly its contours that now lay buried deep beneath ice.
Aint Antartica amazing - Ptolemy had access to the great library of Alexandria with very ancient texts - How many years ago was Antartica ice free then is a question that pops up and requires attention for when it was ice free it was mapped and recorded in ancient documents in The Great Library of Alexandria which was burnt down by The Holy Catholic Church - Why did they do that and brand all the ancient works there as worthless pagan herecy but I digress. What do you think?

reply to post by artistpoet


Where is this map from Ptolemy you are talking about?

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by artistpoet

 

Where is this map from Ptolemy you are talking about?

I don't know but a later copy was made 500 or so years ago - it mentions that on one of those links - It was a turkish copy that is the one Hapgood saw.

Here it is apparently it survived below is some text which is just above it on that link I sent previously plus there is a diagram of the actual map just below the texy I have copied below.

"Nordenskiöld was familiar with the maps of Claudius Ptolemy, which had survived from antiquity and had been reintroduced to Europe in the 15th century. Comparing the maps, he found that the portolanos were much better than Ptolemy's maps. Comparing Ptolemy's map of the Mediterranean and the Black Sea with the Dulcert Portolano below in Figure 3, the older map's superiority is evident"

reply to post by artistpoet


OK, but the link about Hapgood's book does not mention it. The only map it shows is of the Mediterranean.

The following link reveals that the map comparison from the Hapgood page fails to mention the large horizontal distortion applied to the map of Ptolemy.
en.wikipedia.org...ortolanero/The_Ptolemy_Problem

The 50% Error of the Ptolemy in longitude size is corrected here to allow a comparison.

Curious how such an important is overlooked when the link you gave by Glover neglects to mention it.

In this link we learn.
www.pbs.org...

... Ptolemy declared that a great northern landmass must be balanced by a twin in the Southern Hemisphere.

That is repeated here
en.wikipedia.org...

Belief in the existence of a Terra Australis – a vast continent in the far south of the globe to "balance" the northern lands of Europe, Asia and North Africa – has existed since the times of Ptolemy (1st century AD), who suggested the idea to preserve the symmetry of all known landmasses in the world.

The idea is old, but not based on evidence.

reply to post by artistpoet


That's a map of the Mediterranean which I just reported shows a heavily distorted map by Ptolemy. The map is not of the fanciful southern continent invoked for the sake of symmetry.

dreams...

proof of spirituality/multidimensions/time-travel/cosmic-travel/intelligent design/God






lol

you know


2012......

ahhh


more energy flowing in, consciousness rising, frequency shifting, reality changing

reply to post by cornucopia

more energy flowing in, consciousness rising, frequency shifting, reality changing

And how would you know this?

Is this part of the claims of the Mayan Elders or is this something from Drunvalo?

Thank goodness we are back on track with the Mayan thing.

I am not 100% sure of the ins and outs all I know is great changes are underway

reply to post by artistpoet


What great changes are underway? How could someone know if there are great changes happening?

The Mayans had no prophecies or predictions associated with the end of the long count calendar. All of the predictions are modern inventions from people like Arguelles, Drunvalo, Lungold, and Calleman.

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by artistpoet

 

What great changes are underway? How could someone know if there are great changes happening?

The Mayans had no prophecies or predictions associated with the end of the long count calendar. All of the predictions are modern inventions from people like Arguelles, Drunvalo, Lungold, and Calleman.

I have no way of proving if the Mayan prophesy is correct as the waters seem to have been clouded on that issue - However in my opinion and my own opinion only ie what my gut feeling is that it could well be so - But that is what I feel - I can not prove what I feel nor can you and what would be the point of that anyway all I can say is what I honestly feel. This is no claim or proof - Is it not so that I as an individual have the right to believe what I do so long as it soes not encroach upon others by way of forcing my ideas upon them. All I can do is speak my truth and say it is my truth what is yours. Irespect your point of view though I admit you got me pretty riled up but that is not your fault it is mine and makes me look at how I inter act with others - Who's perfect who truly knows all that is certainly not I or you but very interesting to share ideas.

reply to post by artistpoet

I have no way of proving if the Mayan prophesy is correct as the waters seem to have been clouded on that issue

It is possible to go back to what is written by the Mayans about 2012. That turns out to be really, really simple. There is only one place. Recently there was a mention of a second use of the date, but in that case the date was not from a long count, but the same date from another calendar.

Here is a write up about that date and the connection to a god that is on the stela the date is mentioned.
haecceities.wordpress.com...

The blog is from someone that studies the Mayans. He is providing a detailed rebuttal to the notion that anything is a prediction or prophecy.

So the ancient Mayans have left nothing in regard to 2012.

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by artistpoet

 

I have no way of proving if the Mayan prophesy is correct as the waters seem to have been clouded on that issue

It is possible to go back to what is written by the Mayans about 2012. That turns out to be really, really simple. There is only one place. Recently there was a mention of a second use of the date, but in that case the date was not from a long count, but the same date from another calendar.

Here is a write up about that date and the connection to a god that is on the stela the date is mentioned.
haecceities.wordpress.com...



The blog is from someone that studies the Mayans. He is providing a detailed rebuttal to the notion that anything is a prediction or prophecy.

So the ancient Mayans have left nothing in regard to 2012.

Hi have watched the video link you sent - Thanks - I agree with you that individuals create there own interpretations of the Mayan long count - Me included - Yet the Mayan date of 21st Dec 2012 is simply an end of a cosmic cycle measured by the movement of stars around the Glactic Centre - That is as far as I am aware. Assuming this count is correct sceintifically then individuals are bound to create their own interpretations - I listen to all and make my own mind up - I do not feel it is a day that marks the end of the Earth. My interpretation is not fixed as always there is fresh information about world events - This cosmic cycle being one event.
But thats it really as far as I would like to say - If it is correct then it is the end of a cosmic cycle which means the begining of another.

reply to post by artistpoet


The Long Count has nothing to do with cosmic cycles. It is simply a modified vigesimal calendar. The only unit used in the Long Count that appears to have any basis in cosmic events in the tun. A tun is the equivalent of 360 days which matches up with the haab (the Mayan solar calendar) minus the five unnamed days. However, in order to get this they had to abandon the vigesimal system. While every other unit in the calendar is composed of 20 of the preceding unit, a tun is only composed of 18 winals. This vigesimal system goes for baktuns as well. 20 baktuns are the equivalent of one piktun. We know this because we have many examples of Long Counts that extend past the 14th baktun. In fact, no one has yet to provide me with a single example of a Long Count that ends after 13.0.0.0.0. People just take it on faith that the Long Count ends on that day without asking for any kind of evidence. If one actually looks at the evidence it becomes clear that the Long Count is actually a linear calendar with no end.

reply to post by artistpoet

Hi have watched the video link you sent - Thanks - I agree with you that individuals create there own interpretations of the Mayan long count - Me included - Yet the Mayan date of 21st Dec 2012 is simply an end of a cosmic cycle measured by the movement of stars around the Glactic Centre - That is as far as I am aware. Assuming this count is correct sceintifically then individuals are bound to create their own interpretations - I listen to all and make my own mind up - I do not feel it is a day that marks the end of the Earth. My interpretation is not fixed as always there is fresh information about world events - This cosmic cycle being one event.
But thats it really as far as I would like to say - If it is correct then it is the end of a cosmic cycle which means the begining of another.

That's interesting because I never watch videos. I read the text. So I have no idea what was on the video. I never bother with videos so I am at a loss here.

The Mayan actually is not associated with any cosmic cycle. It certainly is not connected to movement around the galaxy. The Mayans did not know about galaxies. Besides the time frame is wrong. It takes hundreds of millions of year to go around the galactic center.
Was the video Calleman speaking?

reply to post by Xcalibur254

Ah that is an interesting idea about there not being an end to the long count.
not heard any say that before - I do not dispute it. Its like cogs within cogs and none truly see the larger picture in that respect.