posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 06:57 PM
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.