Debate The Mayan Prophecy of the end of the world

Is it held with truth that we shall end our reign upon this planet on the date of December 22, 2012 as held by the Mayans or is this a ridiculous assumption only worthy of derision?

 

As always, I think nothing of such a prophecy. They've been wrong before, and by what may or may not have been coincidence, they've been right, but never about anything really big or concrete.
Nostradamus, for example, predicted the world would end, what, three times? And just a couple years back, there were some who said the world was going to end in 2000. One guy I knew had even picked a date.
I'm going to go with Fred Durst on this one and say "no use in dreadin' what they call Armageddon. I think we made it through the slump. But who really cares where we're headin', 'cause now you mother****ers got a reason to jump!"

Anyway, could we have some more details about this supposed prophecy? Such things intrigue me.

 

The startingly accurate Mayan calander ends at the date specified.

That's about all I know, and I havent heard any thing besides that quoted.

 

According to the Mayan Calendar we are in the 13th Baktun cycle or the final cycle on the Mayan calendar which lasts from 1618-2012 AD and is characterized as a time where humanity loses its association and understanding with nature and we are more concerned with materialism then the consequences of our actions. On that date the mayans believed that our incoherence toward nature and inclination toward extravagance and waste would be remunerated in that the very materials that we so rely on to carry the sustenance of our lives would fall astray from its concurrence to us. The dog would attack its master, the materials would no longer be in adherence to our will, the very fabric of our society that controls the reins of our pleasure would fail and destroy us.

 

Oh, is THAT all? I thought it would be something serious. Call me an optimist, but I don't think the world's going to be ending any time soon, at least not without the help of a few world leaders I can name. Really, if the Mayans could have predicted the end of the world, don't you think they could have predicted and prevented their own demise?

 

It is completely and utterly impossible for the world to end. Sure, the lack of Neutrality could tear the whole universe to pieces, but that is not what I am reading. It's impossible for human beings to predict the future, for it has not happened yet. The future is not accessible, nor is the past. I do believe that there is a chance that this is true, but that chance is very, very small.

You DO know the Mayans were incessantly high. Yes, we are going to believe some dope-fiended society about the end of the world.


SomberQuotient, Misao's friend

>>yah I didnt write that....my friend did...dunt he sound so smart!? lol

 

Predictions of the future could be inherently apart of every one of us. Humanity may possess the ability to do much more than meets the eye, it is said that we do not use more than a small percentage of our brain, although it can also be argued that alot of that goes to involuntary actions that runs the maintenance and amelioration of our body. It could be conceived that some people may possess an innate knowledge of that which cannot be seen by the naked eye, catching subconsciously the hidden and subtle motions that forshadow the ensuing and progressive actions of the future. My reasoning is that with such a small percentage of our brain only being used at once, there is reason to say that it is conceivable that some may be able to do what the average person can only see as impossible because of their greater ability to control the intricacies of the brain.


The mayans were brilliant astronomers, to postulate that their accurate deductions regarding astronomy came about in that way is not in every manner of utmost candor. It is of a factitious nature to say that the mayans were a civilization that adulated and esteemed the lotus blossom above all else, but rather the drugs were used to reach a transcending state from which to become closer to the gods that they held in faith to, not in the observatory of the sage.

 

I must add that you are guilty of a debate tactic fallacy, namely that of "you cant disprove what I'm saying, therefore I am right".

For example, I have no evidence that there are not massive gyroscopic machines created by gnomes making the continents move, but that doesn't mean those gnomes exist.

For all we knew the other 90% of the brain is composed of redundant backup systems.

However, I'm getting off-topic.

 

true that was an unnecessary statement, it has been removed.

 

Astronomers they may have been, but I defy you to show me how being able to figure out that the Earth revolves around the sun gives you the ability to see the end of the world coming.
Whether or not they were stoned out of their minds constantly is irrelevent.
Is it not possible that their calendar ends because they just didn't want to continue it any more, or due to an error of some kind, Y2K style? I mean, how many business got screwed because September 9, 1999 wasn't compatible with their database? And how many computers couldn't wrap their logic stuff around the fact that there could be more than one year ending in two zeros? Maybe the Mayans just omitted something? That's a possibility too.

 

You know what else is a possibility?

Might I point out Galileo? The man that was forced to a trial Inquisition and found guilty of heresy because he proclaimed that, HEAVEN FORBID! The Sun is the center of the universe! Now, this concept may be just silly to all you here intellectual-like peoples, but did y'all e'er t'ink 'dat maybe... ohhhh, I don't know... we could be completely obnoxious, self-centered and ignorant of the possibilities, thus blowing them off and, Hell, we'll find out just how wrong we are later?

I'm not saying that all this **** is true... this is just a thought for all you peoples that I thought I'd throw out there.

 

Verifiable scientific theories are a wee bit more believable than prophecies that arise because a calender ends.



Sort of like how a corvette is just a little faster than a tricycle being driven by a one legged child with downs.

 

First off, what does the Inquisition have to do with ANYTHING?
We're logically assessing the situation, here. Not just jumping to conclusions and saying that the world's never going to come crashing to a sudden and horrible end. Look around you. The world is not as it should be, no doubt about that. But what possible conclusive evidence could you have supporting a claim that the world is going to just suddenly cease to exist and everything's going to come crashing down in an instant?
Yes, I consider myself some kind of academic. I wouldn't still be in school if I wasn't. That doesn't make me close-minded. That doesn't make me ignorant of the real world. That doesn't mean that I'm locked up in some ivory tower with books and papers studying while the world crumbles around me. I'll tell you what. When you can give me ONE POINT that shows that the world MAY POSSIBLY end some time soon, I will consider this hypothesis.

 

What about the blind, deaf, dumb kid that could play pinball? I bet he can kick yo' *** any day of the week! And what does a corvette have to do with anything? You're confusing me!

Anyways...

It's still the basic principle. It's the dismissal of the IDEAS of other people because we just flat-out think its silly or we refuse to look at it as they look upon it. Although, yes, the fact that one was science related and the other is a prophecy, in the end it's really all the same, coming down to fact that they haven't proven enough to us over our beliefs and the likes to convince us otherwise. Same basic principle. And, hooey, I just nearly typed "principal". Just thought I'd tell you all.



And Novus, chum, tell you what. Show me one undeniable fact that the world will NOT come to a complete end upon given date.

 

But there are no universal moral standards, no universal preferences.

I refer you to this.

You can't just say "you cant disprove me, hence I am right". You have to prove yourself.

 

Let me tell you a little something about debates. When you enter a debate, argument or any other type of persuasive conversation, it is your job as the arguer to convince the opposing side that you are right. As such, when someone asks you a question, you don't answer with a question. If someone asks you to prove a point, you don't ask them to prove it wrong. That would result in people just spouting off bullshit because they wouldn't have to have any proof to anything they say. Does that make sense to you? It certainly does to me.
So, if you follow that, then you'll get this. There's a saying among physics types that a body in motion stays in motion, according to Newton's Laws of Motion. This can be extended to other, non-scientific stuff in general with the expression "things tend to keep doing what they have been doing". Basically, without some kind of external force to disrupt the current equilibrium, it will not change.
To apply this to the current debate, unless something shows up to destroy the world, it will not destroy itself.

 

So, let me get this straight...

Because I'm the one that was questioning the fact that it MIGHT be true, I need proof while, since YOU are saying that it's NOT true, you don't need to do anything but say "Well, Hell.. Y2K was a big let down"?

Makes sense to be...

By the way, chum, what happened to "If you have a problem with me, take it to PM", hm?

Boy, talk about them hypocrites.

Remember, chum...

"And if you have a problem with me, don't waste people's time posting messages. PM me. Have some tact."

Thank you and good night.

 

Know what? The floor might consume me tomorrow morning as I get out of bed due to a random quantum fluctuation.

It might transform into flesh! A GIANT MOUTH, HERE TO CONSUME ME AS I GROGGILY ROLL OUT OF BED!

And why should I fear? BECAUSE I CANT DISPROVE IT WILL HAPPEN!!!! AAAAAAAAGH!

C'mon.

 

Okay, if I seem like a hypocrite, forgive me, but I have PM'ed you TWICE TONIGHT ALONE.
Your problems also seem to be purely with the first half of my post. You asked for something that would say that the world wouldn't end, and I gave you law related to theory. There's no other proof I can give you. I can't predict the future or anything.
If you want to believe that the world may suddenly end out of the blue, fine, you go ahead. But when everything keeps going as it has all along, fine, I'll just sit here, EXISTING. Go fear for your soul because an ancient society thought the world might end. Go make yourself a bomb shelter, because maybe that'll help you. Buy a generator. Start hoarding food stores. Stockpile every little thing you can get your hands on. Whatever.

 

Hey someone's gotta stick up for the little guy.

And don't think I'll let any of you stay in my bomb-shelter when the Grim Reaper comes knocking at your doors! (or in my case, stepping on my cardboard box).

Buuuut, I was just making a point... why prove my point if he can't prove his? (Even though it's really not my point. I honestly don't believe we're all doomed that day... maybe the day after when everyone who believed it gets pissed that it didn't happen and decide to go on a mass, genocidal killing spree and destroy us all! Then, yeah, I guess we're all kinda ****ed there. But like I said, someone's gotta stick up for a little guy... just never claimed I'd do a good job of it. )