Talk:2012

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Spotlight on the UK 2 Update on when Australia will cease Analogue TV 3 New age shit 4 Incorrect information on December 21st 2012 5 Precession of the equinoxes 6 Terrence McKenna's Timewave Theory 7 2012 cleanup task 8 Blackouts?? 9 Going overboard? 9.1 Fraud 10 Verifying the Theories 11 NPOV regarding religions? 12 Tibetian Monks 13 2012 cleanup task II 14 Move "apocalyptic" content to new page? 15 Lisa Launch? 16 Calendar 17 Miscellaneous 18 Questions 19 New 2012 paper 20 Singularity Timetable 21 Tibetan monks 22 Mexico as the ruler of the Universe 23 2012 cleanup task III 24 Rewrite of Maya Long Count info 25 Cleanup task 3.01 26 Copyright Issue 27 Canes Venatici "discovery"? 28 AFI? 29 Heroes "Five Years Gone" episode 30 2012 cleanup task IV 31 I Believe the date may be in error 32 Added text 33 Metaphysical Predictions 34 Eros Orbital Calculation 35 The wind of charged particles from the galactic core 36 Titanic Anniversory not notable? 37 Fenway Anniversary has to get its due too. 38 January 1st 39 Cleanup task 4.3 40 Fenway Park Anniversary 41 Intro 42 Link to Tolkien Wiki page 43 2012 in other calendars 44 Eastern Orthodox Easter Date 45 7 reasons the world will end in 2012 46 bewerken 47 The end of the internet

[edit] Spotlight on the UK

Many of the 'Year Pages' on Wikipedia have an introduction, describing the main events, and also stating whether it is a common year and the day of the week the year begins. Therefore, please do NOT delete the factual information regarding the United Kingdom. Also, terms such as HRH and Her Majesty have been used in accordance with British Tradition with refering to the Monarch. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hrvyvrmnt6789 (talk • contribs) 17:22, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

This article is part of WikiProject Years, an attempt to improve and standardize articles related to Years. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.

	This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Mesoamerica, a WikiProject interested in improving the encyclopaedic coverage and content of articles relating to pre-Columbian Mesoamerica, its civilizations, history, accomplishments and other topics. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project's talk page.
Resources and guidelines for editing Mesoamerica-related articles: Guidelines— Outline of suggested guidelines and editing conventions Resources— Selected resources and compendia of Mesoamerican sources and studies Citations— Bibliography and pre-filled citations for Mesoamerican sources Journals— Links to selected journals publishing Mesoamerican research, example citation templates Article listing— Inventory and watchlists of WP:MESO articles and their talk pages (Article Watchlist)—(Talkpage Watchlist) Worklists— Project worklists and activities
NB: Assessment ratings and other indicators given below are used by the Project in prioritising and managing its workload.
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the Project's quality scale.
Low	This article has been rated as low-importance on the Project's importance scale.
WikiProject Mesoamerica priority open tasks: (click "show" to expand) WikiProject Mesoamerica Open Tasklist: a shortlist of things you can do to help out. Queries welcomed here. (Project Main • Activities • Catalogue • Guidelines • Strategy• Tools and refs) edit | watch | purge NEWS and ANNOUNCEMENTS: → Mesoamerica, Maya civilization, Olmec, Palenque are WP:MESO collaboration targets of the moment. → Pre-filled citation templates for Mesoamerican sources at Citations. → Recently promoted to GA status: Yuri Knorosov, Nahuatl language, Charles Etienne Brasseur de Bourbourg. PROJECT ACTIVITIES: Meta-tasks and subprojects: • add project banner to articles • document Strategy • assign article ratings per the assessment scheme • add to Project references • collate images and maps • More... Categorisation: • develop full Category scheme • reorganise Cat:Mesoamerica contents • More category tasks... Templates: • {{Mesoamerica site infobox}} (create) • {{Mesoamerica ruler infobox}} (create) • {{Maya civilization}} (improve) • {{WP Mesoamerica}} project banner (populate) • More... ARTICLE TO-DO: Requested articles: • History of Mesoamerica • Chenes (Maya subregion & architectural style) • 260-day Mesoamerican calendar • List of Mesoamerican cultures • Hermann Beyer • Huastec civilization • Valley of Oaxaca • More... Expand from stub: • Calendar round • Chiapas highlands • Chilam Balam • Chol language • Trecena • Veintena • More... Cleanup/attention needed: • Domesticated plants of Mesoamerica • Gender in Mesoamerican cultures • History of Mesoamerica (Paleo-Indian) • Gender in Maya society • Olmec figurine • More... Improvement drive: Start-Class • Mesoamerican calendars • Mesoamerican chronology • Mixtec • Monte Albán • Toltec • Yucatán Peninsula • More... Improvement drive: B-Class • Chichen Itza • La Venta • Maya calendar • Maya civilization • Maya script • Olmec • Quetzalcoatl • More... Prepare for Quality reviews (GA, PR, FAC): • Mesoamerica • Mayan languages • Spanish conquest of Mexico • Palenque • Chunchucmil • More...

This article was nominated for deletion on 9 May 2007. The result of the discussion was keep.

[edit] Update on when Australia will cease Analogue TV

It is now scheduled for 2013 see http://www.dbcde.gov.au/media_broadcasting/television/digital_switchover_information_for_consumers 58.175.36.8 (talk) 22:31, 5 April 2008 (UTC)Andy58.175.36.8 (talk) 22:31, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] New age shit

That the sun will flip it's poles is true, however it's impossible to know when it's gonna happen and nobody has said it's gonna be 2012, some fuken new ager has been there changing. That is totally incorrect. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.105.228 (talk) 16:21, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Incorrect information on December 21st 2012

The following item is not correct (as far as I can not tell):

December 21 - 99942 Apophis (2004 MN4)a large near earth object will make a direct pass to the earths orbit, some information points to pole shift and a peturbed earth orbit, resulting in catastrophic events.

99942 Apophis will not be passing the Earth at all during 2012, c.f: http://newton.dm.unipi.it/cgi-bin/neodys/neoibo?objects:Apophis;main (also see http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/risks/a99942.html) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Riftor (talk • contribs) 19:22, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

The following item is ALSO not correct, or should be put somewhere other than "scheduled events":

"21st December, according to Nostradamus' prediction, Zombie's will invade the earth."

Not to mention syntax incorrect. Or perhaps he means that the collective will of the zombie invades? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Druj (talk • contribs) 16:33, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Precession of the equinoxes

I tried to update the 2012 page, but there is a problem with wikipedia, or the server, or something. I cannot edit the page. What I wanted to post was the following:

---

There are misconceptions about exactly what the astronomical conditions are that lie behind the (increasingly legendary) December 21, 2012 winter solstice. There are two things that will occur, astronomically, in 2012 (very roughly speaking, time-wise ... see below). First, it will be the first time in approximately 26,000 years (the time required for one complete precession of the earth about its axis) that the equatorial plane and the ecliptic plane intersect at approximately the position of sunrise at the winter solstice. The exact time of the winter solstice on December 21, 2012 is 11:11 a.m. GMT. (The equatorial plane is the spacial plane in which Earth's equator lies, and the ecliptic plane is the plane in which lies Earth's mean orbit around the sun – the equatorial plane and the ecliptic plane are separated by an angle of approximately 23 degrees.) What is often not recognized is that the alignment of the December 21, 2012 winter solstice sunrise with the intersection between the equatorial and ecliptic planes AND the alignment of that intersection with the center of the Milky Way galaxy is an event that is not dependent just upon the precession of Earth's axis. It is primarily dependent upon the length of time it takes for the Milky Way galaxy to complete one rotation. The rotation time of the Galaxy is about 225 million years. Only once in 225 million years does the intersection of the ecliptic and equatorial planes at winter equinox align with the center of the galaxy. This will occur around 2012 – plus or mines a few million years. So 2012's galactic-center alignment is an event that has not occurred for 225 million years – plus or minus a few million years.

Here are the caveats: The intersection of the ecliptic and equatorial planes at winter solstice can be estimated only to an accuracy of about plus-or-minus 30 years (for technical reasons regarding the accuracy of astronomically plotting the precession of Earth's axis). Moreover, the alignment of said winter-solstice intersection with the galactic center can be estimated with an accuracy of plus-or-minus several million years. This is because it is not known precisely where the "galactic center" is – i.e., it is not possible to define exactly where the supermassive black hole of 3.7 million solar masses is, which is believed to be the center of our Galaxy. The position of the "center" is known, but there is a slight margin of error involved. Given that the Galaxy is 80,000 to 100,000 light years in diameter and about 1,000 light years in thickness (Recently the thickness was discovered to be greater then this, please check for accurate thickness), it is not possible to define where the "center" lies more closely than a few hundred light years. This would imply, given the rotation time of 225 million years, that the ecliptic-equatorial-galactic-planes alignment cannot not be defined more closely than plus-or-minus a few million years, at best. Thus, while the December 21, 2012 is the end of the ancient Mayan calendar, and while the winter solstice will perhaps be a remarkable mass-psychological phenomenon, in terms of astronomy it could be considered a non-event.

The comment above (first introduced here) is wrong in several respects. Yes, one complete precessional cycle takes 26000 years. This means that the alignment in question happens every 26000 years. The 225-million-year orbit of the sun about the galactic center is irrelevant, except that the position of the galactic center (with respect to the extragalactic background, as seen from Earth) will have shifted by a fraction of an arcsecond each time. If you were to insist, not just that the solstice sun should line up with the galactic center, but that it should do so in Sagittarius (more precisely, that it should do so against that portion of the extragalactic background in the sky region we have called Sagittarius), then you could talk about a 225-million-year cycle.

Also, while we apparently do not know the distance to Sagittarius A*, the central black hole, very well (Wikipedia cites an uncertainty of over a thousand light-years), we do know the direction with considerable precision. If the criterion is that the solstice sun should line up with Sagittarius A*, or that it should get as near as possible, then one really should be able to pick out a particular year. The charts on this page (if you can make them out) suggest what would be involved. But the rational supposition would be that the Long Count was calibrated only against galactic-center features which are visible to the naked eye.

I previously wrote about these matters in this revision (why it was deleted in the next edit, I don't know). Mporter 08:17, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Here[1] is a related attempt to plot the yearly shifts; in this case, the movement of the "solstitial colure" (the great circle or meridian on which the solstices lie) with respect to the intersection of the ecliptic and the galactic equator. Mporter 06:49, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

What you wanted to post doesn't have a neutral point of view-- it wouldn't be good for Wikipedia.--24.45.184.21 (talk) 14:38, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Terrence McKenna's Timewave Theory

[edit] 2012 cleanup task

Realizing that, whether a coincidence or self-supporting emphasis or something beyond, I hope more people than just me have realized that 2012 is a critical year for many current-day "prophecists" (or 'buffs' or 'bluffs' or whatever you prefer calling) and whatnot, about of course the very End of the World or trascendental stuff happening this year (that explains this year having its own Apocalypse section!). Thus I feel a responsability in watching this page, particularly for the regular prancings of the fellows described above.

Besides checking for regular changes in hard facts and references in fiction, if there are additions by individuals with an apparent higher interest in popularizing their "next revealing book" or "perception-altering" website than to put actual investigation-supported predictions, I'll be there in a zip in order to mantain Wikipedia's integrity and neutrality, and comment on those changes here. It's not my job to prove or disprove theories, furthermore to question anyone's credibility.

The less alarmist stuff that happens to this page of course, the better, making my job easier. Any help or suggestions are of course appreciated. So it begins.

• 1. This week's "prophecist" is the Dire Gnosis page, adding a plug to the Mayan calendar comment. A link at the bottom of the page is more than enough, thank you.
  2. Note at Apocalypse:

     According to spiritualist writer Bob Frissell, humankind will ascend into a higher state of collective consciousness.

     I'm guessing you're not the only one to do that, Mr. Frisell. Would we want an extensive list of hundreds other spiritualists saying this very same thing in this page? My guess is no we don't.
  3. I don't know how serious this Jenkins guy is, but if this info is as complete and supported as it should, then he should have his own page with this info included (and more extensively supported, of course). Here's the abstract I'm taking off, if you care to use it elsewhere and link it here if elaborated as suggested before:

     Mayanist/ researcher John Major Jenkins explains in his book, Maya Cosmogenesis 2012, that the Maya were tracking the cycle of precession of the equinoxes, (but they used the solstices), and that the end-point in 2012 targets the conjunction of the winter solstice Sun with the galactic equator - an event that actually takes about 36 years to complete, from 1980 to 2016. He foresees a possible collective kundalini experience, as explained in his book, Galactic Alignment, and he finds supporting evidence in his next book about a lost Aztec codex, Pyramid of Fire.

  4. Another note at Apocalypse:

     David Flynn claims the year 2012 was encrypted in the Roswell Crash and points to ET intelligence indicating a world scale change event in support of the Mayan calendar here: http://www.raidersnewsupdate.com/flynn.htm For a critique of the article, see: http://www.diagnosis2012.co.uk/new8.htm#ets

     Good for you, mr. Flynn! But I'm guessing you're not the first one of the probably hundred others relating UFOs to mayan calendars to 2012! Good thing you do that "here:", but not on Wikipedia anymore! (This was probably put by the guys owning the second web link; so much for the point/counter-point spirit :)
  5. I'm making the new "Fictional references" section for a couple of facts previously listed in the Apocalypse section, including this comment on the X-Files (which I will edit, of course):

     In the X-files mythology, this day would be the beginning of colonization

(So many errors in a single phrase: it happens on the X-Files Mytharc, but it's simply confusing to put it as a Mythology directly from here; 2012 is a year, not a day, these are comments about the year, not December 21; and finally, a "day" cannot "be" a beginning of colonization >.< I guess you were at least going for "ON this day...")

Besides consequently clearing the references, that's all for now (and for long, I hope), thank you. Kreachure 21:31, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Blackouts??

I'm not sure why a peak in oil production would result in blackouts, especially since in both China and the United States a great deal of electricity is produced by burning coal, a resource that in terms of longevity will last longer than oil. The proportion of power plants that burn oil to create electricity is, contrary to popular belief, proportionally quite small.

If production is at a peak then prices should skyrocket, blackouts would be a result of mass numbers of people not able to afford electricity at peak prices. (we have no more oil fields to tap, we have a supply and demand issue).

Blackouts may be more related to solar activity then anything else. 2012 is the next peak year for sunspots and other solar activity which is on an 11 year cycle. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/06/080609124551.htm

[edit] Going overboard?

Is it just me or have the list of prophecies been getting to be a bit much lately? For example, who says there's going to be a geomagnetic reversal? What's the logic behind the thought that the temple will be rebuilt in 2012? Are these types of things actual verifiable prophecies or do we just have our own Cassandras publishing their own predictions here? --Aranae 02:33, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

So what exactly does the 112th pope have to do with 2012? I think I could ask the same question about several of the entries. --Aranae 21:33, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

While I don't personally believe in any of these theories, I find it interesting that so many different cultures predict similar events occuring on or around 2012. In reality, none of these things will probably occur, but it is prominent enough to be listed in this article. For clarity, I have added a pseudo-disclaimer at the beginning of the section as a safety against people who could somehow read it as fact. Avengerx 21:46, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

I don't disagree that this information definitely belongs here, it's just that there have been a few unreferenced and unverifiable statements and/or statements where it's unclear how they apply to the year 2012. The statements probably belong, they just need cleanup so they don't just look like one person writing one crackpot theory that they decided to add to some online encyclopedia that let's them get away with it. --Aranae 02:26, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

I see what your saying, and I'd be happy to attempt to fix it. However, I am currently working on finals (college) and am too busy. If no one fixes it by early January, I'll hop in and clean it up. Avengerx 03:34, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Fraud

I can remember when I was a kid, people where I lived thought the world was coming to an end and Mikhail Gorbechev's birthmark was the sign of the beast. Well, the USSR is gone, so I guess they were wrong. But then, they decided that the real end of the world would come in 2000. Well, that was six years ago, so I guess they were wrong then, too. Then, they said, "Well, Jesus was actually born in 4 AD. So the world will end in 2004". Guess they were wrong about that one, too. Now, we've got the Mayan Calendar, the Prophecy of the Popes, and Nostradamus. This isn't just a recent phenomenon, either. The world's been coming to an end for a while, now. The early christians thought Jesus was going to end the world within his lifetime. Now, the question is, why? Why do we keep hearing doom scenarios, complete with a specific date, and once that date comes and goes, without any apocalypse, the same people who warned us about the bogus apocalypse come up with a new date? Well, it sells books and tabloids, doesn't it? Churches make a lot of money when people, scared for their souls, donate all their cash hoping to buy God off. The real question ought to be, why do we keep falling for it? Instead of worrying about making this world a better place, or improving ourselves through expressions of compassion and reason, why do we fear the end that is always so near? Why are we paranoid and gullible enough to buy into this scam? 2012 will come and go, and on 1 January 2013, I predict that some hack will write that it has been predicted by the ancients that the world will end in 2015. Wandering Star 04:09, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree! It's become very fashionable among young folks to think that the big three Monotheistic religions are absurd while buying stuff that is equally as preposterous simply because it came from a culture outside of their own. Yeah, the Mayans had some accurate astronomical measuring devices. they also performed human sacrifice. After Dec 12, 2012,(when nothing of significance as relating to prophecy happens) believers will find some way to keep believing. Or maybe some event will happen, like some hated dictator will die, or there will be a cure for aids or something, and they'll be like "see? that's the gigantic change that the Mayans predicted!" A lot of beliefs seem to me to be a function of a similar brain impulse as OCD. Like all the ritual and superstition.Morningwindow

One thing to consider before dismissing the 2012 myth as complete unfounded quackery: the ancient Mayans did have an ACCURATE calendar for their time, which aligned with modern-day proven cycles of sunspots and movements of the cosmos and the moon, and THEY are the true origins of the 2012AD prophecy, as their calendar of the current cycle in the evolution of mankind ends in that year (and began in 3113BC). I would say their calendar based on sunspots and galactic cycles would have much more scientifically-proven credibility than our own inaccurate taxpayer calendar based on Roman Gods and pagan myths and propagated by the Roman Catholic Church. Whether the significance of the year 2012 is true or not is to be determined, but it is a FACT that the Mayans predicted this "move to a new level of consciousness" or "end of the world as we know it" in that year, according to current interpretations of their works. 2012 is not a "new date" that's been picked by those who were proven wrong by the 2000 and 2004 predictions.. it has been standing since the days of the Maya. There are many books that scientifically study this calendar system.. admittedly there are a lot of kooky books that are nearly impossible to read and even harder to verify. I would recommend checking out the works of Maurice Cotterell if interested. Of course, since he is original research, I would not cite his works in the main article until independently verified. And one last point -- at no point that we know of in the history of mankind have we been so connected in communication, has knowledge been so readily available, nor have we had the ability to collectively destroy such vast quantities of life through use of today's advanced weaponry. deronde —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.147.234.222 (talk • contribs) 20:44, June 17, 2007 (UTC)

actually the prediction/myth is not a fact, it only is stated that its the end of one of the Mayan (mythological) ages. (unsigned by an unknown user)

Further, please reference the 'Age of Aquarius' crapola that the 60's generation extolled so vocally. That was based on astrology too, and it claimed that come the year 2000, there would be some great cosmic awakening that would put an end to war and open our minds to free love and dope. Guess what? There's over 3,000 dead American kids and several hundred thousand dead Iraqis who can all attest to the fact that war has not ended. Astrology is not science. It is not testable, which is a criterion for any theory purporting to be scientific. The scientific method itself requires every hypothesis to be tested for veracity, rigorously and by many different people, before it can be considered a legitimate claim. And yet, no astrologer since the dawn of time has managed to carry out such an experiment. You know, people used to look at dead animals' entrails to portend the future too, and they also analyzed the shape of somebody's skull, all claiming to be scientific markers. And it was all 100% bullshit, just like medieval claims that any woman who looked at you cross was a witch or that left-handed people were the spawn of the devil. Listen, it's scary to admit that we don't know all the answers. Nobody, not you nor I nor any priest or astrologer or president can predict when they or the world will meet it's end, or how. I can't tell you what will happen next in your life, and no scientist of any merit would even dare to try. You, and I, and all of us, exist in darkness, with hallucinatory dreams of what exists beyond what we can sense. We hold candles such as reason up to illuminate a small patch of that darkness, and it helps a little. But as that tiny light flickers, it is all too easy to think the shadows it casts are real, and they aren't. There are no ghosts or demons, and no accurate predictions of the future either. And even if you have an accurate calendar based on the movements of the planets, the belief that such a calendar will tell you when the end of time is nigh is as much of a stretch as saying that because you have a good pair of eye glasses, that you also have X-ray vision. It's okay not to know all the answers. If you did, wouldn't life be so very boring? I mean, what would be left to learn? What newness would exist, anywhere? Why bother living, if you know so clearly that you are about to die? Live, and leave death to those who have already passed. Wandering Star

[edit] Verifying the Theories

There are too many theories about 2012, in my opinion, to ignore. You could say, well, there was a lot of theories about the year 2000. There was, but most of those theories were born just out of ignorance. In 1999 you could set your VCR to 01-01-00 and it wouldn't explode. But if you combine these theories and apply modern day terms to them (Sumeria=Syria, Babylonia=Baghdad, Jews=Israel) and it makes a scary theory (which I dont really believe, but its interesting). Here's the site where you can get the whole explanation, but I'll just give you the jist of it.

• Some of this information might be a little off from what the site says, I dont remember the years exactly.Source

2009 - War breaks out in the middle east, Syria vs Iraq most likely. 2010 - The Muslim world is at war but eventually it is settled and they are unified (And this is accomplished by the "Dont blame each other, blame the infidels!" tactic) 2011 - This new coallition declares war on Europe and attacks Spring 2012 - Europe is losing the war and alot of territory is lost to them Winter 2012 - (Possibly on the Mayan Doomsday) Rome is attacked by the Arabs and the Vatican is destroyed 2012 - 2023 - Europe loses the war and the Arabs dominate the world temporarily. Chirstianity is outlawed 2025 - Christians unite (Protestants unite with Roman and Eastern Orthrodox Catholics) 2039 - 2045 - Another war in which the West takes back Europe and the Arabs are driven out and defeated After 2045 - The End of the Lesser Tribulation

Actually, there were many more theories about the year 2000 then just Y2K. Earthquakes, war (focused highly in the middle east, how original), plagues, famine so bad "man became an eater of man" and such... it isn't really all that different. Also, you should sign your posts by adding four tildes to the end. 70.125.132.204 (talk) 09:56, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

I agree, plus the ancient calenders end in 2012, not 2000. Neurolanis (talk) 01:48, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] NPOV regarding religions?

Why arte Egyptian and Mayan religious theories not included under the subheader 'Religious Theories'?

Is it not a violation of neutral point of view to seperate out some religious theories as 'religious' and others by culture, indicating that in some way the Egyptian and Mayan stories are less valid than the Christian, Jewish and especially Tibetal Alien Invasion stories?

No, what it is stating is that the Egyptian and Mayan theories are MYTHOLOGY, and no longer practiced. The ancient Egyptians and the ancient Mayans no longer exist, and are very different from the modern, existant religions. It never ceases to amaze me how some people go out and look for conflict. Avengerx 00:24, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Wow, you accuse the first poster of looking for a conflict but you place the MYTHOLOGIES of "modern" religions about those of historic ones. If people are taking seriously the end of the world as predicted by the Mayans, that constitutes the blind faith of religion (believing in an untestable theory). Of course end times MYTHOLOGY always has one built in test. The Christianity of today is very different then that of the Spanish Inquisition but belief in the current faith does not require conviction to previous practices. People believe in this Mayan stuff so it constitutes current religious observation status. PS: By "modern" religion, I assume you were referring to Scientology and Mormonism or is a 2000 year old institution still considered "modern"? 69.219.153.147 09:22, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

The Mioans said that the world would end in 2012. They haven't been wrong yet, they predicted WWI and WWII not to mention Katrina and the tidal wave in Asia. This give me reason to believe that the world will end in 2012.

Who are the "Mioans?" They don't have a Wikipedia page... Or perhaps they reached back from their homes in Mioia to the future to delete their page... Do you mean the "Minoans?" Or the "Mayans", like everyone's talking about. I don't think any of them predicted any of those events. What's your source? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Druj (talk • contribs) 00:47, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Tibetian Monks

I removed a line about Tibetian monks using remoting viewing to say alies would come in 2012. The only source as an editorial. 67.172.137.17 17:59, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

I don't see why it's any less valid than the bit about the Bible code or Malachy's predictions. -- Vary 18:05, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

If you use google there are many sources. Whether or not you like the concept isn't important. Unless you can find a serious lack of information behind it, then it should stay. Avengerx 20:00, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

So your logic is, "Add whattever you want, and only take information away if we disprove it"???

The source quoted for that is [2] but the India Daily is as reliable a source as Pravda, The Sunday Sport, The Weekly World News or The Onion - i.e. it is made up. I've been monitoring their output for a while and while amusing it has no basis in reality. (Emperor 03:09, 24 March 2006 (UTC))

Problem is _they_ dont give any sources, or even name the monks in question. Its all right this is mentioned, but I suggest a different wording, 'it is claimed that unnamed tibetan monks' etc, so that its clear that noone can really confirm this allegation. aryah ~~

[edit] 2012 cleanup task II

Hello again, I leave this article barely 6 months alone and it is again full of prophetic and religious brew-haha! Oh well, I think 2012 is a more famous year than I originally thought! But, that's what I'm here for! So, whatever this significant year holds for us then, let's keep our heads on the ground today!

To avoid complications, I'll make clear three conditions:

• If there are no sources to support what is being said (inside or outside the site), then it's not meriting to put them here. Especially since so many wacky and sometimes delicate things are being said here with no way to corroborate them, 'kay?

• It's not my, and in fact anyone else's, job to prove or disprove things being said here, since we have to wait 7 years to find out if they are true!! But, as pointed before, you must have supporting arguments and sources (as with any other theory anywhere!)

• Anything which doesn't relate significantly to anything happening exactly in 2012 doesn't belong here. This means that if you're talking about the end of the world and stuff, but don't relate it with sources to this year, you're in the wrong place. This goes also for esoteric sites which aren't focused in any date of '12.

So it continues.

• 1. On December (busiest month of that year, I'm sure!), according to the astronomy source, there will be a "Striking" aligning of the celestial bodies. It's arguable whether it's striking or not, but I think astronomers would be more inclined to say (at least) "remarkable". So I'll put it this way, but it's a minor change, so I DO NOT expect anyone arguing on this (or even noticing!>.<)
  2. Since there appeared so many points regarding mayan and egyptian "prophecies", someone divided the subsections for clearer listing, but it's better listing to notice that they all mostly talk about the same prophecies! So, shortening the list and condensing the facts (like the winter solstice stuff) will make things way more understandable.
  3. I don't know why this was under "Mayan/egyptian theories"!

     Interpreted by millennialists as a time when there will be an evolutionary change in human consciousness brought about by a series of world changing events or revelations. Following this period of upheaval they believe we will begin a new 1,000 year cycle in which peace, enlightenment and our environment take priority.

     If you check the Millenialist page, you'll find that their focus is not at all this year (hence the term millenialist, as in every thousand years, i.e. year 2000, maybe? I'm no expert on this, but does this make sense to the layman?) So, as stated above, it's not worth mentioning it here.
  4. Wow, big words!

     The predicted 2012 geomagnetic reversal of the Earth's poles (in conjunction with a solar-magnetic-reversal) brings into question the Schumann resonance of Earth and the human biophysical response to such an electromagnetic shift. It is believed that this "geomagnetic reversal" last occurred some 780,000 years ago, (approx. 3 cycles of the 26,000 year "precession of the according to this official FACT), but you sure need a remedial course on your maya calendar! A Bactun for the Long Count calendar is 144,000 days, which is roughly 394 gregorian years. But since you talk about thirteen bactuns, that means you're saying that between 1776 and 2012 there are 5,128 gregorian years!, which (gasp!) is not AT ALL equal to 260 mayan years. Thus, I'd recommend a math review along with that. (If you meant something else and just screwed up the baktuns and katuns,

  5. More egyptian stuff:

     Other pyramid theories based on Egyptian mythology estimate that the Giza pyramid complex will come into synchronous conjunction with the constelation Orion (which it was modeled after) on 21 December, 2012 at 11:11 UTC. Although this notion is incorrect, this date does include an alignment of the Sphinx's eastwardly gaze and the point at which the planet Uranus, symbolically the mythological Creator and father of the Titans, lies on the horizon. [3]Likewise, 21 December 11:11 UTC corresponds to an alignment of the southern-facing King's Chamber shaft of Khufu and the planets Mars and Pluto in the constellation Sagittarius, the archer. [4] Symbolically, these heavenly bodies represent war and the underworld (or transformation) respectively. Pluto takes a generation to pass through a single sign or constellation implying (on an astrological level) that the generation born in these times will witness war and transformation. [5]

     Some of external links are again for astronomical charts, but they do not explain anything about the conjunctions. If these actually will happen, show us someplace that they will, and how! Also, the pluto astrological symbolisms are unnecessary, simply because they don't inform us about egyptian meanings of the purported alignments (as far as I know).
  6. I had removed this before for lack of sources:

     Tibetan Monks specialising in remote viewing predict that divine extra-terrestrials will intervene at a point where the world's governments are about to deploy weapons of mass destruction. Adding to this, the Tibetan Monks say that the world is not ready to be destroyed and that our Earth is blessed and being saved continuously from all kinds of hazards that Mankind is not even aware of.[6]

     Now, I just wanted to put a little comment on this: OMG it's not BS??? Crazy India people and their wacky news!
  7. Pope stuff:

     The Prophecy of the Popes, attributed to Saint Malachy, speculated that the next pontiff would be from the Order of Saint Benedict or Gloria Olivae. In April 2005 former Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger was elected to the papalcy, later adopting the name Pope Benedict XVI and supposedly fulfilling this prophecy. Saint Malachy predicted that this Pope would reign during the beginning of the tribulation which Jesus spoke of and sometime before a future pope described in the prophecy as "Peter the Roman". According to St. Malachy, the 112th Pope's pontificate will end in the destruction of the city of Rome and the Last Judgement. [7]Pope Benedict XVI, the current Pope, is #111 in the list. He himself stated that his "pontificate will not be a long one" due to his age, and many have speculated that it is within reason that he could pass away before 2012. However since the doomsday Pope (Peter the Roman) is not assigned a number (we only say that it is the 112th Pope because it is the one after the 111th Pope), it is possible that the #111th Pope and Peter the Roman are the same person, which means that the lesser tribulation could begin within the pontificate of Pope Benedict XVI. [8]

     While most of this is true according to the external links, it doesn't need to be so long, only explaining about Pope Benedict XVI so much is of no need (And that's what the external links right after are there for).
  8. Apocalypse in the making?

     Plans to rebuild the Jewish holy Temple in Israel have been on the drawing board since June 2005. Predictions from the Book of Daniel depict what is refered to as the abomination of desolation, a restoration and then destruction of the Jewish Temple in Israel. This is related to the Prophecy of the Seventy Weeks. According to Daniel's predictions, "From the time that the daily sacrifice is abolished and the abomination that causes desolation is set up, there will be 1,290 days./ Blessed is the one who waits for and reaches the end of the 1,335 days." In total, this timespan is just 45 days short of the predicted 7 year tribulation of the Book of Revelations, locating the date sometime in the year 2012. [9]

     Sadly (for jewish and christian doomsdayers), no. There is no mention on the external news of the actual planned dates for beginning and ending the temple reconstruction, so from where did you assume you could count to get 2012? (Um, aren't 1,290 days 3.5 years? How did you calculate, really??) Also, isn't the Seventy Weeks prophecy already supposed to have happened? I suggest you check your math too, and your biblical history too (if you have time:).
  9. People have complained about the subtitles on the Apocalyptic (apocalyptic indeed... to fix, that is:) section, and after the changes mentioned above, I think that renders them useless (so less quarrelling for us all! Yay!).
  10. There are way too many external links for this and in fact for any kind of article in Wikipedia. Since some are intended plugs with nothing to do with 2012, and others are simply too short in their content of 2012 (again, there's already more than enough links for anyone's needs!), these being gone will shorten the list a lot. Still, I'll be leaving some links that are suspicious as of the veracity of their claims (like the Schumann resonance ones), so that people can make their own opinions about these, and can then do something about it if that's their feeling. (Check the page's history if you want to know which links I removed, they're too many to list here!)

Whew! That was a mouthful! I'll get busy making the changes now. As always, comments and suggestions (and help) are welcome, and keep the good work on Wikipedia up! Thank you! Kreachure 22:46, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

OK OK that's fine, but has anyone mentioned anything about the second coming being in 2012? A lot of people assumed that 2000 would be the year but it is quite possible that 2012 could be the actual year! What's a few years over a period of 2000? I don' believe anyone throughout the ages has ever been able to accuratley predict dates for various Bible prophecies. I have some thought on this issue which I will no doubt share at a later date. In the meantime, it would be interesting to have other comments on the subject.

[edit] Move "apocalyptic" content to new page?

I predict a sizable accumulation of material here...Perhaps it would be best to mention briefly that there are many predictions of apocalypse/transformation in 2012, and move the bulk of it to 2012 Apocalypse theories or somesuch. Dev1n 03:36, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

I don't think it is necessary yet, but if more material does appear, I think it would make sense. Avengerx 04:28, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

I strongly agree to make 2012 Apocalypse theory a separate lemma. Rob, the Netherlands

I disagree with the choice of title, the more scholarly works dont believe an apocalyptic scenario would happen - but that doesnt discount the period of turmoil as a result of geomagnetic reversal for instance... um lets say why not '2012 predictions' --86.8.240.91 17:29, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lisa Launch?

The article LISA claims the launch will be in 2015 or later, yet, this article claims it to be indefinite in 2012. Anyone know the correct date on that?

No. But I removed the reference. Grandmasterka 10:24, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Calendar

Elsewhere on Wikipedia, the weeks on calandars start on Sunday. On this page (and a few others), it starts on Monday. Why? I know consistency on Wikipedia is not considered important, but it does look strange. 209.197.136.185 15:55, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Miscellaneous

[edit] Questions

Are there any reports of creating space ships or portals (wormholes) to flee Earth in case something goes wrong?

Um... That would be a no. Grandmasterka 04:45, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Darn

Why isn't there a "March" in the month list? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.20.54.228 (talk) 11:29, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Probably because there are no scheduled events in March. If you can find a notable scheduled event, go ahead and add the month. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 14:28, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] New 2012 paper

There is a new paper out on 2012:

Robert K. Sitler (2006) The 2012 Phenomenon New Age Appropriation of an Ancient Mayan Calendar. Nova Religio. 9 (3). 24-38.

It helps resolve a lot of the issues about where the 2012 date sneaked into the New Age community (José Argüelles) and how reliable his calendar is (not very). I've extracted a few pertinent quotes [10] but it's well worth tracking down if you are interested in this topic. I doubt it'll slow the wave that will grow over the next 6 and a half years (2012 Terror?) but it is a refreshing take on this given the rest of the general output on his subject ;) (Emperor 03:36, 24 March 2006 (UTC)) I know!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.210.16.185 (talk) 20:34, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Singularity Timetable

• Singularity Timetable predicts a Technological Singularity to happen in 2012:
• 2006 -- True AI
• 2007 -- AI Landrush
• 2009 -- Human-Level AI
• 2011 -- Cybernetic Economy
• 2012 -- Superintelligent AI
• 2012 -- Joint Stewardship of Earth
• 2012 -- Technological Singularity

That's interesting... Human-level AI in three years? The robots I see still run into walls sometimes. This seems like just another product of the apocalyptic obsession with this year. Grandmasterka 05:26, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Research what you're talking about before you start blabbing, please. True AI would be able to improve and replicate itself. The idea behind the singularity is that the cycle of improvement speeds itself up until the speed becomes infinite, which would happen fast -- think of the old trick with the pennies and the chessboard (put one cent on the first tile, two on the next, four on the third, and so forth, doubling the amount every time).

It sounds unlikely and there are various physical restrictions (namely resources), but it's logically sound. -- 88.153.33.63 (talk) 19:40, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Tibetan monks

"It is claimed that unnamed Tibetan monks specialising in remote viewing predict that divine extra-terrestrials will intervene at a point where the world's govern..."

Indiadaily.com runs a lot of fictional stories (although it usually runs legit stories). Like this:

"Why did the type IV extraterrestrial civilization in Hyperspace orchestrate the artificial big bang in the massive particle collider?"

It's probably best to remove that entry.

[edit] Mexico as the ruler of the Universe

Do the Mayan prophecies consider Mexico as the next universal ruler?

In a word: no, the Mayan prophecies are about the end of an era (not the world) this end is thought as either an awakening or a destruction The Mayans could have never known about Mexico existing because central America had no countries at the time.

[edit] 2012 cleanup task III

Hello again, everyone! As usual, I'm here to take care of the craziness that often ensues around this particular year. Yes, I know you are all very concerned about what could or could not happen in this year. But even if you're just regular people looking forward to marvels in the future, or more 'peculiar' chaps with 'peculiar' predictions regarding this year, we can all agree this year will probably pop out more often than not the closer we get to it, due to its 'inflating coolness'. I sincerely hope this 'coolness' doesn't get out of hand. But if it does, that's what I'm here for!

My proposed conditions were already stated before, so if you disagree with anything I say and do here, please read them before you come at me.

So it continues!

• 1. I don't know who is the 'hilarious' guy or gal who decided to waste otherwise precious free time in numbering every single year with unimportant anniversaries and other things that happen every single year. Yes, anniversaries happen every year including 2012, and sports events like the Super Bowl happen every year too, but unless it's a really significant milestone (like, say, a hundred-year anniversary, or 75, or 50, but not "The 54th running of the Daytona 500!! Geez!), then take my word when I say nobody will care this year is the XLVI Super Bowl until it actually happens. Congratulations whomever you are, you wasted many hours of your life doing something both stupid and which nobody will ever care about. I do envy all that free time to tinker with every single year of this century, though.
  2. D'oh!

     *The long count will end in the Aztec calendar.

     While the Aztec and MAYAN calendars are similar in its influences and cultural connotations, the Long Count will end this year in the MAYAN CALENDAR, and (as far as I could find out) the Aztec calendar doesn't even have a Long Count, or anything similar that would indicate the end of a cycle in any year! If I'm wrong about this in any way (and I was wrong when I let this slip at the last cleanup, so sorry 'bout that!), then please, o experts of all things Aztec, correct and enlighten us with the exact mechanics of the Aztec calendar!
  3. Politics is sooooooo much fun...:

     By 2012, the USA government should guarantee full Health Insurance for all Americans, as urged by a non-partisan advisory panel created by Congress. [11]

     This actually talks about a recommendation to the US Congress about what that group claims should be done by 2012. Listen, I'm sure this proposal has its grounds and is probably important for those who would get covered by this and whatnot, but, come on, is it really so important to know the year this 'would' be happening? It's a recommendation, not something that has already passed and will surely be done! My point is that it's too early to know if this proposal will even pass to the US congress, and even earlier to know it will actually happen! I think I've said enough to make clear that, at least for now, this is not really worth mentioning here.
  4. The following is a sort of bodily function for modern alarmists: they have an uncontrollable urge to say "ancients TOTALLY KNEW the world would END!":

     The calendars of ancient Mesoamerica (Maya and Aztec) come to an end in 2012, at the time of the Winter Solstice (December 21). This can be interpreted as either the absolute end of the world, the beginning of a new and better age, or the shift of human consciousness to a higher level or existence.

     I can't stress this enough, and I hope I have to say it just once:

     THE MAYAN CALENDAR DOESN'T "END" ON DECEMBER 21, 2012. On that date a Long Count finishes, and that is pretty significant, but it doesn't just "stop" then, after that a new Long Count begins!!

     The nature of the Mayan calendar is better explained here. The mayans believed in life as a cycle, renewing every now and then for benefit of all. So saying their calendar ENDS anywhere is ignorance. I don't know how to put it more clearly without seriously questioning anyone's intelligence. Again, if you disagree with this, then you're probably an expert of some sort with reasons to believe otherwise, so feel free to rebuke.
  5. Sigh...

     2012 is the target date for everyone in India to have access to a toilet, putting an end to defecation in public.

     OMG. This would be a very, very crude joke, if it weren't that it's actually true [12] [13]. But... I don't really know what to say here. For me, as cruel as it might sound, this classifies as "Too much information" or "something I REALLY didn't need to know", but I still feel remorse of putting this out. I'm... sorry? Anyway, if ANYONE thinks this should stay here, I would understand, but I would also not comment anymore on this subject. Ever.
  6. More politics... yay.

     It is projected that by 2012 the state of Iowa could have as many as 200,000 more jobs than workers to fill them, which could lead to better wages and benefits. See USA Today, 03/20/2006.

     Again, I'm sure this is important for present and future workers in the state of Iowa, United States, but... seriously. It's just a projection. For ONE of the FIFTY+ states of ONE of the 190+ countries in the world. Do you think it's probable that someone coming here, even just one, will actually care about this? Because I don't think so. Sorry all you Iowans... Iowanites...Iowies... oh whatever, who cares!!!!
  7. Alright, alright. I'll take this off...:

     It is claimed that unnamed Tibetan monks specializing in remote viewing predict that divine extra-terrestrials will intervene at a point where the world's governments are about to deploy weapons of mass destruction. Adding to this, the Tibetan Monks say that the world is not ready to be destroyed and that our Earth is blessed and being saved continuously from all kinds of hazards of which mankind is not even aware.[14]

     I really thought this had some serious journalism behind it, but the "Tibetan Monks" comment above does make a strong point. Crazy India people and their wacky news.
  8. I had already taken this out!!!:

     The Reverend Dr. Sun Myung Moon from Korea, has proclaimed 2012 as the ending and final fulfilling stage of mankind's long seeking quest for an absolute Sinless World.[external link to one of the thousand pages with esoteric references to 2012].

     Yes, this is one of the thousand claims of something transcendental happening in 2012, but that's exactly the point of what I'm doing here! There's way too many of this in the Internet and elsewhere, and Wikipedia is definitely not the place to put it as well! PLEASE stop putting claims and links like this one, and you'll be making mine and all other contributors' jobs a lot easier! Thanks!
  9. Bible code jargon follows:

     A hidden code found within the Torah through the computation of equidistant letters sequences shows signs of a comet within this year producing one of two outcomes: Either hitting and destroying the Earth, or crumbling into pieces. The two codes are found very close to each other within the Torah, and through the use of mathematical shortcut matrices, can be pieced together accordingly. These two statements are, "Comet...5772 [2012 according to the Gregorian calendar]...Earth Annihilated" and "Comet...It Will Be Crumbled, I Will Tear It To Pieces...5772 [2012 according to the Gregorian calendar]."

     This was already adressed with more clarity and support before in a Bible code comment, but this person decided to rant on about the subject, which resulted in this poorly constructed comment. You didn't even worry about putting a supporting link, or anything! Until someone decides to link properly to an explanatory page where this exact premise of the Bible code is explained, I will revert this to a comment with a link to the Bible code page, which has plenty of external links to find this out.
  10. I have to give it to ya, I'd never heard of this one before:

      The supposed time traveller John Titor predicts some unusual events in 2012, but nothing like the end of the world : his comments are more about something like the Red Sea passage.

      I have no idea how this John Titor guy and his crazy forum posts got a pretty long article on Wikipedia. But as I said before, this isn't the place to argue about the credibility of theories like this. The fact remains that it's just a very brief mention of the year 2012 he makes, and it's not even about the apocalypse or anything similar, so it's not worth mentioning here, in my opinion. Anyone disagree?
  11. I won't complain about there being just one external link, to a strictly-2012-related site for that matter, because I'm sure it will fill up again with many others in time. And of course I'll be there when that happens to make sure they're actually helpful.

Whew! Now I'll get to the actual changes, and as always, any comment or suggestion is welcome. Keep working on Wikipedia, everyone! Thank you! Kreachure 21:14, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rewrite of Maya Long Count info

I've rewritten the Dec 21 entry (period-ending in Maya Long Count calendar), removing the more egrarious New Age/Arguelles-inspired misconceptions and attempted to separate out and make clear the differences between scholarly and speculative (re-)interpretations. The John Major Jenkins theories (concerning solstices and equinoctal processions) I've omitted as non-standard / minority interpretation. If specific references are required would be happy to supply them, but they are also reflected/mentioned in the Maya calendar article itself.

I also took out the reference to the Aztec calendar, as there are in fact no observances of mesoamerican long count-style calendrics in the documentation of this postclassic culture. Also added in Dec 23 as the other correlated date for this event, still supported by some in the field.--cjllw | TALK 02:54, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cleanup task 3.01

Hi, again. In a few words, I'm speechless. As of today, the page is in excellent conditions, better than I last left it. I only had to take out a few things that aren't even worth mentioning. I wish the article remained this healthy! Kreachure 15:22, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

this is sopposed to be the end or the begining of a new era according to the mayan calendar. Its Dec 21 2012 and from another source and Group its april-22-2012

[edit] Copyright Issue

I just found the following paragraph on the Armageddon Online site:

"December 21 - The Long Count calendar used by the Maya civilization of pre-Columbian Mesoamerica completes its thirteenth b'ak'tunb'ak'tun date of this starting point (13.0.0.0.0.0) is repeated, for the first time in a span of approximately 5,125 solar years. The significance of this period-ending to the pre-Columbian Maya themselves is unclear, and there is an incomplete inscription (Tortuguero Stela 6) which records this date. It is also to be found carved on the walls of the Temple of Inscriptions in Palenque, where it functions as a base date from which other dates are computed. However, it is conjectured that this may represent in the Maya belief system a transition from the current Creation world into the next. The December solstice for 2012 also occurs on this day."

It appears to be a word-for-word duplicate of the language used in the December 21 reference in this Wikipedia article. The Armageddon Online site has a copyright citation at the bottom of their page. However, I have no way of determining if the text originated on that site or on Wikipedia but, either way, there appears to be a copyright issue here. Joekoz451 04:35, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

I am the author of the passage quoted above, which I added to wikipedia in this edit. It was not taken from anywhere else. The Armegeddon site merely mirrors wikipedia content of articles it finds 'relevant', and indeed the entire content of that page reproduces the wikipedia original at some earlier point in time. So if there's any concern over copyvio, it would rather be the other way around- although they do provide text links to this 2012 article and wikipedia copyrights policy.--cjllw | TALK 12:12, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Canes Venatici "discovery"?

This article includes the reference: "On December 23, 1986, Dr. Jason Malcolm discovered Canes Venatici at Lowell Observatory in Flagstaff, Arizona."

I'm not sure what this is supposed to say, but as it's written, it makes no sense - Canes Venatici is a constellation in the northern hemisphere, so designated in the 17th century by Hevelius. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lsibley (talk • contribs) 06:36, 18 February 2007 (UTC).

"Canes Venatici"? surely we're doomed!

[edit] AFI?

I think this little section is a victim of hype. Alot of different sources have presented a plethora (sp?) of different theories about the event of this year. However, as an AFI fan, i believe it is more likely that the reference to December 21st in the song title Prelude 12/21 is in reference to the winter solstice, in correlation to the whole "wintery" theme of the Decemberunderground album. Also, whoever wrote the article actually misspelled "referring". I changed it.

20:49, 20 May 2007 (EST) ---Geo (i dont remember my login, so i corrected as a guest)

[edit] Heroes "Five Years Gone" episode

Should there be a mention of the alternate furute episode of Heroes on this page? Or on the 2011 page? 68.237.192.47 03:37, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

It'd be a lot more fucking noteworthy than the asston of text on the end of the world, or whatever —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.254.70.119 (talk) 10:03, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 2012 cleanup task IV

Hello again, all! I'd said about 6 months ago that I hoped this page would remain as healthy as it was half a year ago... while it has improved in certain aspects, some others have forced me to do this cleanup once more.

Again: I've already stated the conditions I use to keep this particular article healthy and kook-free. If you want to argue my contributions, then please read my previous cleanup posts here and then we'll talk.

Since I'm certainly not the only one who has noticed the metaphysical fascination of this year, I believe this article needs a little extra effort to keep it within encyclopedic standards, and not chock-full of eccentric and outrageous claims about the future instead. If this year is indeed important in the future, then it's important as well to keep our heads grounded and try our best to separate the wheat from the chaff in order to understand better what's truly in store for us 5 years from now.

So it continues.

1. Terrence McKenna's entry was butchered by some dude who wanted to draw attention to his page:

   Terence McKenna's mathematical novelty theory suggests a point of singularity in which a great number of things could happen, including "hyperspatial breakthrough", planetesimal impact, alien contact, historical metamorphosis, metamorphosis of natural law, solar explosion, quasar ignition at the galactic core, or nothing. [15]

   All of this nonsense, of course, has nothing to do with McKenna's theory, and neither does the webpage which elaborates on the aformentioned nonsense.
   
   
2. This new age mention needs sources.

   Many new age spiritualists and philosophers ("new-agers") believe humankind will enter an age of enlightenment in 2012. There are a range of varying, generally positive, beliefs shared by a subset of spiritualists from the mundane to exceptional — including a positive social shift and age of peace, mankind becoming psychic and connected by a collective, and/or an evolution of the human race into non-corporeal beings made of "spiritual" energy, or light energy, i.e. 'ascension'.

   While the new age movement does indeed speak of spiritual transformations 'when the time comes' (hence the name), if there are no sources indicating who exactly are those "many" or on what exactly are these "many" basing their beliefs, then I must dismiss this as yet another wishful attachment to the increasing coolness of 2012.
   
   
3. And if I intend to dismiss the last one, I sure won't hold back on this next one!:

   Some alien-enthusiasts (e.g. Riley Martin), along with some new-agers, believe 2012 to correspond approximately with the return of alien "watchers" or "caretakers" who might have helped the first human civilizations with developing their technology and may have been waiting for us to reach a higher level of technological and/or social advancement. Beliefs range from the extra-terrestrials having benevolent purposes — such as to help human society evolve — to malevolent purposes — such as enslavement of mankind and/or manipulation.^{[citation needed]}

   Listen, I'm sure there are many "alien enthusiasts" who think things like these, but that doesn't mean that we're gonna start putting generalized beliefs about aliens just because everyone thinks similarly about this subject without any factual justification about these beliefs. If there are no tangible sources about "extraterrestrial activity converging in the year 2012" stated (and trust me, there are thousands of pages relating to this subject in many books in your local new age store), then this simply cannot be accepted as encyclopedic!
   
   
4. According to Ram Bahadur Bomjon's page, he didn't return on 2012 as he prophecized, but instead, um... 9 months later. Then he left again three months later. Then they found him again 20 days later. Hmm. Anyways, since he voided his own prophecy and has made intermittent appearances since then, it's now pretty worthless to mention him here.
   
   
5. And this next one doesn't even try:

   There is a Hindu following indicating the appearance of an Avatar (God in human form) with God-like powers who will herald a new age. An interesting website to this effect appears at End of the World 2012.

   Oh, an interesting website, you say! How convenient! Specially since all this gibberish originates from this page exclusively! Also, I didn't know the term "Hindu following" is now used to refer to a single person with a lonely webpage! Shameless plug: instantly deleted.
   
   
6. And now, for something (apparently) more serious. The extensive (at least for this article) entry called "astrological predictions" (although there's only this one) talks about an astronomical alignment of the Galactic center with the "open cluster of the Pleiades". Well, sounds intriguing so far. But then, it states that this alignment won't happen, because it's impossible. (...) So why the hells do you put it if you already know that it's wrong?? Seriously, there's even the unverified sources template on top of it, meaning that even this "invalidation of a non-prediction" is unsourced! SO WHY BOTHER AT ALL!!! Geez, sometimes I think you're just trying to be mean to this poor article...
   
   
7. Finally a comment: I'm intrigued by the amount of mentions in the music subsection. I can't say the songs mentioned talk about 2012 or not, but it appears from here that they do, so I don't dare to touch these just yet. I'm sure some others may check out the bands and the lyrics to the songs to prove this, but I'm certainly pleased that there are people singing songs about 2012 (if indeed they are, even if they're bands that still don't have more than two fans coming over to their concerts at their parents' garage). Thus I say: Rock on! Spread the 2012 coolness around, why wontcha!

As always, opinions and help are appreciated. Let's all keep working hard on Wikipedia! Kreachure 00:15, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Re #6 above, I think that the 'galactic centre alignment' part is a somewhat mangled portrayal of a theory put forward by John Major Jenkins, who contends that the Maya purposefully designed the Long Count calendar so that its 'end-date' would coincide with the alignment of the sun's path at the Dec. solstice with the galactic equator/centre; see his site summarising his claims. There's a bit more involved to it than that, and the part denying the alignment can happen is the relic of an editor's attempt to counter the theory. Although JMJ's ideas have generally little support or consideration in Mayanist scholarship, it would not be accurate to describe them as 'astrology' per se, and he's probably regarded as the most rigorous and least cranky of the alternative theorists. Maybe his ideas could be redocumented here as a notable alternative explanation for the significance of 2012 to the Long Count calendar, but then again his alignment really occurs in a 'window' stretching from 1980 - 2016....--cjllw ʘ TALK 04:59, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Re #1, that was in fact McKenna's personal site (and is now de facto his legacy site), and he did actually compile that rather arbitrary list of possibilities. Mporter 06:29, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] I Believe the date may be in error

I heard about the 2012 date, did some research and though I am far from being an expert in anything much less this I think I found something that invalidates the 12/21/2012 date.

The calculation that lead to the end date were based on the Mayan month calendar with 18 months of 20 days each for a total of 360 days. The end of the current age is supposed to happen 5,200 years after August 11, 3114 B.C. They multiplied 5,200 by 360 to arrive at a total number of days for the age, then using that number calculated the end date to be December 21, 2012.

However the Mayans also had a solar calendar that has the same month structure as the month calendar but includes an additional 5 days to correct the solar year error. This gives a total of 365 days in the year and not just 360. That discrepancy alone makes the original calculation in error by over 25,000 days.

We calculate the year at 365.25 days and I don't believe the Mayans would have known about the necessity of the quarter day per year to keep the calendars accurate. If we make the calculations using the 365.25 day year versus the 360 day year, the end date for the current age becomes September 19, 2087. To further bolster my position on this, the Mayans talked about the number of years from start to finish of the current age not the number of days. If we apply just that then 5,200 years from the start year of 3114 B.C. gives us an end year of 2086.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Msackett (talk • contribs) 15 August 2007.

Hi Msackett. The Maya had a number of different calendar systems, pls review Maya calendar article. You seem to be confusing several of these. The (approximation of a) "solar year calendar", the haab' of 365 days, is actually the one made of 18 'months' of 20 days each, plus an additional 5 days ([18 x 20] + 5 = 365). While the Maya did fully appreciate that this only approximated the solar year, they never saw fit to amend this calendar, but instead used other methods to more accurately track the seasonal cycles, for crop planting etc.

However, the haab' cycle has nothing to do with the 2012 date. This date comes from the Long Count calendar, which essentially expresses a linear number of days elapsed since a starting point (equiv to Aug 11, 3114BCE (gregorian) by the GMT-correlation). The so-called 'end date' is reached after 13 b'ak'tun cycles of 144,000 days each, ie 13 x 144000 = 1,872,000 days, or a little over 5125 solar years. When you add that to the starting point, that's how you end up at Dec 21, 2012.

I'm not sure from the above what you consider the "Maya year" to be, but for Long Count purposes the Maya did not work in 'years', but rather various combination cycles of days, when you get down to it. It's invalid to multiply "our" years by their cycles to arrive at an answer, as your calcs seem to do. Also don't see where you get 5200 years from. In any case, it would be original research to include your own analysis of it.--cjllw ʘ TALK 03:44, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Added text

I've added a textual note and link to an interview I did which debunk the New Age claim that the Mayans have a special prophecy about 2012 (and I count myself as a New Ager). The Mayan priests in Guatemala whom I've asked about this are aware that there is a so-called Mayan prophecy for 2012 because they read the papers and watch TV, but they've asked ME what I know about the thing, since they have no knowledge of it themselves (it's not part of their culture). The Chol Qij (260 day almanac) and Haab (365 day count - or at least the last 5 days of same) do indeed have mantic significance; but the long count in which the December 21, 2012 change occurs does not. En passant, the so-called Propheteers such as Arguelles aren't even doing the calculations correctly; as far as I know none of them have even set foot in Guatemala, know the language, the culture, or anything else about the Mayans. The Mayans themselves tend to resent this sort of usurpation of their cultural traditions (though I've tried to tell them they should be flattered by it). BobMak 17:52, 23 August 2007 (UTC) BobMak

[edit] Metaphysical Predictions

I am removing the following: "* The Prophecy of the Popes, attributed to Saint Malachy, speculated that Pope Benedict XVI would reign during the beginning of the tribulation of which Jesus spoke, and sometime later a future pope described in the prophecy as "Peter the Roman", the last in this prophetic list, would appear, bringing as a result the destruction of the city of Rome and the Last Judgment," because there is NO indication in said Prophecy of the Popes that gives any indication of dates, as far as I can see, not to mention the spurious nature of the "Peter the Roman" reference. Zerobot 05:30, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Eros Orbital Calculation

Has anyone done or heard of calculations done on the Eros orbit around the sun and where it will cross Earth's orbit on the way back? What if our encounter with Eros slows or alters its path around the sun? Could this be the cause of the proposed impact on the 21st of December? Any articles related to this? (Never74 22:12, 20 September 2007 (UTC)never74)

If you mean the asteroid 433 Eros, no-one (credible) is calculating an 'impact', either on 21 Dec 2012 or any other date. If you've seen something along those lines, I think that its coinciding with the Long Count calendar "end date" is a glaring red flag that there's pure hokum behind the claim. In fact, its closest Earth approach is worked out to be on Jan 31 2012, see this listing of near-Earth objects provided by NASA. The asteroid's article here spells it out.

If the source is claiming "but what if something changes its orbit", that would be no more than idle speculation; 'what ifs' can lead to any outcome you want them to.--cjllw ʘ TALK 00:01, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi. Well, if you rotate around the 3-D image from NASA, you can make almost any object's orbit seem to cross Earth's. Also, if I remember correctly, Eros is not expected to collide with Earth any time soon. We also don't need what-ifs, as Wikipedia is not a crystal ball and we do not need speculation. Thanks. ~AH1^(TCU) 20:53, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The wind of charged particles from the galactic core

You know about how the solar wind generates aurora borealis and aurora australis.

The wind of charged particles from the galactic core converging with this solar system in 2012 is similar to the solar wind, it just originates from the galactic core, not from the sun. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.109.238.94 (talk) 20:30, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

What does this have to do with the article? — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 22:31, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Actually, a quick google suggests that the "galactic wind" mostly comes from the hot stars throughout the galaxy. The core emits a lot for its size but it does not in any way dominate the interstellar flux. If a star actually falls into the central black hole, or if you get a wave of novas among the stars crowding around it - then you'll get a significant burst from the core. Mporter 11:20, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

The galactic wind of charged particles is an electrodynamic hurricane revolving around the galactic core. The sun is always absorbing energy from this galactic wind, but in 2012 the wind is going to reach a peak of intensity.--83.108.99.161 14:44, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

If you say so. But do you have any evidence or even any argument for this? There will be a solar maximum around 2012. That ought to strengthen the wind from our own sun and thus keep the interstellar wind further away.

You may be better off taking your theories to this list[16].Mporter 04:02, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Are you sure that the sun gets all its energy from thermonuclear fusion? Maybe some of the sun's energy is obtained from a galactic birkeland current? If so, then perhaps the long count of the Maya calendar records cyclical changes in the sun's energy output.--Zanthius (talk) 15:06, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

The galactic magnetic field is extremely weak.[17] Also, the field lines follow the spiral arms[18], whereas the sun's orbit cuts across the arms. Mporter (talk) 12:07, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Have you read about the electric sun hypothesis? http://www.electric-cosmos.org/sun.htm If the sun indeed is increasing its energy output, then perhaps global warming is not just happening because of the greenhouse effect.--Zanthius (talk) 14:16, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Titanic Anniversory not notable?

I noticed that the 100th anniversary of the Titanic sinking is not included in the events for 2012 list. I went to add it, only to discover a comment saying not to add it as it was not a notable anniversary. This makes no sense to me. How can the 100th anniversary of the most widely known maritime disaster not qualify as notable? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.18.30.114 (talk) 00:31, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

If you're talking about my comment regarding anniversaries (which as far as I can see is the only comment here about anniversaries), read it again. I specifically said 100-year (as well as 75, 50, etc.) anniversaries are indeed notable, and should be put in a year article. But that's just my opinion, Be Bold! Kreachure (talk) 01:06, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

The guideline seems to be that future anniversaries should only be listed if there are present plans for observance. I can't find the appropriate Wikiproject, but that seems to be consensus. Perhaps Wikipedia Talk:WikiProject Years would be an appropriate discussion area. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 01:29, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fenway Anniversary has to get its due too.

I added the 100th anniversary of the opening of Fenway Park. On the 100th anniversary of the Titanic I am sure there will be some notable memorials. a dropping of a wreath into the water sort of thing. The Fenway Park 100th will blow the the doors off that for notability. The owners have already said they are making major renovations to the park culminating in the 100th anniversary celebration.MBCF (talk) 19:59, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] January 1st

End of incandescent bulbs in the USA < seems worthy of noting that incandescent bulb will be effectively illegal for sale —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.24.119.52 (talk)

It would be notable, if it were accurate. It seems not to be, as CA's law doesn't take effect until later. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 08:26, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

By effectively it is meant that they will not longer meet the efficiency standards for legal sale: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/22/business/22light.html?_r=4&ex=1356152400&en=a3bd3c90eb102844&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=slogin —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.60.41.233 (talk) 01:44, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry here is a better link: http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/energy/environment/2007-12-16-light-bulbs_N.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.60.41.233 (talk) 01:48, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Cleanup task 4.3

Hello again, peoples! I'm glad to see the article in good shape again. I just had to remove a few annoyances I had already removed before, is all. Is it that the Wikipedia community is getting smarter by the day, now taking proper care of this article? Or is there just the semi-protection to blame? (Could be both, right?) I just hope no more serious protection is needed to keep the article humbug-free and clean like a breeze!

The time for truth draws near! Isn't that fun?

See you beyond!

Kreachure (talk) 01:37, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fenway Park Anniversary

Hopefully it won't be deleted, (it probably will be edited, and if so, fine by me) but it is an important milestone for American sporting venues. --Qazox (talk) 06:35, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Not notable, IMHO. As has been said many times in, the convention is that anniversaries should only be listed if there are present plans for celebration. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 08:38, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Understand completely. If and when there are confirmed plans for a celebration, I'll repost it here. (Thanks for not completely making me look foolish ;) --Qazox (talk) 05:11, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Oops, added my comment to the Titanic anniversary a few paragraphs above. I think it is clear that the owners of the Red Sox have already started laying the groundwork for a grand celebration on April 22, 2012. To quote them:

"We fully expect as a result of this formal commitment, this public declaration, that we will, in the year 2012, celebrate in a grand fashion the 100th anniversary of Fenway Park, the centennial of Fenway Park, the first time ever a baseball park will have celebrated a 100th anniversary insofar as we know," said Lucchino. (Luchino is not overstating with the demise of Detroit Stadium Fenway Park is the oldest and will be the only Park celebrating a centennial for many many years to come.)MBCF (talk) 19:59, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Intro

I think the intro section warrants a mention of all of the end-time/metaphysical phrophecies associated with 2012. Any thoughts? Sethie (talk) 18:43, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

No, the intro does not need something of that sort. A brief summary farther down in the article should be okay, but we don't want any Undue weight nor fringe theories in the article, especially in the intro for a year article. Thanks. ~AH1^(TCU) 20:50, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Link to Tolkien Wiki page

I just joined so I don't want to do any actual editing myself, but I followed Tolkien Notion Club link and that page says that the papers were discovered in 2002. I've never read that story so I have no idea which Wiki page is correct. Dgpg (talk) 18:36, 9 April 2008 (UTC)dgpg

[edit] 2012 in other calendars

2012 in the "Arvisura" (legend collection of the sumeer-scytha-hungarian ancient chronicles, "Arvisura" is cca "Truthful Speech") is 6053. "medvetoros év" ("year of bear's thorax"). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.21.20.30 (talk) 18:42, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Eastern Orthodox Easter Date

I can't seem to figure out how to edit the page. Eastern Orthodox Christians use the Julian rather than the Gregorian calendar to calculate the date of Easter (Pascha) and it differs in 2012, being on April 15 rather than April 12. The Eastern Orthodox Church is the second largest of all Christian churches and so this date should be added if we are also to include the date of the Western Easter. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ilion301 (talk • contribs) 16:20, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 7 reasons the world will end in 2012

7 reasons the world will end in 2012, basically what they have is seven proven facts that the world might end in 2012, should these facts be noted in the article? Androo123 (talk) 19:28, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Hard to tell in this medium whether you're being serious, or sarcastic. Either way, the answer would be no. --cjllw ʘ TALK 05:04, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

No. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Net neutrality (talk • contribs) 19:46, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi. I would say no, the website is a forum/blog, and does not cite sources and is not reliable. Besides, be might already have some of the information here and in seperate articles (eg. metaphysical predictions), but other than that it does not deserve any more than a brief mention. This is a significant claim, which means we will need a significant and reliable source other than this one for something like this. Thanks. ~AH1^(TCU) 20:47, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

If you search at amazon.com for books about 2012, you will find A LOT of books predicting an apocalypse in 2012, and VERY FEW of them are mentioned in the "metaphysical predictions" section. http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_gw?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=2012 --Zanthius (talk) 17:40, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

LOL. This page about "7 reasons the world will end" is awesome... but not encyclopedic at all, with no reference and making obviously unrelated claims (the world will end in a human-created black hole or because of a super-volcano?) By the way, the LHC won't create a black hole : it is weaker than the cosmic radiations hitting our planet every single day. Thanks anyway for the good laught.Kromsson (talk) 18:12, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Not that I don't believe you, but it says that it might be a possibility in the wikipedia article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_Hadron_Collider#Micro_black_holes --Zanthius (talk) 22:23, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, intersting discussion... But still, the first experiments will begin sooner than 2012, so there is no link to the other doomsday prediction. (and I let you know about this, my country will be at the frontline in case of human-created black hole.) Kromsson (talk) 23:25, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Of course the Large Hadron Collider isn't what is going to cause the apocalypse. Computers connected on the Internet like neurons in a brain. The awakening of the global brain, that is what the new world of the Maya calendar is all about. --Zanthius (talk) 00:27, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] bewerken

Why do all the section edit links say "bewerken" instead of "edit"? — DeFender1031 08:03, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Please check your language preferences.... Could be a subtle vandal at the system level, but I don't think so. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 12:11, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The end of the internet

http://www.infowars.com/?p=2640 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.182.132.199 (talk) 00:08, 13 June 2008 (UTC)