It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Does 2012 reveal a colonialistic view of ancient civilizations?

page: 1

log in


posted on Sep, 6 2010 @ 09:13 AM
A blog I recently read makes the following claim:

The 2012ers therefore argue that the ancient Maya (or any other “civilization”) were incapable of coming up with these buildings, writing, etc. all by themselves. They needed guidance. This sounds much like the “white man’s burden”, where non-western people were seen as child like.

2012: How to spot a prophet’s Maya hoax – ethnocentrism and Annunaki

This is in reference to the claim that the work done by these ancient civilizations required the oversight by aliens, possibly the Annunaki.

I have noticed this stream of thought in several threads on Egypt and Sumeria and the Mayans. They could not do it. They could not do those sort of calculations, constructions, writings, ... whatever.

I have also seen the situation where statements made by people were given greater authority because of their heritage. If someone had ancestors that were Mayan, does it make their statements any more or less authoritative? If someone had ancestors that were European does it make their statements any more or less authoritative? If someone had ancestors that were African does it make their statements any more or less authoritative?

Later, the blog states:

Thus, whatever the 2012 debunkers say it will always be lies. This is like arguing with a religious fundamentalist….and btw, the creationists are already in this circus. They are the most ethnocentric and even racist regarding the Maya.

Not only does the blogger claim that the 2012 folks act as if the ancient civilizations were inferior, but the tone of the comments is affected by those that are more religious.

I'm not sure about the latter claim. I am certain that people either treat the ancient civilizations as being incredibly superior or incapable of having built their civilization without help.

posted on Sep, 6 2010 @ 09:58 AM
Interesting take.

You can't argue with it though, say there was a pyramid complex in the British heartland that was on the scale of the one in Teotihuacan. Won't go as far as saying that people will all undoubtedly believe that it was the British and the British alone who built the complex, but the mentality which we have grown into through society and the media has embedded at least a small element of a cultural superiority/inferiority scale within our psyche. Looking at places like Mexico and Egypt which we nowadays see in the 'second world, third world' light, it definitely has an impact on how we judge and perceive the people of certain nations/cultures and their abilities. Total rubbish of course, but its there.

Again, interesting take, worth looking further into. Thanks.

posted on Sep, 6 2010 @ 11:14 AM
So if someone thinks the Maya or other ancient civilizations had Alien ET contact that makes them racist Europeans (whites)???

This is totally absurd.

Way to play the Race Card yet again. It's totally asinine.

People need to stop blogging their useless opinions and start reading or something.

Sure we are all guilty but some of these people have no education what so ever.

The Race Card being played in the 2012 debate. Priceless...

posted on Sep, 6 2010 @ 12:08 PM
reply to post by muzzleflash

It's a straw man argument to say that belief in contact with ETs implies racism. That is not what is being said here. You might want to review the material and correct your mistake unless you intended to make a straw man argument.

It's really not absurd. Should we go around and start collecting places where people have made these statements? I've seen claims that:
1. It must be true because the person is a Mayan
2. The ancient Sumerians or Egyptians could never have done with this without help

The authority of the claim is based on the heritage of the person making the statement. Isn't that a form of racism.

posted on Oct, 20 2010 @ 08:11 AM
I've been looking for blatant commentary that suggests that people choose positions based on the race of the people involved. Would someone say that a story is more true because it is about Mayans and the speaker is Mayan? I have seen it here. I did not want to dredge up old material so I looked for commentary in new posts.

Here is a comment:

The NWO bunch thought Obama was their flunkie, but he was really more like a double agent for the oil guys, since he is more arab than black.

Ouch! This comment suggests that the actions of the president of the US is based on his racial heritage. I guess the author of this claim does not realize that much oil originates in the US, Nigeria, and Venezuela.

posted on Oct, 21 2010 @ 12:28 PM
It's starting to pour again.

It is he-said-she-said until we get a real Mayan descendant to confirm which is false.

The claim is that only a Mayan descendant can know Mayan facts for certain. That's ridiculous. I am no authority on the history or facts of my ancestral homeland. No chance of me getting their history correct.

I believe such a comment is racist. It supposes that someone can only know a fact by virtue of their racial origins.

posted on Oct, 22 2010 @ 03:11 PM
reply to post by stereologist

Well, looking at the structures involved and that the Egyptians and Mayans were between stone age and bronze age technology levels then you have to as the following questions.

Why would they build such structures? At their technology level it would take decades to build such structures. Secondly, the act of simply moving stone blocks the size found in those structures would be in between impossible to close to it. Some of those blocks would be impossible to move with today's technology. And the fit and finish on the stone blocks was extremely good. There is no mortar in the pyramids. They are just blocks put together and held together by their weight.

Also it appears that the dimensions of the Pyramids encode mathematical properties a bronze age people would know nothing about. Clearly either the world was extremely advanced 10 to 40 thousand years ago and it was lost or advanced aliens were around and assisted with the construction of the structures in question. There could be a kernel of truth to the Atlantis and Noah's ark stories. Maybe Noah started from Mars and the Ark was a spaceship?

posted on Oct, 22 2010 @ 04:22 PM

Some of those blocks would be impossible to move with today's technology.

That is a claim often made, but not true. Even larger blocks can be moved.

Clearly either the world was extremely advanced 10 to 40 thousand years ago

None of the structures in question are that old.

Other than that I agree that the structures made by ancient man are still marvelous in today's world.

Even in today's world human powered projects have been done that are astonishing. Friends of mine went to China where labor was cheap enough that the materials for a nice hotel were carried up to a mountain top by laborers despite the available tram system. Everything from bricks to doors to windows to concrete for a very large hotel was carried on human backs. Mining projects in Brazil and Africa have created pit mines that rival and surpass mines dug by machines. Every piece of rock dug by hand was carried out by laborers. I'm sure there are many more amazing human power created marvels.

The marvels created by ancient peoples also tell us the skill they had in organization from the actual work to the necessities of feeding and housing large crews.

posted on Oct, 26 2010 @ 06:13 AM

Just don't hang out with any of the Uber rich, or move to Israel. While everyman Jew isn't in on the whole Illuminati/NWO thing, some of their leadership is hiding there and it's gonna get messy when their tribulation starts.

Another ugly comment has surface din the 2012 forums. This one by one of the previous authors anonymously quoted earlier. It seems that there are a few bad eggs pushing the hoax called 2012.

posted on Oct, 27 2010 @ 10:16 AM

Once again it will be he said she said non-sense until we have a REAL MAYAN DESCENDANT correct us both on the matter.

Here is another post in which someone thinks that heritage means a better understanding of the situation. It's a typical mistake and speaks to an underlying racist attitude.

posted on Nov, 11 2010 @ 05:47 PM

Your not a Mayan, you didn't live in their times so you can do is speculate.

Yet another comment in which someone thinks your racial, cultural, or ethnic heritage makes you an authority on an issue. I think this person might be greatly disappointed in how little I know about the place where my ancestors came from.

This is a typical racist comment. It suggests that people that are not Mayans cannot know about the rich and wonderful history of this culture. That's a falsehood. Let's try a similar falsehood to help illustrate what I mean:

You're not a white guy, you didn't live in ...

Racism is racism.

posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 06:21 PM
reply to post by stereologist

This thread seems designed to be an 'easy win' for you? The Stereologist I know can (and does) argue against anything and everything to do with 2012, ancient astronauts, high technology in the remote past (etc), and yet you chose a relative 'no-brainer'. There's nothing to debunk! Nothing to disagree with!

Of course we don't need Mayan descendants to tell us what their ancestors knew. Of course it matters not a jot whether Barack is Arabic, African-American or green with pink polka dots.

Now what I really wanted to see in the 'Stereologist-authored' thread was:

"This is what people think is going to happen in 2012 (insert examples) - Here is what people think about the culture explosion in ancient Sumeria (insert examples) - here is what people think about the ancient Vimana craft in Hindu mythology (insert examples)... AND NOW I WILL DEBUNK IT ALL..!!" * cue echoing laughter and ten page diatribe *

Come on - you know you want to..

But hey, kudos for actually creating a couple of threads since I asked you about why you hadn't done any. Remember? When I asked why, despite hammering the 2012 forum incessantly for ages with 'debunk & ridicule' postings, why hadn't you authored anything to give your opinion in a concise and ordered presentation?

Authoring threads lends a bit of credibility to your persona as a member. As in, you don't just spend all day, every day debunking, crowding out (commonly called spamming) and ridiculing other people's theories... with post after post after post after post after post after post after post, but you actually contribute to the wealth of material on here.

Yeah, good to see...

I just think it's a shame that you haven't used all of your knowledge in this, your most '2012-oriented' thread to date..

Maybe you're scared that someone will come along and do to your thread what you do to the threads of others? Is that why you chose to make an non-contentious thread? So you could give yourself some credibility as a real member and yet not risk actually drawing any attention to your agenda? Glad to know my feedback was taken on board - (by the board, .

I'll check back soon to see if you can compose a real thread, detailing Your real thoughts on the whole shindig.

posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 07:57 PM
reply to post by FlyInTheOintment

Thanks for the nice post.

Maybe you're scared that someone will come along and do to your thread what you do to the threads of others?

I'm not scared. Actually, if I created a contentious post I'd garner all sorts of points, which is nothing I'm interested in.

posted on Aug, 2 2011 @ 09:27 PM
My position has been that the Mayans were a civilization with great abilities. It is often claimed that by being Mayan someone has a greater incite into the issues. There is the Mayan council claim. If the Mayan council says something about 2012 then it must have a greater weight than statements made by others who are not of Mayan ancestry.

This is really not true unless the Mayan elders had a great deal of time invested in their research on this topic or were privileged to arcana unknown to the outside world or maybe something else I am not thinking about.

It turns out that the Mayan elders were recently introduced to the 2012 issue.
The Maya elders and 13 Baktun

Jenkins mentions Hunbatz Men and he is probably the first of the Maya that began to be affiliated with the 2012 phenomenon. Hunbatz Men came in contact with Argüelles in 1985. Hunbatz is a Yucatec Maya and had no tzolkin tradition to rely on and he began to rely on Argüelles own invented day-count system that had no relation to the true tzolkin. The next important infiltration of New Age ideas into the Maya area came with Ian Lungold’s visit to Don Alejandro Cirilo Perez Oxlaj in the fall of 1998. Lungold brought along Jenkins’s book Maya Cosmogenesis 2012 and had portions of it translated to Don Alejandro. Apparently he was intrigued by Jenkins’s ideas and in January 2000 these ideas appeared in Don Alejandro’s own “prophecies”.

So these people that are part of the Mayan elders were introduced to the 2012 ideas from outsiders. It was not part of the Mayan culture of the elders.

So now we have a non-Mayan idea sent to the elders who are supposed to hand it back to the non-Mayans where it originated from in the first place.

posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 11:00 AM
Nice frame of thought stereologist.

To add more to this, because of the short amount of time that you or I exist, we can often form a basis or bias because of the tools we have at hand to use. Throughout, our (homo-sapien) history, man has always had the same capacity for learning and adapting. What really changes throughout history is the application of what we have learned and the tools we use to aid in that endeavor. It's become easier for us to believe that because we can do some things now, with relative ease, that in the past it would have made accomplishing the same task more difficult. It also become easier for us to believe that the tools and knowledge we have now are recent revelations and not an evolution of applied learning.


new topics

top topics


log in