Cycles within cycles

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by OuttaTime

 

let me look up Mohenjo Daro and see what you are talking about.

I found a creationist article. Are you referring to the sham articles in creationist journals?
I also found some dodgy material claiming an ancient nuclear war there. That appears to be from some Sitchinesque translations of ancient texts, i.e. made up.

Other articles from real academics make no mention of the carbon dating issue. The background radiation at the site is not elevated as claimed in these fraudulent tales.

The carbon dating in that area works just fine.

Apparently, you are going to base your debate on 1 or 2 other articles. How would you explain a city where rock is fused together. So what all-knowing source does your wisdom come from? And yes, carbon dating still works, but can you undeniably say it is 100% accurate?

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by OuttaTime

 

Or will it 'roll over' to 0.0.0.0.0 in their chronology again?

There is no roll over. The calendar is a linear increasing calendar with no limit just as our calendar, the Gregorian, has no limit.

The Mayans made no predictions about the end of a long count. The claims of anything associated with the date are modern inventions.

OK, so evidently you did not read the rest of that post where I added a link to correct that question. What the Dresden Codex indicates is that 2012 is the end of a 5,000 year cycle. It does not mean the calendar ends, but it marks the end of a cycle within the calendar. Calendars can be cyclical and linear at the same time. That's a no brainer. I am making no assumptions about what that interprets to as far as events. I merely stated that it was a cycle, just like the OP. Yet the final page of that codex shows a serpent spewing water upon the earth.
I'm pretty much done arguing the Mayan calendar at this point as it is not a thread devoted to that primary subject. Again the thread is Cycles within Cycles, not C14 Dating, not Astrophysics, etc.

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by OuttaTime

 

Did you read the commentaries. It seems that no one in the physics forum thinks much of this claim.

A big problem for me was the claims of global floods which are known not to have happened - ever. DaVinci was one of the first to point out that a global flood probably did not happen and the evidence against has increased since then.

The write up also suggests ECDs. That has not occurred in over 200My. The only pole shift was 800Ma and took 15My to complete.

The article you referenced is a dead end. It is more baloney than substance.

Now we're discussing global flooding? I didn't indicate anything in my OP about any flooding. Are you referring to the article?

Chart of Magnetic Reversals for what it's worth. It's not a Popular Mechanics article or a JPL white sheet, but here it is nonetheless.

Thanks for your posts Outta Time. It seems significant to me that so many cycles are all converging around the same time.

You just may be onto something if Stereologist is willing to spend this many posts to discredit you

Originally posted by Cecilofs
Thanks for your posts Outta Time. It seems significant to me that so many cycles are all converging around the same time.

You just may be onto something if Stereologist is willing to spend this many posts to discredit you

Thanks That was the only message I intended to convey was that there are many clocks ticking, all on different schedules. I don't mind his debate, but I'm kinda getting dragged off topic

reply to post by OuttaTime

Apparently, you are going to base your debate on 1 or 2 other articles. How would you explain a city where rock is fused together. So what all-knowing source does your wisdom come from? And yes, carbon dating still works, but can you undeniably say it is 100% accurate?

The rock is not fused together. That is just a lie. Yes people do lie and they lie a lot to make all sort of absurd claims. The YECs are unhappy when old civilizations are discovered. People with wild eyed claims of ancient lost knowledge make up stories to support the notion of long lost knowledge and ancient advanced technologies.

Carbon dating works. With recent advances it works far better than before. Corrections have been worked out. Smaller sample sizes can be used. It can be applied to older material.

As I stated before nothing is 100%. Every measurement method has uncertainty. There is no 100% accurate measurement method. Maybe that wasn't made clear enough. If you want I can discuss measurement with an example.

reply to post by OuttaTime


I did read your post. I do not believe that 2012 is mentioned in the Dresden codex. Interesting. Let me see if I can find something about that. The date 2012 as far as I know is only mentioned in one place: a stela.

Calendars can be cyclical and linear at the same time.

Not true. Our calendar is not cyclic. Maybe reading Eliade's book "The Sacred and the Profane" could help you understand the difference. It's short and easy to read. Maybe that's why I enjoyed reading it.

The long count calendar is not cyclic. It does not repeat. That is an important issue to understand.

Again the thread is Cycles within Cycles

Again, the long count is not cyclic.

As for the other issues you brought them up, not I or anyone else.

reply to post by OuttaTime

Now we're discussing global flooding? I didn't indicate anything in my OP about any flooding. Are you referring to the article?

You made reference to an article that was based on rather obvious mistakes. If you are not interested in bringing this to light, then maybe you could consider not providing links to obviously bad material.

But here you do it again linking to blatantly mistaken material. This silly link goes on by mixing excursions with reversals. It makes absurd claims such as a links between ice ages and reversals and providing nothing of support.

reply to post by Cecilofs

You just may be onto something if Stereologist is willing to spend this many posts to discredit you

What is abundantly clear is that a lot of hooey is being pushed as evidence. The material is confused and full of falsehoods. How can anyone expect to learn if they do not take the time to understand the difference between nonsense and reliable material.

Learning to distinguish begins by asking questions and trying to figure out if the material makes sense. About all that is here is mistakes.

reply to post by OuttaTime


If you have an issue to discuss, then why bring up all of these other issues which you base on mistakes?

I need to correct an earlier statement. I stated that the date 2012 appears only on one stela.

Wrong. It appears solely on one monument, Monument 6 at Tortuguero.

Tortuguero Maya site

Monument 6 from Tortuguero is currently generating discussion as it includes the only known inscription depicting the end of the current 13-Bak'tun era in 2012.

The Dresden codex does not include the 2012 date.

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by OuttaTime

 

Apparently, you are going to base your debate on 1 or 2 other articles. How would you explain a city where rock is fused together. So what all-knowing source does your wisdom come from? And yes, carbon dating still works, but can you undeniably say it is 100% accurate?

The rock is not fused together. That is just a lie. Yes people do lie and they lie a lot to make all sort of absurd claims. The YECs are unhappy when old civilizations are discovered. People with wild eyed claims of ancient lost knowledge make up stories to support the notion of long lost knowledge and ancient advanced technologies.

Carbon dating works. With recent advances it works far better than before. Corrections have been worked out. Smaller sample sizes can be used. It can be applied to older material.

As I stated before nothing is 100%. Every measurement method has uncertainty. There is no 100% accurate measurement method. Maybe that wasn't made clear enough. If you want I can discuss measurement with an example.

OK, instead of debating this, let me ask you this... have 'intelligent' beings only existed beginning with Mesopotamia and Egypt? I mean, is mankind only just evolved in the last few thousand years, and that we evolved naturally from amoeba?

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by Cecilofs

 

You just may be onto something if Stereologist is willing to spend this many posts to discredit you

What is abundantly clear is that a lot of hooey is being pushed as evidence. The material is confused and full of falsehoods. How can anyone expect to learn if they do not take the time to understand the difference between nonsense and reliable material.

Learning to distinguish begins by asking questions and trying to figure out if the material makes sense. About all that is here is mistakes.

Seems like the one slinging the hooey is from your console. I've presented quite a bit more positive input into this thread than you, but I can see you don't like too many threads since your flag count is still under 10. Perhaps you can give us the synopsis of the Mayan culture and why they were masters of charting celestial movements, and predicted upcoming events (planting, harvesting, solstices, the timelines of Venus and the moon) and knew exact dates of past and future eclipses, and so on. Even if the calendar is linear, it is loaded with celestial cycles.
The Mayan calendar is 99% accurate with the Hindu calendar, and they both record the same timeframe.

The Mayan calendar began with the Fifth Great Cycle in 3114 BC and will end on 21 December 2012 AD. The Hindu Kali Yuga calendar began on 18 February 3102 B.C. There is only a difference of 12 years between the Hindu's beginning of the Kali Yuga and the Mayan's beginning of the Fifth Great Cycle.

The ancient Hindus mainly used lunar calendars but also used solar calendars. If an average lunar year equals 354.36 days, then this would be about 5270 lunar years from the time when the Kali Yuga started until 21 Dec 2012. This is the same year that the Mayans predict rebirth of our planet. It is also about 5113 solar years of 365.24 days per year, and is day number 1,867,817 into the Kali Yuga. By either solar or lunar years, we are over 5,000 years into the Kali Yuga and it is time for Lord Krishna's prophecy to happen according to the ancient Hindu scriptures. Lord Krishna's Golden Age could easily begin in 2012!

So the calendars would have no need to write out "December 21, 2012 is the last day". It is merely the progression into the 14th bakhtun. That is when our Gregorian calendars correlate the 14.0.0.0.0 event. What this timeframe does show is that even though it may be 'linear' the 14th bakhtun signifies the end of a 5000 year long count cycle.

reply to post by OuttaTime

OK, instead of debating this, let me ask you this... have 'intelligent' beings only existed beginning with Mesopotamia and Egypt?

These are instances of civilizations which are distinct from human beings. By that I mean that human beings can exist without exhibiting what we would call civilizations. Intelligent beings have existed for a long time. The existence of the tools they left behind and their use of such things as fire indicate that intelligent beings have existed on Earth for quite a while.

I mean, is mankind only just evolved in the last few thousand years, and that we evolved naturally from amoeba?

Mankind has been evolving for more than a few thousand years. A species evolves; individuals do not. Chordates including humans did not evolve from amoeba which are in a different kingdom. Amoeba are in the protista kingdom. We are in the animal kingdom.

Did humans and other animals from other forms? Yes.

reply to post by OuttaTime


So now you launch into the personal attacks with some non-issue such as flags. Seems you are out of real info or fake data that you have linked to in this thread.

Perhaps you can give us the synopsis of the Mayan culture and why they were masters of charting celestial movements, and predicted upcoming events (planting, harvesting, solstices, the timelines of Venus and the moon) and knew exact dates of past and future eclipses, and so on. Even if the calendar is linear, it is loaded with celestial cycles.

Many civilizations studied astronomy. The Mayans did. Were they masters? Considering the level of technology they had to work with, i.e. what they developed, I guess they were. With the unaided eye they figured out when to plant. That's not too hard to do. Their Venus tables are so rough that it is hard to use their tables as a means of creating a correlation to the Gregorian calendar. See Fuls for more info on that,
Correlation Table

The calendar is linear. That's it. Every day gets a new number. There are no cycles. The calendar does not start over. It is not loaded with celestial cycles as you claim. You need to learn the difference between cyclical time and linear time.

The Mayan calendar is 99% accurate with the Hindu calendar, and they both record the same timeframe.

Which hoax site did you get this from?

So the calendars would have no need to write out "December 21, 2012 is the last day". It is merely the progression into the 14th bakhtun. That is when our Gregorian calendars correlate the 14.0.0.0.0 event. What this timeframe does show is that even though it may be 'linear' the 14th bakhtun signifies the end of a 5000 year long count cycle.

So what? That's no different than saying that June has ended or we are now into years of the 2000s. That is what happens when you have an unending linear calendar. After a while the numbers change. The 5126 years of a long count begun in 3114BC ends in 2012. That start date precedes the Mayan culture. That start date and thus the end date are dependent on the GMT correlation.

The calendar does not write out "last day" because the calendar does not end.

reply to post by stereologist


I'm not out of real info, but I can tell that continuing this debate with you is futile. You're still on about the Mayan interpretation that will only exist from your point of view. Perhaps you can enlighten me with what link you get your info from. Link plz. I want to see who you are getting your info from.
I show correllations of cyclical events and you troll in and start throwing your biased opinion on everything. Yellowstone has an eruption timeline, the magnetic reversal you so profoundly cite would have happened during the snowball earth time and there was no discernable life at that time, but the reversal cycles I cited were taken from ice samples from Vostok, Iceland, and Greenland. Those cycles would have been potentially triggered by solar activity combined with core temperature and volatility factors, which would directly effect the polar magnetic and geomagnetic characteristics of the event. These geomagnetic phenomena would have had effects on the atmosphere and the earth lithosphere through continental drift and atmospheric cavitation as it would also be gravitationally interacting with the lunar process since the moon was closer to the earth at that time.

reply to post by OuttaTime

I'm not out of real info, but I can tell that continuing this debate with you is futile. You're still on about the Mayan interpretation that will only exist from your point of view. Perhaps you can enlighten me with what link you get your info from. Link plz. I want to see who you are getting your info from.

I have provided links especially in cases where you provided links.

My Mayan viewpoint as you call it is not mine, it is the viewpoint of people that actually spend their lives studying the material.

I show correllations of cyclical events and you troll in and start throwing your biased opinion on everything.

Actually you confused a number of issues and when you posted links it was clear that you were using unsubstantiated and rather poor materials such as the link to the magnetic reversals where magnetic reversals and magnetic excursions were listed under the heading of magnetic reversals. Clearly, the authors of these web pages did not understand the difference. The difference is important. The last reversal was some 700,000 years ago.

Yellowstone has an eruption timeline, the magnetic reversal you so profoundly cite would have happened during the snowball earth time and there was no discernable life at that time, but the reversal cycles I cited were taken from ice samples from Vostok, Iceland, and Greenland.

Yellowstone does have an eruption timeline, but that timeline is not orderly as you have suggested. The most recent snowball earth time was some 800Ma. What reversal are you talking about back then? No discernable life at that time? Are you kidding? As for the reversal cycles you cited you are actually talking about excursions, not reversals.

Here is what you posted

An ice core from the Antarctic's Vostok Glacier -- at the other end of the world from Greenland -- showed the same 1,500-year cycle through its 400,000-year length.
The ice-core findings correlated with known glacier advances and retreats in northern Europe.
Independent data in a seabed sediment core from the Atlantic Ocean west of Ireland, reported in 1997, showed nine of the 1,500-year cycles in the last 12,000 years.

You provide no reference for this claim. You ask for links and very little of what you posted was linked to anything. You simply dumped a lot of quoted material without sourcing the claims.

I found those claims here. The claims have a reference - their own writings. Who is the NCPA? They are lobbyists. Not exactly a scientific group is it? They lobby on issues of the economy. That is what they state.
THE PHYSICAL EVIDENCE OF EARTH'S UNSTOPPABLE 1,500-YEAR CLIMATE CYCLE

This is the NCPA statement

Our goal is to develop and promote private, free-market alternatives to government regulation and control, solving problems by relying on the strength of the competitive, entrepreneurial private sector.

Those cycles would have been potentially triggered by solar activity combined with core temperature and volatility factors, which would directly effect the polar magnetic and geomagnetic characteristics of the event. These geomagnetic phenomena would have had effects on the atmosphere and the earth lithosphere through continental drift and atmospheric cavitation as it would also be gravitationally interacting with the lunar process since the moon was closer to the earth at that time.

Is this claim from the NCPA? The lithosphere is hardly affected by geomagnetism. What has a profound affect is the heat engine of the mantle moving the plates. BTW, continental drift is a long dropped theory developed by Wegener.

reply to post by stereologist


What reversal am I referring to? The one you mentioned on pg 2:

The only pole shift was 800Ma and took 15My to complete.

Then you say it was 700,000ya. Are Nature Magazine and New Scientist not viable resources? The reversals I spoke of refer to the ice core samples where they examined the cores and found magnetic realignments in a predictable timeframe and their results showed it, and it meshed with glacial activity (advances and retreats).

I also mentioned in my OP that there would be link junkies, and to feel free to do their own research. When I mention 'discernable life' 800m ya, I refer to mammalian life, not flora and sealife. There was probably seabased life at that time since the rest of the planet and most of the oceans were covered in ice. And 'modern science and palentology' hints that upright walking mammals did not appear until about 4mya.

You state that you get your Mayan info from professionals, yet I have asked for your source several times and you dodged it. Your research shows one perspective and mine shows info like this:

The Mayan Council delivers a message of hope, not despair. It is not the end of the world, but the end of the cycle. A new cycle begins and humankind enters an age of doing things differently at a higher "octave," more peacefully and more compassionately. It is the end of the old world and the beginning of a new world, a new society. The Mayans say that this could be a beautiful passage or something difficult, depending on how humanity handles it. Either way, the result is a brand new path for humanity for the better.

Here's the link, but I'm sure it doesn't mesh with your material.

Perhaps we should agree to disagree since our references come from 2 different areas. I don't hold much faith in MSM and ivy league academics.

add: As far as Yellowstone goes. 1 event is an incident. 2 events is a coincedence. 3 events is a pattern. I'm not referring to magmatic flows or hydrothermal activity. I'm referring to super-eruptions. Link here.

reply to post by OuttaTime


In reference to pole shifts I use the term as fringe author Hancock coined the term. It refers to a change in the Earth's rotational axis. It is known in the scientific literature as a TPW, or true polar wander. A magnetic reversal is very different. The term pole shift is used in different ways by different people. I use it as it was used by the original author. I am sorry if this has led to some confusion. I will switch to using TPW and magnetic reversal from now on in this thread.

The reversals I spoke of refer to the ice core samples where they examined the cores and found magnetic realignments in a predictable timeframe and their results showed it, and it meshed with glacial activity (advances and retreats).

I doubt ice core samples are reliable indicators of magnetic orientation. Unlike orientations determined from rocks and fire rings, ice can move, ice recrystallizes as more ice is piled on top, and the particles in the ice are not necessarily aligned with the Earth's magnetic field when deposited.

When I mention 'discernable life' 800m ya, I refer to mammalian life, not flora and sealife. There was probably seabased life at that time since the rest of the planet and most of the oceans were covered in ice. And 'modern science and palentology' hints that upright walking mammals did not appear until about 4mya.

Thanks for the clarification.

You state that you get your Mayan info from professionals, yet I have asked for your source several times and you dodged it. Perhaps we should agree to disagree since our references come from 2 different areas. I don't hold much faith in MSM and ivy league academics.

The MSM certainly seems to be unable at times to report science well. Not sure why you distrust academics. Maybe you don't have experience with those groups? I find it odd that you posted a link to a business lobby group. Do you trust them?

reply to post by stereologist


The ice core samples were examined under microscopes at the iron isotopes and found to have polarization variations. Granted they are on a microscopic level but as far as I can tell, all of those samples are still preserved and available to other scientists to examine. Whether or not they showed a reversal or a wandering event is not completely verifiable globally as I am not aware of Antarctic ice core samples.

For a second ther I thought you were referring to a physical pole reversal in 800mya, but I had read articles that say the last magnetic reversals were either 800my or 700,000y, but at the same time I found many other articles that gave more information about these historical events. My trouble with MSM academics is that they seem to follow some sort of agenda. Back when Darwin wrote his book, he was mocked. Then eventually, people who do not follow his book are mocked. Seems like a flip in political academics. But these are the kind of people who discredit Pluto as being a planet and have it removed to add two other rocks in out outer fringes.

I have no animosity about the directions of this thread. We just happen to stand on two different sides of the fence