It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Impending doomsday officially cancelled!! (probably)

page: 5
69
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 7 2012 @ 11:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Exsisto
 


A person I know wrote this to the attached video:

"OK. So this is my take on the whole Doomsday thing: People constantly want to foreshadow some cataclysmic rapture where all humanity simultaneously perish. This may be viewed as a morbid coping mechanism to help console us with our own neurosis and inevitable 'final judgement' via our personal mortality. A shared mutual apocalypse is an attempt to alleviate the terror of the sublime- our own individual death. Seriously Rad Video! Resist the N.W.O.!"



In the end it is always up to you and only you, to believe or not. However; throughout all recorded history civilizations have collapsed, disappeared or have been destroyed. Our current world events eerily resemble the writings in Revelation. See attached video



In the end... You Decide.




posted on Mar, 7 2012 @ 12:47 PM
link   
No one knows when the End of the World will happen..Entire region in a nuclear war especially the middle east is not good at all.



posted on Mar, 7 2012 @ 01:11 PM
link   
Actually, I don't care about the end of the world
The world will be around for quite a long time.

Its the end of humans that makes me a bit concerned.

(ahh semantics, you cruel beast you).

Although I tend to laugh at most doooooom threads, I will say this time is unique. We will soon have the ability to where tiny rogue nations can create genetically enhanced bio-weapons that can make the black plague look like a mild cold.

That is how I see us going out if we don't sort out our nuttyness.
Even in the worst case global warming style event happening, mankind will still move on..but we do have the ability (or soon will have) to utterly destroy our species by our own hands if we don't check in with a bit of wisdom and desire for progression.

Once we get some other planets colonized, then things will be a bit less intense for us I reckon...but for now, with us on the cusp of intersolar colonization, we are also at our most dangerous. Advanced tech held by a still violent and brash species.



posted on Mar, 7 2012 @ 01:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by MyrtlePlace

First of all, why should now not be so special? Why is tomorrow any better time for a catastrophe to happen? Simply because it's more convenient than now? But semantics aside, technology plays a major role in this discussion. Up until now, known civilization literally couldn't destroy the planet. Now we literally can destroy the planet. That's not to say we'll do it, just to say that that's what's different from yesterday and the difference between tomorrow coming at all.


I used to be afraid to fly. Knowing I was getting on a plane would keep me up nights before any trip I was taking. Then I had a conversation about it with a friend who asked me, "Have you ever won the lottery?"

"Not yet." I replied.

"Well, your odds of winning the lottery are better than your odds of dying in a plane crash." He flatly told me. When looking at it logically, my raging fear of flying became greatly doused.

The truth is; the odds of us experiencing an ELE during this lifetime are far worse than our odds of dying in a plane crash or winning the lottery. When I win the lottery I might start being more fearful again, although by that point I'll be able to build my own customized train, so maybe I'll quit flying altogether.

I'll add civilization is not capable of destroying the planet. We're capable of changing it, sure, although any change we bring about is likely to be impermanent. The planet will long survive us and has a displayed ability to regenerate itself over the long haul. If you doubt that, look at Bikini Atoll. The former nuclear test site is a favorite dive spot for those who want to see an abundance of gorgeous and vibrant sea life.



posted on Mar, 7 2012 @ 01:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Exsisto
 


I agree 100%!

The flip side to this is that ancient cultures, mystics, guru's etc have been saying that we are amazing spiritual beings with the ability and right to create the world we want to live in for just as long as others have been screaming the end is near....

Unfortunately, humans have a tendency to dwell on the negative instead of looking at the positive, just a strange human attribute I guess.

This video can be summed up in the Alchemical motto: "As Above, So Below"

It's all right here for us, we just have to pay attention. Thanks for this great post!



posted on Mar, 7 2012 @ 01:42 PM
link   
Yes! I began this personal great awakening about a year ago. I felt (and still feel) change coming. I believe great change happens at all levels. Anyway, I quickly fell prey to all the doomsday beliefs. I am now beginning to suspect that it is all a ruse to keep us distracted from creating REAL social change. Yes, Earth changes are happening. Yes some are destructive. But should that be the area of focus? I think not. I do believe that there are new cosmic energies coming to us. And we need to make the most of them.
edit on 7-3-2012 by thinkingthing because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 7 2012 @ 02:37 PM
link   
reply to post by NISMOALTI
 


um... didnt we find the Mayan calendar like back in the 70s?
and didnt we do the math with it using our current calendar?

believe what you want about what may happen on December 21st/2012 but that IS the day the Mayan calendar ends.



posted on Mar, 7 2012 @ 02:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Bisman
 


We've known about the Long Count since the Spanish first arrived. It's just that there really wasn't much research done in regards to the Maya until the early 20th century. Throughout the 20th century different correlations between our calendar and the Long Count were proposed. The most widely accepted correlation (the GMT correlation) was proposed in 1983.
edit on 3/7/2012 by Xcalibur254 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 7 2012 @ 02:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Exsisto
 


My Favorite Thread to Date... I love it :-)



posted on Mar, 7 2012 @ 03:07 PM
link   
Nice post OP. Star and Flag.

See the thing is most Humans tend to forget our animal past and the role fear played in keeping us alive. Humans are hardwired to crave fear, it gives us edge, it allowed us to spot danger and live to spread our genes long, long before we were anything like our current form. Basically it doesn't surprise me one bit the amount of fearmongering that goes on within ATS, we simply can't help it.

Now when someone speaks rationally, that is something special.



posted on Mar, 7 2012 @ 03:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by SaturnFX
We will soon have the ability to where tiny rogue nations can create genetically enhanced bio-weapons that can make the black plague look like a mild cold.

Even in the worst case global warming style event happening, mankind will still move on..but we do have the ability (or soon will have) to utterly destroy our species by our own hands if we don't check in with a bit of wisdom and desire for progression.


My thoughts exactly, our times ARE unique.

I dont fear natural disaster for all the reasons the OP posted, however we as people have the power in our hands for the first time to quite handily wipe ourselves out. As a child of the cold war, i can tell you the early 80's under Reagan (who i have a great respect for now in hindsight), were terrifying.

The sheer number of incidents that could have lead to a nuclear war during the cold war are astounding. Everything from the Suez crisis to Able Archer and so much more could have lead to our demise. I think it quite a miracle we survived those years. And as technology becomes more available, even to developing nations, WMD are going to be easier to produce and more widespread.

I dont fear natural disasters. I fear mankind.



posted on Mar, 7 2012 @ 03:24 PM
link   
The reason for end of the world prognostications is quite simple:
We all realize we're going to die and -
Nobody wants to go alone.




posted on Mar, 7 2012 @ 04:31 PM
link   
So much can be said about this topic:

We are here on the planet experiencing what humans have created... It was created using reason and experience in an environment where relative reasoning is all that is possible - since we don't know absolutely everything about everything.

The reasons for a cataclysmic collapse can be many and various. I will give an example here, and expound on it:

For instance, a comet *could* crash on the earth and change life on the planet in a very drastic fashion. Does it mean that this is *the way* that drastic change will occur on the planet? Not necessarily. Does it mean that we can't observe before hand and predict such a thing happening.... We have tools that help us to see such things (though perhaps not necessarily everything) and it is reasonable to believe that if such a thing were to occur, we might actually be able to predict it and it's effects using the technological tools we have currently. Does this mean that people won't predict that the occurrence of a comet crashing will happen, in spite of not having evidence of such, or going on evidence that is very flimsy? No.

What would be acceptable evidence from one person to the next of a comet crash changing the world drastically? Well, you have the person who will say: it is not going to happen, regardless of what evidence is presented. You will have the person who will say that the destiny of the earth is to be hit by a comet regardless of of what evidence is presented. You could probably also see how every degree in between could be argued by people of the world. A scientist might argue that this is about to happen, based on empirical evidence, and tool based observation. He might in fact be an expert. I personally am not an expert in the matter: Regardless of what the scientist observes, I am free to believe/disbelieve what is said, and then it would be a matter of the tasting of the pie for proof of what was said by the scientist. Suppose, on the other hand, in spite of all the scientist's observations, he missed some really key points (which he nor anyone else was aware of) in his arguments and the comet doesn't hit the world... Does this entirely discredit the scientist's ability to observe the universe?

At one point in time, the modern world believed that the world was flat and at the center of the universe. The greeks apparently knew before that the world was round. Kepler, Galileo and Newton proved this to be wrong.

Essentially, truth and observation is not a monopoly belonging to anyone or even a group of individuals.

Verification of one's beliefs sometimes relies on reality more than it relies on hearsay.

As far as doomsday is concerned. I believe that it is a possibility. For instance: Just because I've safely driven for five years doesn't mean that I can't have a serious accident tomorrow. I don't believe that anyone holds a monopoly on doomsday predictions, and even if someone were to predict it tomorrow and it did occur, I would personally (as I suspect everyone would) require *MY* satisfying level of proof that it wasn't a coincidental prediction. There are so many variations to the theme of predictions that are made - each one has his/her own reasons/observations - in addition to the fact that *I* would have to understand the proof... If I don't see something that I feel reasonably trustworthy as a basis for the proof, I won't accept it as anything more than coincidental.

Why do I say trustworthy? I say trustworthy, because I have a level of proof I personally impose (due to my personal shortcomings/abilities/experiences/understanding). This is somewhat unique from person but from what I've seen a certain amount can be transferred from person to person through communication - hence the website.



posted on Mar, 7 2012 @ 04:34 PM
link   
I personally believe the world is in grave trouble, not because of some of the fancy observations we are capable of making as a result of our technological advances, but because the human race at this point in time has never been more greedy.

It is convenient for us to take for granted that we can use cars to drive from point A to point B along a road - and we do this daily. However, it is inconvenient that the same science predicts that we have a limited atmosphere, capable of taking only so much change in the composition of air, before the animals living on the planet suffer and the balance of nature suffers significantly. Now, I do understand that the word significant is a politically correct word in and of itself. What one person calls significant can potentially not be enough for another person to call significant. I don't hold it wrong to consider saying the word "significant" for that reason. It helps when one has a discussion of these things to write out what one feels the word implies. Fortunately, or unfortunately this may require people to write up an entire dictionary of terms as interpreted by each individual.

My belief of the use of our atmosphere being gravely troublesome, doesn't mean I believe that the changes we will see will be cataclysmic overnight though. It may take some time (IMHO), and how much I can't rationally predict, since I haven't a science degree to support my position, but a hazarded guess is in the next 10 years or so. I've seen reasonable enough effects of global warming where I live and have heard other accounts of the effects on weather to support my belief.

Of catastrophic change, I don't believe our troubles are limited simply to the atmosphere. I believe our financial systems are in grave trouble as well. This arises from the fact that I believe that our financial systems are akin to a monopoly game, and that we are nearing the end game. The only way to cure this would be to remove greed and reset the distribution of wealth - but I don't believe that TPTB are going to do such a thing.

Do I have a date for this trouble. I don't have a date for the trouble I believe is brewing. I believe that the monopoly game is going to shut down, and the gravity of the situation will be judged by each individual for him/herself based on *their* requirements of proof. This is something I believe will happen over time - say the next 3-4 years. However, for the now likely over 50 million Americans who are jobless and some in tents newly set up, the gravity of the situation cannot /(couldn't have been) be understated.



new topics

top topics



 
69
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join