Oriana on Apr 1 2009, 01:44 PM, said:
No - but that programme on the history channel was saying that the Mayans calculated it to the winter solstice of our year 2012.
Um, no. The Maya long count (which was adapted from early calendars BTW, so isn't actually of Maya origin) is a cycle of 394 years. The latest one rolls over in December 2012.
There is no evidence, anywhere, ever, that the long count is based on precession, and it can't be, as the timespan of precession is always changing. A calendar used to measure it would be constantly going out of date.
We don't know exactly how long precession is. Why would the Maya?
The duration of the precession cycle, the time it takes for the equinox to precess 360 degrees relative to the fixed stars, is often given as 25,920 or 26,000 years. In reality the exact duration cannot be given, as the rate of precession is changing over time. This speed is currently 243.8 microradians (50.3 arcseconds) per year which would give 25,765 years for one cycle to complete.SourceThat means that a long count is exactly 65.3934040101 of a precession's Great Year. Wow. Spot on guys.
Oriana on Apr 1 2009, 01:44 PM, said:
The effects are - the solar winds are stronger, this affectes the ionosphere of the Earth, and the geodynamo magnetic field
Again, this happens every 11 years. What does this have to do with... well, anything else? What changes and events happened in 2001? Or in 1990? Like I say, how is this related to anything that "could" happen in 2012?
Oriana on Apr 1 2009, 01:44 PM, said:
So all those pictures showing the dark rift are..what...exactly?
I stand corrected - I was going on the description of the Dark Rift from a different forum that claimed it was something to do with a black hole at the centre of the galaxy.
The Great Rift is an interstellar dust cloud that blocks the light from stars shining beyond it. These dust clouds are generally found on the inner edges of spiral arms; they're also where most of the new stars are forming.SourceThis still has nothing to do with the Maya, precession, Venus or the solar cycle.
Oriana on Apr 1 2009, 01:44 PM, said:
I never said that, I asked why they would allow an inaccuracy like this on their channel. Why did they air it then?
The History Channel are an entertainment channel. They also air programmes on UFOs and Nostradamus. Do they get their programmes peer reviewed first? Of course they don't.
I saw one about the Maya calendar on the History Channel and what was the first image they showed? An Aztec calendar. A good 400 years out, and the wrong part of the continent.
Oriana on Apr 1 2009, 01:44 PM, said:
Did someone tell you that or did you think of that yourself?
I come from a null-hypothesis position - that is, I look at the evidence first, and then form a conclusion. If there is no substantial evidence, then the conclusion must be that nothing out of the ordinary will happen.
Such an enormous, cataclysmic event requires a
huge amount of solid, objective, proven evidence in many areas - astrophysics, history, cultural studies to name a couple.
Not circumstantial pseudo-science from a website that doesn't even know when to use the word "Maya" and the word "Mayan", or thinks that a pole shift would tip the entire planet over.
*sigh*
Well because of the precession of the equinoxes, the Earth wobbles on its axis. The Mayans constructed their calendar to take account of this wobble. Also according to the History Channel, the cro-magnon man appeared on the Earth during the last Precessional alignment
No. They. Didn't. There is no correlation between
any calendar and precession - as I said -
it is constantly changing.
And, no, that is just plain wrong about the cro magnon.
The oldest definitely dated specimen is from 34,000–36,000 years agoSourceIt may have taken them some time to become established but according to that programme, they were here at that time, the dominant species etc thus APPEARING.. referring to being the dominant species of human being.
Well despite you have your timings completely wrong, what does it have to do with anything???
A calendar, an appearance of a new species and big changes... ok but I don't believe in coincidence so I won't say that. Its because the precessional alignment marks a place in time when things change
No. It. Doesn't.
You've been told it does, have done no research at all (apart from dredge up the usual, factually shocking 2012 websites) and have no evidence of precession being relevant to
anything.
No I don't. You just said it was, that doesn't mean it is what you said it is.
Your dates are wrong. Your information is demonstrably inaccurate. As I said - there is nothing in that post that is correct, and this isn't just my "opinion".
Well I hope it is nonsense. We'll all look like total idiots for ignoring the warnings if it isn't then won't we?
Warnings?
Man alive.
(edit, spelling and overuse of italics, bolding and capitals)
Edited by Emma_Acid, 01 April 2009 - 02:48 PM.
"Science is the least subjective form of deduction" ~ A. Mulder
6
take each day as it comes LMAO
RAW Berris... Dare you enter?
