If a huge Earth changing event happens in 2012, will the skeptics admit it was predicted?

People have been talking about the "end times" in 2012 since at least the decade of the 1970's.

More than 30 years of "predictions" for 2012.


Now, suppose that a huge Earth changing event happens in 2012. Like the start of a very destructive nuclear war. Or a very huge volcanic eruption, or several eruptions, that creates a "volcanic winter", making Earth plunge into a "mini Ace Age" with widespread destruction of crops. Or a huge solar flare that knocks down the electric grid of half of the world, with permanent damage to thousands of transformers.


What are the chances that the "skeptics" will admit those huge Earth changing events were predicted?

Most probably, the "skeptics" will keep saying that everything was a "coincidence".

If the Earth changing events don't happen exactly on December 21, they will use that as an argument: "But the prophecy wasn't for December 21? So, if it didn't happen on December 21, it wasn't predicted!"

So, it's almost certainly a waste of time to debate with skeptics. Skeptics only believe what they want to believe. They are irrational.

If it's a natural disaster, cataclysm from space, then sure I'll concede the possibility.

If it's something caused by man, like war, then no. Sorry.

I think regardless the government will maintain that it was all a coincidence, and once that happens there are bound to be plenty of skeptical sheep that follow suit.

So.... using your logic, would the people 'predicting' the destruction and dissasters this year admit that they put too much faith in things they read regarding predictions if nothing happens?

Always wanted to see what it would be like on this forum after the fatefull 21/12/12 if nothing happens at all.

reply to post by GLontra


I honestly think that if this "event" does happen then the sceptics will be irrelevant. We wont have time to run around yelling "I TOLD YOU SO"

If a HUGE Earth Changing event DOES happen along the lines of what we discuss daily here, then I don't think this question will have much importance. I'd even suggest the skeptics know it, right now, too.

If such a thing happens...The net will likely be off for weeks..or months....if not forever.

If it's to the real bad side of what we all speculate about...then the basic truth is, most of the skeptics won't survive the opening days or weeks..let alone months or the entire aftermath of whatever should happen. I suppose that means in the end, they'll face their own folly of assumptions, but it'll be a real private moment for the skeptics and we don't even get to say 'I told ya so!'.

Oh well... Those of us who prepared will at least know that moment came for those people before they died. That's enough to bring a smile..SHOULD that time ever come to pass.

Originally posted by GLontra

So, it's almost certainly a waste of time to debate with skeptics. Skeptics only believe what they want to believe. They are irrational.

Everyone is irrational when it comes to their beliefs. Hence every war since the dawn of man.

reply to post by GLontra


The skeptics are irrational....are you serious?

99.9999999% of all predictions on here dont happen. 99.9% of all predictions worldwide dont happen.

The odds of the world ending in 2012 are stupidly huge. You have more chance of an alien invasion

If you want people to tell you what you want to hear then obviously avoid the skeptics, if you want some help in getting to the answers you seek, then you have to accept, you can be wrong...and most probably are in regard to earth changing events in 2012.

As another poster said, wars dont count. They have been manufactured since the dawn of man, so they are inevitable, and highly likely this year.

The predictions have been pretty specific. Why do the predictors get off with having "sorta kinda predictions" ?

"Oh well we said 'earth changing event' for this date in 2012, but it happened a few months off, and it was 'sorta kinda' and earth changing event" so therefore we are right?

Enough things have happened in the last few years that weren't predicted. Or were they? The housing bubble was predicted by a select few economists, but it had nothing to do with being psychic, or reading ancient stones.

Where was the prediction that Japan would suffer one of the worst Nuclear disasters in history?

Predicting wars? Well, that's more just political analysis than anything superficial.



The predictions of comet Elenin destroying the Earth? Fail.
The prediction of the "global consciousness change" ? Isn't that ambiguous....
The prediction of Nibiru? Uhh... Nope

I think it would have to be a really really big event or a serious of events for a 'skeptic" like myself to admit all the 2012 hype was predicted. It's not that I don't want to believe in all the 2012 hype, my mind just tells me everything will happen as usual.

My question is and I'm not being rude in any way, How many times has a prediction or prophecy actually come to pass exactly as predicted and at exactly at the right time? My guess would be zero

Here is a nice little list of all the end of the world prophecies through out history. When you read all of these, it's hard to not think that the 2012 one is yet just another one to pass us by;

End of the world prophecies - Wikipedia

reply to post by loves a conspiricy


To make your point I think you meant the odds of the world ending are stupidly small ( Thus making your point you are saying the opposite of what you meant hehe no biggie!)

And I do think too that the odds are really small, I don't get where the end of days 2012 actually comes from. ( not the mayans they never predicted the end of the world).

So, end of world believers, who predicted the end? Is what I'd really like to know.
WHO?

reply to post by GLontra


If it is the huge Earth changing event that a lot of people on here and else where are predicting then there probably wont be anyone around to admit that they were wrong...

If something happens then sure I'll admit I was wrong, why is that such a big deal? I think a lot of people would do the same. If something happens that maybe I scoffed at or thought was wrong previously then I'm woman enough to be the first to say "I'm sorry, I was wrong". But lets put the shoe on the other foot for a moment. What if nothing happens and we enter into 2013 without any massive world changing or ending event, will all of the 'believers' admit they were wrong? Or will they continually recalculate and say the date was off and the end is in a different year/time? There is only so much recalculating and re-figuring of doomsday dates someone can do and still expect to be believed.

So, it's almost certainly a waste of time to debate with believers. Believers only believe what they want to believe. They are irrational.


Personally I don't know that anything will happen other than the sun will rise and set just like usual. But the key there is that I don't know, none of us do. I'll take what happens as it happens. I live in a place where I am typically prepared for many things (Colorado Mountains) and beyond that I will just take it one day at a time. Same way I live my life now actually! I refuse to live my life in fear of something that 'might' happen.

Originally posted by MaMaa
But lets put the shoe on the other foot for a moment. What if nothing happens and we enter into 2013 without any massive world changing or ending event, will all of the 'believers' admit they were wrong? Or will they continually recalculate and say the date was off and the end is in a different year/time? There is only so much recalculating and re-figuring of doomsday dates someone can do and still expect to be believed.

Exactly.

I'm still waiting on Terral's mea cupla for his Elenin kerfuffle, never mind his big, fat March 22nd oopsie which failed to make our knees freeze and livers quiver from a massive Nibiru-based event.

For me it depends on what happens. Of course if I were to die in said event it would be moot.

reply to post by Jassu

It's overrated and everybody forgets you said it.I told my command in sept 1990 we would be done in less than a week if we fought a war with Iraq.They of course didn't like that and thought I was being arrogant.

reply to post by GLontra

Whatever "earth-changing event" actually occurs, 90% of the "2012" predictions will have been predicting something completely different.
So the "2012" expectation would still be 90% untrue, even then.

Originally posted by VeniVidi
reply to post by GLontra

 

If it is the huge Earth changing event that a lot of people on here and else where are predicting then there probably wont be anyone around to admit that they were wrong...

that's why it's so easy to be a skeptic on this particular issue. They are just betting against near 0 percent probability that they would be able to be told wrong. I would do the same thing If I didn't have my own thoughts on the issue. Better safe than sorry.

I also think a Nuclear war should count. There's been wars, but a global nuclear war would count as ending the world and therefore counts as a scenario. Skeptics who are saying no to a war counting are using illogical conclusions that war is always the same. "since the beginning of time." haha. If it is like I said above IT DOES COUNT.

By the way You can rationalize everything, but it makes you anything except rational... Rational people never have an answer for certain, because rationally you can never know until afterwards.. So you know. Skeptics can be very irrational sometimes. I'm speaking on certain people not skepticism in general. Since in general if you are a skeptic for real you would also be skeptic that the world wouldn't end. It has to go both ways (skepticism) or you are a blind believer just as the people you think you are "skeptic" of. Just opposite ends of irrational thought as it were.

I don't know. Therefore I am one of the few true skeptics there is on this issue that I have seen on this site.

you guys get it??

A huge, Earth-changing event happens every year. Every year some incredible thing happens that in some way changes life, history, etc. The 2012 predictions aren't even specific. They could at least say exactly what is going to happen, and not give some vague prediction about "change." That's the hard part.