Mayan predictions

  • Thread starter jreelawg
  • Start date
  • #26
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,260
310
Actually, I think it is more to the point to say the Mayans made no predictions (of the type being discussed here) at all! No need to quibble over whether being right once was lucky - they never played the game being attributed to them!

I don't know enough about it to have an opinion, but we'll go with that for now unless someone has evidence to the contrary.
 
  • #27
Chronos
Science Advisor
Gold Member
11,408
742
Just as an aside, the 2012 prediction is not scientifically meaningful. The alignment of the sun with the galactic center is a line of sight event with earth. To assign it any causal affect implies the earth has a priveledged position.
 
  • #28
D H
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Insights Author
15,393
686
Just as an aside, the 2012 prediction is not scientifically meaningful. The alignment of the sun with the galactic center is a line of sight event with earth. To assign it any causal affect implies the earth has a priveledged position.
Correct. From a galactic point of view, the solar system is nowhere near the galactic plane; we are currently about 26 parsecs from it. (See http://arxiv.org/abs/0903.4206.) Crossing the galactic plane may have caused some of the mass extinctions in the past. Fortunately, on Dec. 21, 2012 we will still be about 26 parsecs from the galactic plane.

So, what did the Mayans predict for Dec. 21, 2012?
  1. Crossing the galactic plane.
    The Mayans did not have telescopes. They could not have known that the solar system is a part of the Milky Way. Besides, the solar system is not crossing the galactic plane any time soon, not even any time soon in a cosmological sense of soon.
  2. Planetary alignment.
    Whether Mayan numerology could predict planetary orbits is debatable. If they did have that capability, they would not have predicted a planetary alignment on the date in question because no such alignment will occur.
  3. Pole flip.
    The Mayans had stone age technology. They did not know that magnetism existed. They did not know that the Earth had a magnetic field. Besides, pinpointing to a specific date something that takes several decades to transpire is just silly.
  4. The end of the world as we know it.
    The Spaniards destroyed every piece of Mayan writing they could find. They didn't get everything, and some of what is left talks about events past Dec. 21 2012.
  5. Winter solstice.
    Check. Mayan numerology could predict lunar eclipses, the equinoxes, and the solstices with amazing accuracy.
Hey! One out of five ain't bad.
 
  • #29
CEL
656
0
On what do you base your implicit claim that any genuine psychic must be 100% accurate and 100% repeatable?

Would two tests be sufficient to say that psychic events happen, or would it take three, or four? How unlikely does an event have to be before chance can be definitively ruled out?

The point was that in my opinion, there could still be a signal below the noise. I'm not saying there is but rather that we have no way to know - that no definitive test can be cited. Assuming for a moment that they do occur, if true psychic events are rare, even people with those abilities may not be aware of it. Maybe it happens to everyone but only a few times in a lifetime? How do we rule out rare and random psychic events? I don't know if it is even possible to falsify that claim [possibility].

If psychic abilities exist and can be called to task, extensive testing shows at most only a very slight effect, barely detectable, and only with meta-analysis. But this says nothing of random events. In fact it may be that the data would support this possibility.

Psychic phenomena have been studied for more than a century. No good evidence has been found.
I know that absence of evidence does not mean evidence of absence, but if those phenomena existed, we should have more than a few meta analysis to show.
 
  • #30
My understanding of the Mayan's and 2012 is that they simply perceived it as the end of an age or era. They expected things would change, maybe dramatically but not the end of the world.

On the other hand there seems to be a confluence of predicted events around that date besides the Mayan calendar. Whether they are real predictions is another question. I am not convinced that Nostradamus made a prediction that actually includes that date. I am not sure about Caycee either. Other things that seem to be happening that could come to a head then: shifting of the Earth's magnetic field (doubtful), a solar maximum will be near that date, the current pope may be the last in a well documented prediction that names all the popes and predicts catastrophic events after the last one and he is old. I think there are some others that I can't remember too.
 
  • #31
mgb_phys
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
7,774
13
My understanding of the Mayan's and 2012 is that they simply perceived it as the end of an age or era.
The date simply clicks round to 13.0.0.0.0 so it's no different from Y2K
Probably rather less so, since very few computers use Mayan dates - and the ones that do will presumably handle all the digits!
 
  • #32
CEL
656
0
... the current pope may be the last in a well documented prediction that names all the popes and predicts catastrophic events after the last one and he is old. I think there are some others that I can't remember too.

St Malachy prophecy is probably a forgery perpetrated in the XVI century.
The mottos of all the popes until the 230th, Urban VII are perfect matches. When this pope died, the prophecy was made public and the motto of the 231th pope should be "De antiquitate urbis" (From the antic city).
One of the candidates was the cardinal of Civitavecchia (old city) and he became pope Gregory XIV. We don't know how much the revelation of the prophecy has contributed to his election, but we can wonder about it.
The subsequent mottos are very vague, like the quatrains of Nostradamus, so they fit anyone you want.
 
  • #33
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,260
310
Psychic phenomena have been studied for more than a century. No good evidence has been found.
I know that absence of evidence does not mean evidence of absence, but if those phenomena existed, we should have more than a few meta analysis to show.

Three hold-outs that I see are:

First, the formal analysis assumes that, if it exists, psychic phenomena can be controlled. I see no reason to assume that it can be controlled and tested on demand. Some of the more impressive stories come with dramatic events, such a murder, of the loss of a love one by some other means - events of extreme personal signficance. Does siginficance matter? How can we know? The tests to date show that if it exists, it cannot be controlled, but doesn't exclude the possibility that phenomena exist that can't be controlled.

Secondary to this are a few stories about psychics assisting with police investigations that were pretty impressive. Debunkers attribute these stories to chance or cleverness, but I have never seen a debunker find a dead body that the police couldn't.

Next, I believe the meta-analysis includes the bulk of serious experimentation to date. If indeed there is a trace signal for something real, that would still be interesting. We did have one paper published in the journal, The Foundations of Phyisics, that references known anomalous results as a fact. Interestingly, I believe the referenced results were only published in the JSE, which is not acceptable here as a journal reference, so at best the evidence for a signal is very weak.

We are way off topic here but I will clean things up later.
 
  • #34
CEL
656
0
Three hold-outs that I see are:

First, the formal analysis assumes that, if it exists, psychic phenomena can be controlled. I see no reason to assume that it can be controlled and tested on demand. Some of the more impressive stories come with dramatic events, such a murder, of the loss of a love one by some other means - events of extreme personal signficance. Does siginficance matter? How can we know? The tests to date show that if it exists, it cannot be controlled, but doesn't exclude the possibility that phenomena exist that can't be controlled.
Anecdotal evidence serves as a clue to the existence of a phenomenon, not as hard evidence.
Secondary to this are a few stories about psychics assisting with police investigations that were pretty impressive. Debunkers attribute these stories to chance or cleverness, but I have never seen a debunker find a dead body that the police couldn't.
Those stories are told by the psychics themselves. To my knowledge, no serious police department has ever called a psychic to aid an investigation.
Next, I believe the meta-analysis includes the bulk of serious experimentation to date. If indeed there is a trace signal for something real, that would still be interesting. We did have one paper published in the journal, The Foundations of Phyisics, that references known anomalous results as a fact. Interestingly, I believe the referenced results were only published in the JSE, which is not acceptable here as a journal reference, so at best the evidence for a signal is very weak.
Except for faulty protocols, no sign has ever been found above chance.
 
  • #35
99
0
More than likelythis is the language of an assertion of 'fact'. It asserts that the reliable probability of a certain statement being true is greater than 50%.
 
  • #36
Whether the Malachy predictions are real or not I don't know, the fact remains that the current pope fulfilled the prediction. I was watching the pope prediction before the current pope was selected. The prediction was 'glory of the olive' for the next pope. The speculation was that for the prediction to come true he could be a Benedictine who are also known as Olivetians. When he was picked it turned out he was a benedictine.

So for all you people who whine about predictions being non-specific, this one seemed to me to be pretty specific and it came true. Of course there are other possible explanations for 'glory of the olive', he could have been an olive farmer or maybe his worst enemy was killed by a falling olive. My favorite is that he would be an alcoholic who had a particular weakness for Martini's with extra olives.

There is also another aspect to why predictions are non-specific and open to many interpretations. If someone really could see the future and they wrote specific detailed predictions most would not come true. If a real psychic were to tell someone that if they go to a ballpark on a specific day they will get hit by a ball and killed and the person believed the prediction, he would just not go to the ballpark. Prediction fails to come true. Not because it wasn't real, but because it was real. Any prediction about events that can be affected by people will be affected by people. Look at the prediction of Israel coming back into existance. It was specific in that Israel would exist again. Jews knew of this prediction and MADE it come true. So for a true psychic who wanted his real predictions to come true of themselves he would have to disguise any prediction that could be affected by people or people WILL try to affect them, whether to make them come true or to not come true, no true psychic would want his predictions affected before they happened but to be a psychic the predictions have to be made beforehand. I think this is why Nostradamus wrote his quatrains the way he did, many could be affected by people. He probably got a lot of flack from predicting the death of that noble in a joust which may be part of the reason for disguising his predictions. The future is not written in stone, it can be changed, so predictions are all of POSSIBLE futures not THE future.
 
Last edited:
  • #37
CEL
656
0
Whether the Malachy predictions are real or not I don't know, the fact remains that the current pope fulfilled the prediction. I was watching the pope prediction before the current pope was selected. The prediction was 'glory of the olive' for the next pope. The speculation was that for the prediction to come true he could be a Benedictine who are also known as Olivetians. When he was picked it turned out he was a benedictine.

So for all you people who whine about predictions being non-specific, this one seemed to me to be pretty specific and it came true. Of course there are other possible explanations for 'glory of the olive', he could have been an olive farmer or maybe his worst enemy was killed by a falling olive. My favorite is that he would be an alcoholic who had a particular weakness for Martini's with extra olives.

There is also another aspect to why predictions are non-specific and open to many interpretations. If someone really could see the future and they wrote specific detailed predictions most would not come true. If a real psychic were to tell someone that if they go to a ballpark on a specific day they will get hit by a ball and killed and the person believed the prediction, he would just not go to the ballpark. Prediction fails to come true. Not because it wasn't real, but because it was real. Any prediction about events that can be affected by people will be affected by people. Look at the prediction of Israel coming back into existance. It was specific in that Israel would exist again. Jews knew of this prediction and MADE it come true. So for a true psychic who wanted his real predictions to come true of themselves he would have to disguise any prediction that could be affected by people or people WILL try to affect them, whether to make them come true or to not come true, no true psychic would want his predictions affected before they happened but to be a psychic the predictions have to be made beforehand. I think this is why Nostradamus wrote his quatrains the way he did, many could be affected by people. He probably got a lot of flack from predicting the death of that noble in a joust which may be part of the reason for disguising his predictions. The future is not written in stone, it can be changed, so predictions are all of POSSIBLE futures not THE future.

Pope Benedict XVI was not a benedictine. I don't believe a benedictine has ever been a pope. Normally popes are not chosen from religious orders like benedictines or jesuits.
The fact that he chose the name Benedict may well have been in order to fulfill the prophecy, in the same way that the cardinals chose the archbishop of Orvieto (Urbs vecchio) in order to fulfill the prophecy of "De antica civitate".

Note: In my previous post I mentioned he was form Civitavechia. My mistake. Anyway, both Civitavechia and Orvieto have the same translation.
 
  • #38
ideasrule
Homework Helper
2,266
0
There is also another aspect to why predictions are non-specific and open to many interpretations. If someone really could see the future and they wrote specific detailed predictions most would not come true.

Incorrect. He could type up the prediction, encrypt it with a strong key, and announce that the encrypted file contains a very specific prophecy. After the event occurs, he can decrypt the file and let the world read the prophecy and become awestruck at its accuracy. Anybody who does that will become an instant celebrity.
 
  • #39
99
0
Thanks for clarifying.
 
  • #40
Chronos
Science Advisor
Gold Member
11,408
742
I side with CEL, with some reservations. The future is malleable, not immutable. Were one to, as CEL suggested, take a personal prediction seriously it could be averted. This parallels the 'many universes' interpretation in quantum physics. We choose our own destiny, imo.
 
  • #41
Incorrect. He could type up the prediction, encrypt it with a strong key, and announce that the encrypted file contains a very specific prophecy. After the event occurs, he can decrypt the file and let the world read the prophecy and become awestruck at its accuracy. Anybody who does that will become an instant celebrity.


Encryption? You think in the middle ages anyone would or could go to such lengths? How are they supposed to reveal a key for a prediction long after their death? Besides, they appear to be encrypted with non-specific info.
 
  • #42
Pope Benedict XVI was not a benedictine. I don't believe a benedictine has ever been a pope. Normally popes are not chosen from religious orders like benedictines or jesuits.
The fact that he chose the name Benedict may well have been in order to fulfill the prophecy, in the same way that the cardinals chose the archbishop of Orvieto (Urbs vecchio) in order to fulfill the prophecy of "De antica civitate".

Note: In my previous post I mentioned he was form Civitavechia. My mistake. Anyway, both Civitavechia and Orvieto have the same translation.

I must be mis-remembering what happened. The fact remains that he chose a name that could be easily associated with the prediction and was before he chose it in that there could be some connection to the Benedictine order. If he had chosen any other name the prophesy would be broken. I find it hard to believe that he would choose a name specifically to fulfill a prophesy, especially one with dire associated consequences.
 
  • #43
CEL
656
0
I must be mis-remembering what happened. The fact remains that he chose a name that could be easily associated with the prediction and was before he chose it in that there could be some connection to the Benedictine order. If he had chosen any other name the prophesy would be broken. I find it hard to believe that he would choose a name specifically to fulfill a prophesy, especially one with dire associated consequences.

The prediction did not mention the name of the pope. The motto associated to the 267th pope was
Gloria olivæ
The Benedictine order traditionally said this Pope would come from their order, since a branch of the Benedictine order is called the Olivetans. St Benedict is said to have prophesied that before the end of the world, a member of his order would be Pope and would triumphantly lead the Church in its fight against evil. While the Holy Father chose the name "Benedict", this does not seem enough to fulfil the prophecy. Nor is it clear how Benedict XVI (a Bavarian) is "Glory of the Olives".
 
  • #44
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,260
310
We do need sources.
 
  • #45
CEL
656
0
Encryption? You think in the middle ages anyone would or could go to such lengths? How are they supposed to reveal a key for a prediction long after their death? Besides, they appear to be encrypted with non-specific info.

What is suggested by ideasrule is that modern prophets, if they existed, could do it.
Vague mentions as those of Nostradamus and the ones falsely attributed to St. Malachy, fit anything.
A Canadian student wrote an article about Nostradamus in 1997. To prove how easy it is a fit all prophecy, he penned a quatrain in the style of Nostradamus:

In the City of God there will be a great thunder,
Two brothers torn apart by Chaos,
while the fortress endures,
the great leader will succumb,
The third big war will begin when the big city is burning"

He never intended it, but when the twin towers of the WTC collapsed, believers started to say that Nostradamus had predicted it.
 
  • #46
russ_watters
Mentor
20,590
7,259
No, he was talking about the Philadelphia Eagles. Shawn and Stacey Andrews, linemen, are both currently hurt, one of them possibly with mental problems. Quarterback (leader) Donnovan McNabb is hurt as well. The third game of the season is Sunday and Michael Vick is making is first start for the Eagles, to much controversy.
 
  • #47
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,260
310
This is all getting way too loose. I will give 24 hours for sources. After that, all posts that make or made specific references without sources will be deleted.

I keep meaning to get in here and move some posts but I get interrupted every time I try. At some point this will all get cleaned up, so some posts will be moved to other threads. I'll provide links when I clean up.
 
  • #48
anted to add to Underwater water Mayan sites or something and couldn't find it. The Director of the ruins at Chichen said that pilgrims to Chichen I. participated in a course of ceremonys at different temples after preparation by priests/guides there. First was an underground water site, last the pyramid.
Predictions? Consider visiting Moises Morales in Panchon, campground next to Palenque Ruins. He was there when the tomb was opened and listened to the "experts." He's partial to anthropologists, especially pretty female ones. Casteneda and r. Gordon Wason were his frieWnds; Wasson visited frequently. He knew the psychiatrist who helped Carlos write his first books and was the main model for "Don Juan's" teaching style.
Moises is '84 and will invite "experts" to confer in the "Linda Schele Sala" and present themselves for more questioning than the 30 minutes allowed in the Mesa Redondas(round table discussions of the Maya. He has lived with the most basic Maya and understands the Maya calender and its relience on wheels turning against other wheels and the nature of wheels to complete cycles. And aware of man's tendency to imagination.
If anyone is interested in the Maya and current possibilitys for interaction please consider visiting him. Easier than the Dala Lama. Ask his opinion of grandmotherscouncil.com or anything about Casteneda or Wasson. Awake to monkeys in the trees near your hammock.
 
  • #49
CEL
656
0
This is all getting way too loose. I will give 24 hours for sources. After that, all posts that make or made specific references without sources will be deleted.

I keep meaning to get in here and move some posts but I get interrupted every time I try. At some point this will all get cleaned up, so some posts will be moved to other threads. I'll provide links when I clean up.

For the prophecies of St Malachy:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prophecy_of_the_Popes
 

Related Threads on Mayan predictions

Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
17
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
490
Replies
10
Views
9K
  • Last Post
2
Replies
25
Views
4K
  • Last Post
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
61
Views
28K
  • Last Post
Replies
13
Views
970
Top