Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

2012 Return of the 9 Gods,The Visitation

page: 3
15
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 06:01 PM
link   
I have a question for anyone that knows about the Mayan calendar and how modern science determined the date of 2012 please.

Does the Mayan calendar have indicators on it that correspond to the stars positions during the time it was made and that is how modern science is determining when it ends or are they using our modern calendars and cycles then correlating them with that old Mayan calendar someway?

I know I probably sound dumb in this respect but I can't understand how they could find a so-called END date on that ancient piece of archaeology.

Thanks for any reply with an answer to my question.




posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 06:57 PM
link   
reply to post by bytebull
 


The GMT correlation was the product of a number of avenues of research. Chief among these are:

Historical: We have a number of post-Columbian documents that bear both a Long Count date and a Julian Calendar date. The most famous examples of this come from the books of the Chilam Balam. There are also a number of tribes of natives in Guatemala that still use the Tzolkin and Haab. Using the GMT correlation our Calendar Round dates match up with those used by these people.

Astronomical: The Maya were great record keepers when it came to astronomic events. For example the Dresden Codex keeps track of lunar phases and eclipses for many years complete with Long Count dates. Knowing when the Maya said these events took place we can then look at our own astronomical records and match up dates.

Archaeological: We also have many artifacts that bear Long Count dates that can be radioisotope dated. The dates that have been received from this method verify the dates gleaned from the other methods.

At this point it is extremely unlikely that the GMT correlation is wrong. I have seen a few compelling arguments for why it's impossible to create any kind of accurate correlation but as it stands right now the GMT correlation has the most evidence to support it.



posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 10:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xcalibur254
reply to post by bytebull
 


The GMT correlation was the product of a number of avenues of research. Chief among these are:

Historical: We have a number of post-Columbian documents that bear both a Long Count date and a Julian Calendar date. The most famous examples of this come from the books of the Chilam Balam. There are also a number of tribes of natives in Guatemala that still use the Tzolkin and Haab. Using the GMT correlation our Calendar Round dates match up with those used by these people.

Astronomical: The Maya were great record keepers when it came to astronomic events. For example the Dresden Codex keeps track of lunar phases and eclipses for many years complete with Long Count dates. Knowing when the Maya said these events took place we can then look at our own astronomical records and match up dates.

Archaeological: We also have many artifacts that bear Long Count dates that can be radioisotope dated. The dates that have been received from this method verify the dates gleaned from the other methods.

At this point it is extremely unlikely that the GMT correlation is wrong. I have seen a few compelling arguments for why it's impossible to create any kind of accurate correlation but as it stands right now the GMT correlation has the most evidence to support it.



thank you ... good post





new topics
 
15
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join