PDA

View Full Version : 2012: The most epic of all failures?



plb
October 26th, 2009, 09:56 PM
http://science.slashdot.org/story/09/10/26/1517242/2012-a-Miscalculation-Actual-Calendar-Ends-2220

BigSilly
October 26th, 2009, 10:04 PM
You wouldn't believe the otherwise intelligent, intellectual, composed and just damn smart people in everyday life who utterly believe the world will end in 2012.

#-o

hoppipolla
October 26th, 2009, 10:08 PM
You wouldn't believe the otherwise intelligent, intellectual, composed and just damn smart people in everyday life who utterly believe the world will end in 2012.

#-o

well there have been a LOT of theories, some I remember being genuinely quite scary if true!

I haven't read the articles fully yet but it's quite funny if the date is proved wrong - I'll read them in just a bit :)

koshatnik
October 26th, 2009, 10:18 PM
People really will believe in any old toss they are told.

pricetech
October 26th, 2009, 10:21 PM
I don't expect to see the universe come to an end in 2012, but I wouldn't be surprised to see civilization collapse because so many people fell for it. Humans can be pretty gullible you know.

t0p
October 26th, 2009, 10:27 PM
OMG the world's gonna end in 2220!! THE SKY IS FALLLLLINNNG!!! :o

kevin11951
October 26th, 2009, 10:28 PM
I don't expect to see the universe come to an end in 2012, but I wouldn't be surprised to see civilization collapse because so many people fell for it. Humans can be pretty gullible you know.

self fulfilling prophecies and all that, right?

hoppipolla
October 26th, 2009, 10:41 PM
People really will believe in any old toss they are told.

To be honest I think it's more shocking how quick people are to condemn things like this before they even understand them or do the research!

I mean I know there are lots of dates on which people claim the world will end or terrible events will occur and most turn out to be nonsense, but that's no reason to turn a blind eye to ALL of them!

samh785
October 26th, 2009, 10:42 PM
People have said the world was going to end many times, and it never has. For the Mayan civilization, the world ended a long time ago. :P

hoppipolla
October 26th, 2009, 10:47 PM
People have said the world was going to end many times, and it never has. For the Mayan civilization, the world ended a long time ago. :P

yeah but see this is the problem, people assume because all the previous dates and predictions weren't true that the next one won't be also.

Believe it or not there are LOTS of things that could severely harm mankind or wipe us out, and to just rule out all dates as untrue based on previous, often completely unrelated, ones is a bit silly IMO.

Tipped OuT
October 26th, 2009, 10:51 PM
You know all of this "end of the world!" nonsense is just to bring in more money.

There's even a movie for it now! Crap, not too long ago I saw an advertisement to a reserve a spot in an underground shelter for 2012... "So you and your family can survive" :roll:.

Once 2012 passes and everybody is done crapping their pants, somebody is going to make a new prediction of the end of the world, with new "scientific" theories.

SunnyRabbiera
October 26th, 2009, 10:57 PM
I dunno, with the current status our race and our planet anything can happen.
One thing that does give some credence that something bad might happen in 2012 is solar flare activity predicted to happen in that year.
Now normally solar flares are nothing to worry about as Earths magnetic field usually protects us from them.
But right now Earths magnetic field is weakening, so who knows if it can deflect them or not.
Plus there is another factor: satellites
Even if Earth itself comes out just fine like it normally does with solar flares, our satellites are not as fortunate.
It is very plausible that the solar flares could knock them out taking down communications, intense solar flare activity could really wreak havoc on our satellites.
We rely on satellites for practically everything, TV, Internet, GPS, all sorts of stuff.
The loss of such a critical system could be devastating.

Truth be told I hope something does happen in 2012, the state of our species right now makes me sick.
As a sci fi fan though I hope its aliens...
Meteor will be nice too

magh-87
October 26th, 2009, 10:59 PM
Who remembers Y2K? Same crap, different decade. Some one will find something new to fear in another ten years.

hoppipolla
October 26th, 2009, 11:02 PM
I dunno, with the current status our race and our planet anything can happen.
One thing that does give some credence that something bad might happen in 2012 is solar flare activity predicted to happen in that year.
Now normally solar flares are nothing to worry about as Earths magnetic field usually protects us from them.
But right now Earths magnetic field is weakening, so who knows if it can deflect them or not.
Plus there is another factor: satellites
Even if Earth itself comes out just fine like it normally does with solar flares, our satellites are not as fortunate.
It is very plausible that the solar flares could knock them out taking down communications, intense solar flare activity could really wreak havoc on our satellites.
We rely on satellites for practically everything, TV, Internet, GPS, all sorts of stuff.
The loss of such a critical system could be devastating.

Truth be told I hope something does happen in 2012, the state of our species right now makes me sick.
As a sci fi fan though I hope its aliens...
Meteor will be nice too

aww man heh, our species really isn't THAT bad, at least I don't think so.

We achieve some wonderful things and pull together to have incredible effects. We have great dreams and hopes and.. *goes way too philanthropic! hehe*

I think it's hard on the human race to say it's a mess or it's all gone wrong, and I think it's very far from the truth. Some things we have done wrong and some people have bad intentions, but many people mean well and are trying to do good for everyone :)

I don't think we deserve to be wiped out or for anything bad to happen, I am the kind of person who is ultimately proud of mankind ^_^

SunnyRabbiera
October 26th, 2009, 11:06 PM
Who remembers Y2K? Same crap, different decade. Some one will find something new to fear in another ten years.

Well Y2K did have some rationality behind it, after all computers had become a big thing and they were all over the place.
Before the 90's computers were not really a household tool but were slowly edging into the mainstream, businesses were using them more often and by the mid 90's computers started to catch on.
In the 90's you had the internet revolution, information was at the tip of your fingers.
Y2K could have been an issue if we didnt take the precautions we did, being a computer based society something like Y2K could have brought it down.

pricetech
October 26th, 2009, 11:06 PM
self fulfilling prophecies and all that, right?

Pretty Much.

Tipped OuT
October 26th, 2009, 11:06 PM
aww man heh, our species really isn't THAT bad, at least I don't think so.

We achieve some wonderful things and pull together to have incredible effects. We have great dreams and hopes and.. *goes way too philanthropic! hehe*

I think it's hard on the human race to say it's a mess or it's all gone wrong, and I think it's very far from the truth. Some things we have done wrong and some people have bad intentions, but many people mean well and are trying to do good for everyone :)

I don't think we deserve to be wiped out or for anything bad to happen, I am the kind of person who is ultimately proud of mankind ^_^

+1

We may not be perfect, but at least we try... hey, we're only human. ;)

Shpongle
October 26th, 2009, 11:09 PM
i remember posting here about this a while back , believe what you will but its better to be prepared and aware than not to be . . . , knowledge is power!!

SunnyRabbiera
October 26th, 2009, 11:10 PM
aww man heh, our species really isn't THAT bad, at least I don't think so.

We achieve some wonderful things and pull together to have incredible effects. We have great dreams and hopes and.. *goes way too philanthropic! hehe*

I think it's hard on the human race to say it's a mess or it's all gone wrong, and I think it's very far from the truth. Some things we have done wrong and some people have bad intentions, but many people mean well and are trying to do good for everyone :)

I don't think we deserve to be wiped out or for anything bad to happen, I am the kind of person who is ultimately proud of mankind ^_^

yes but look at the economy, the fighting in the middle east, the oil industry, look at the news and many issues with our race will stare you in the face.
I personally think we are going in circles as a race right now, not advancing just repeating mistakes just this time we got some Mrs. Dash.
Sorry I have no real faith in the human race

RichardLinx
October 26th, 2009, 11:16 PM
and to just rule out all dates as untrue based on previous, often completely unrelated, ones is a bit silly IMO.
Not really. Based on the fact that they've predicted the world will end numerous times before because of an inconsistency in an ancient civilizations calender it would be completely rational to assume the rest of the predictions and dates are also going to be complete lunacy.

pwnst*r
October 26th, 2009, 11:21 PM
We rely on satellites for practically everything, TV, Internet, GPS, all sorts of stuff.
The loss of such a critical system could be devastating.



i hope you have better examples of how "devastating" losing those satellites would be. i don't think any of my internet data transmissions are crossing any satellites, so none of those three would be labeled devastating if lost.

RichardLinx
October 26th, 2009, 11:25 PM
yes but look at the economy, the fighting in the middle east, the oil industry, look at the news and many issues with our race will stare you in the face.
I personally think we are going in circles as a race right now, not advancing just repeating mistakes just this time we got some Mrs. Dash.
Sorry I have no real faith in the human race

So basically you're a pessimist who's ignorant to all the accomplishments of man kind. While people are working on solving Earths energy problems you're sitting in front of your computer telling people how terrible they are. While people are making huge leaps forwards in medical technology, here you are again telling us how hopeless they are. And while people are out there making huge progress in a multitude of other areas (eg. Aerospace) you're talking about how our race is pathetic and going in circles.

I find it to be an extremely ignorant thing to say. Yeah, there's war and crime, but who's to blame for that; The people out there breaking the law, or the people sitting in front of there computer not willing to take a look out the window to see the kid being sold drugs by the local dealer.

aysiu
October 26th, 2009, 11:26 PM
It doesn't make sense to say "There was some other scare, and nothing happened, so nothing will happen this time either."

If you flip a coin, the chance of it landing heads or tails is 50/50. It is always 50/50. It doesn't matter if the last ten times you happened to flip it, it landed heads. That doesn't mean it's more likely to land tails the eleventh time.

Likewise, in the story of the boy who cried wolf, the first time he "cried wolf," everyone believed him but there was no wolf. Likewise with the second time. But the third time, he "cried wolf" and the wolf actually came, but no one believed him.

Do I believe the world will end in 2012? No. But to say it won't end then because it didn't end all the other times people said it would end makes no sense. People saying the world will end has no effect on whether it actually will end.

Every day I could say "It will be 70 degrees Fahrenheit out today." The days it is 70, I will have been correct. The days it isn't, I will have been wrong. My saying it will be 70 degrees has no predictive effect, but just because I am often wrong doesn't make me always wrong in my prediction.

pwnst*r
October 26th, 2009, 11:30 PM
do you guys worry EVERYday about the world ending tomorrow too? if so, lol.

bodyharvester
October 26th, 2009, 11:30 PM
While people are working on solving Earths energy problems you're sitting in front of your computer telling people how terrible they are. While people are making huge leaps forwards in medical technology, here you are again telling us how hopeless they are.

a little overstated i think, although i agree with your point, you could have written it more eloquently.

jrusso2
October 26th, 2009, 11:32 PM
If refer you all to the worlds end of 2000, 1996, etc ad infinitum

koshatnik
October 26th, 2009, 11:33 PM
To be honest I think it's more shocking how quick people are to condemn things like this before they even understand them or do the research!

I mean I know there are lots of dates on which people claim the world will end or terrible events will occur and most turn out to be nonsense, but that's no reason to turn a blind eye to ALL of them!

I guess I just don't fricking care :) If its going to happen, I can't stop it, so not worth worrying about.

But it is all toss. All of it.

RichardLinx
October 26th, 2009, 11:36 PM
Do I believe the world will end in 2012? No. But to say it won't end then because it didn't end all the other times people said it would end makes no sense. People saying the world will end has no effect on whether it actually will end.
It makes complete sense. With the amount of time they've predicted the world will end basic probability would be in favour of people like you and me. People who say "No, the world will not end". I could right a calander now and state it's purpose as "A calender for predicting events leading up to the end of the world" If people are as gullible a thousand years down the line as they are today, my calender could be taken as seriously as the bible.

(Note: If this falls into the "religious" department I'll edit it. I don't think it does since I don't mention a specific religion or it's bible. This is merely to put my point into context.)

Junkieman
October 26th, 2009, 11:41 PM
Truth be told I hope something does happen in 2012, the state of our species right now makes me sick.
As a sci fi fan though I hope its aliens...
Meteor will be nice too

Technologically we live in a very exciting age (wish I could be around in the next millennium though!). Morally we have come a long way, but still have a long road ahead. Ecologically we have potentially ruined the planet beyond recovery; maybe not, but the odds don't look good.

Logically, and sadly, I agree with you. I vote meteor, or zombies.

MadCow108
October 26th, 2009, 11:44 PM
It doesn't make sense to say "There was some other scare, and nothing happened, so nothing will happen this time either."

If you flip a coin, the chance of it landing heads or tails is 50/50. It is always 50/50. It doesn't matter if the last ten times you happened to flip it, it landed heads. That doesn't mean it's more likely to land tails the eleventh time.

Likewise, in the story of the boy who cried wolf, the first time he "cried wolf," everyone believed him but there was no wolf. Likewise with the second time. But the third time, he "cried wolf" and the wolf actually came, but no one believed him.

Do I believe the world will end in 2012? No. But to say it won't end then because it didn't end all the other times people said it would end makes no sense. People saying the world will end has no effect on whether it actually will end.

Every day I could say "It will be 70 degrees Fahrenheit out today." The days it is 70, I will have been correct. The days it isn't, I will have been wrong. My saying it will be 70 degrees has no predictive effect, but just because I am often wrong doesn't make me always wrong in my prediction.

If you come with statistics you first have to have a correlation between prediction and probability of doomsday or your statistics point is invalid.
If the self fulfilling crap counts as correlation is debatable.

Its just some random crap someone has invented as a nice story (the mayan calender does not even end in 2012 neither does it in 2220, its just their millenium)
These theories pop up all the time: 1999 (early Y2K) 2000 (Y2K) 2001 (late Y2K) 2003 (illuminaties) 2005 (bible code) and again 2012
nothing will happen but still people will then say "miscalculations!" and say 2013 just like in 2000
But the film which is coming is brilliant marketing using this current doomsday trend, although the film will probably complete crap like everything else from these guys

my favorite 2012 theory is the jupiter size stone planet (sometimes with life on it) crashing into earth on an highly elliptic orbit.
Its just so incredibly stupid, I really wonder if anybody actually believes this or or it is just spread to see how stupid other people are

Tipped OuT
October 26th, 2009, 11:45 PM
Every day I could say "It will be 70 degrees Fahrenheit out today." The days it is 70, I will have been correct. The days it isn't, I will have been wrong. My saying it will be 70 degrees has no predictive effect, but just because I am often wrong doesn't make me always wrong in my prediction.

Can you clarify what you meant here? I just don't quite understand "The days it is 70" part.

RichardLinx
October 26th, 2009, 11:47 PM
Can you clarify what you meant here? I just don't quite understand "The days it is 70" part.

I think he's referring to temperature.

Tipped OuT
October 26th, 2009, 11:49 PM
I think he's referring to temperature.

Ohhhh I see now. I was reading it differently where it looked like he was using improper grammar.

lethalfang
October 26th, 2009, 11:49 PM
To be honest I think it's more shocking how quick people are to condemn things like this before they even understand them or do the research!

I mean I know there are lots of dates on which people claim the world will end or terrible events will occur and most turn out to be nonsense, but that's no reason to turn a blind eye to ALL of them!

Are you joking or are you serious?
The notion that a civilization that could not leave the bounds of Earth, and understood precisely nothing about the laws of physics, could somehow predict events 2000 years into the future is preposterous.

dragos240
October 26th, 2009, 11:53 PM
Besides. the mayan calendar won't end on 2220, it will have completed a cycle. Then it starts again.

lethalfang
October 26th, 2009, 11:54 PM
It doesn't make sense to say "There was some other scare, and nothing happened, so nothing will happen this time either."

If you flip a coin, the chance of it landing heads or tails is 50/50. It is always 50/50. It doesn't matter if the last ten times you happened to flip it, it landed heads. That doesn't mean it's more likely to land tails the eleventh time.

Likewise, in the story of the boy who cried wolf, the first time he "cried wolf," everyone believed him but there was no wolf. Likewise with the second time. But the third time, he "cried wolf" and the wolf actually came, but no one believed him.

Do I believe the world will end in 2012? No. But to say it won't end then because it didn't end all the other times people said it would end makes no sense. People saying the world will end has no effect on whether it actually will end.

Every day I could say "It will be 70 degrees Fahrenheit out today." The days it is 70, I will have been correct. The days it isn't, I will have been wrong. My saying it will be 70 degrees has no predictive effect, but just because I am often wrong doesn't make me always wrong in my prediction.

In any given day, there is a slightly above-zero chance that the world may end.
The point, however, is that an ancient civilization's calender ending on a particular date does NOT in any shape or form make that date any more likely than any other random date.
So to focus on a particular day because it corresponds to some calender is shear stupidity.

Tipped OuT
October 26th, 2009, 11:58 PM
In any given day, there is a slightly above-zero chance that the world may end.
The point, however, is that an ancient civilization's calender ending on a particular date does NOT in any shape or form make that date any more likely than any other random date.
So to focus on a particular day because it corresponds to some calender is shear stupidity.

That's only half of the story. I believe there's something about Planet X, worlds colliding, sun exploding... lol

aysiu
October 26th, 2009, 11:58 PM
In any given day, there is a slightly above-zero chance that the world may end.
The point, however, is that an ancient civilization's calender ending on a particular date does NOT in any shape or form make that date any more likely than any other random date.
So to focus on a particular day because it corresponds to some calender is shear stupidity.
That's not what I'm talking about, though.

I'm not saying 2012 is a valid end-of-the-world year. I'm just saying it's no less valid than any other year, and it's no more valid, either.

Some people in this thread appear to be saying that it can't be the end of the world in 2012 simply because it wasn't the end of the world in 2000 or in any of the other years others have said the world will end. That makes no sense for the reasons I stated earlier.

bodyharvester
October 27th, 2009, 12:05 AM
The world could very well end some time during 2012, however, it is the reason given for the catastrophic end which i disagree with.

SunnyRabbiera
October 27th, 2009, 12:08 AM
So basically you're a pessimist who's ignorant to all the accomplishments of man kind. While people are working on solving Earths energy problems you're sitting in front of your computer telling people how terrible they are. While people are making huge leaps forwards in medical technology, here you are again telling us how hopeless they are. And while people are out there making huge progress in a multitude of other areas (eg. Aerospace) you're talking about how our race is pathetic and going in circles.

I find it to be an extremely ignorant thing to say. Yeah, there's war and crime, but who's to blame for that; The people out there breaking the law, or the people sitting in front of there computer not willing to take a look out the window to see the kid being sold drugs by the local dealer.

Yes technologically we have advanced, and I am not denying our accomplishments.
However socially we seem no better then we were in the 70's, we are certainly socially better then the 60's but it seems we learned nothing.
Look right now we seem not able to get past our issues, our world is in a state of chaos and who knows what will happen in the next few years.


Technologically we live in a very exciting age (wish I could be around in the next millennium though!). Morally we have come a long way, but still have a long road ahead. Ecologically we have potentially ruined the planet beyond recovery; maybe not, but the odds don't look good.

Logically, and sadly, I agree with you. I vote meteor, or zombies.
Zombies is good.

RichardLinx
October 27th, 2009, 12:10 AM
That's not what I'm talking about, though.

I'm not saying 2012 is a valid end-of-the-world year. I'm just saying it's no less valid than any other year, and it's no more valid, either.

Some people in this thread appear to be saying that it can't be the end of the world in 2012 simply because it wasn't the end of the world in 2000 or in any of the other years others have said the world will end. That makes no sense for the reasons I stated earlier.

Thanks for clarifying that. I don't doubt that it's possible. I was told "anything is possible" when I was in primary school and remember my friend kept bugging me and saying "So if I spit on the ground right now the world will explode" to which I'd always reply "it's possible". I think he thought I was a complete loon now that I think about it.

So sure, it's possible the world will end that day. But it's so improbable that it's really not even worth considering to any reasonable extent beyond the "hocus pocus" theory.

hoppipolla
October 27th, 2009, 12:28 AM
Not really. Based on the fact that they've predicted the world will end numerous times before because of an inconsistency in an ancient civilizations calender it would be completely rational to assume the rest of the predictions and dates are also going to be complete lunacy.

who on earth are "they"?

Tipped OuT
October 27th, 2009, 12:33 AM
who on earth are "they"?

The morons on the Discovery channel.

RichardLinx
October 27th, 2009, 12:33 AM
who on earth are "they"?

I don't know if you're joking or if you're trying to change the subject completely. Which is it? :P

hoppipolla
October 27th, 2009, 12:42 AM
I don't know if you're joking or if you're trying to change the subject completely. Which is it? :P

well, "they" could mean anyone. The media? The Illuminati? A philosopher? An ancient race? A conspiracy theorist? An alien probe victim? What? lol

RichardLinx
October 27th, 2009, 12:49 AM
well, "they" could mean anyone. The media? The Illuminati? A philosopher? An ancient race? A conspiracy theorist? An alien probe victim? What? lol

I think you're getting a little to specific. I don't know who. "They" was meant as a generalization of the fanatics that "predicted" the end of the world. I wasn't talking about the mental cases that actually believe in the prediction. (Alien Probe Victims, etc)

Edit: No offense to any Alien probe victims on the board. I'm sure it was a terrifying experience.

hoppipolla
October 27th, 2009, 12:54 AM
I think you're getting a little to specific. I don't know who. "They" was meant as a generalization of the fanatics that "predicted" the end of the world. I wasn't talking about the mental cases that actually believe in the prediction. (Alien Probe Victims, etc)

Edit: No offense to any Alien probe victims on the board. I'm sure it was a terrifying experience.

But that's assuming:

a) that it was "fanatics" who first came up with this stuff every time (not just people with information we don't have or people who have been able to connect the dots in a unique way)

b) that they were the SAME fanatics who came up with the last one xD

"They" means nothing, all these predictions are by different people and as such have different levels of credibility. However, to really prove or disprove something you need to do research.

JillSwift
October 27th, 2009, 01:23 AM
Tsk.

There are two reasons the 2012 doom prediction is just like the previous doom predictions:

1. No supporting evidence.

The whole thing is based on a very degraded single inscription that from the very little is left could be interpreted to mean a cataclysm. Then things were added to make it sound more likely, such as the alignment of earth, the sun, and galactic central. Sadly, every one of these additions is either an utter fabrication, or simply doesn't matter (like the alignment - this won't be the first time that's happened. In fact, it's a yearly thing.)
2. Evidence to the contrary.

There are Mayan inscriptions predicting events well past the 13th B'ak'tun.
Prognostication is only guesswork unless you have evidence. The thing with guesswork is, if you have enough people guessing and enough opportunity, someone's eventually going to be right. It's the law of large numbers.

magmon
October 27th, 2009, 01:36 AM
yeah but see this is the problem, people assume because all the previous dates and predictions weren't true that the next one won't be also.

Believe it or not there are LOTS of things that could severely harm mankind or wipe us out, and to just rule out all dates as untrue based on previous, often completely unrelated, ones is a bit silly IMO.

All the things that will likely end the world are not predictable, therefor if any predicted date happens, it is pure luck. Armageddon theories should be ignored, in my humble opinion.

hoppipolla
October 27th, 2009, 01:39 AM
All the things that will likely end the world are not predictable, therefor if any predicted date happens, it is pure luck. Armageddon theories should be ignored, in my humble opinion.

But lots of them can be predicted, such as meteors hitting or supervolcanoes erupting.

And some interesting points there JillSwift :) You'll notice my arguments were more from a "keep an open mind and do your own research" point of view, because I haven't actually made the time to do some proper research on 2012 myself yet, just dribs and drabs :)

magmon
October 27th, 2009, 01:41 AM
But lots of them can be predicted, such as meteors hitting or supervolcanoes erupting.

And some interesting points there JillSwift :) You'll notice my arguments were more from a "keep an open mind and do your own research" point of view, because I haven't actually made the time to do some proper research on 2012 myself yet, just dribs and drabs :)

Both of your events can only be given time frames that can still be wrong. Any event could happen to change the course of a meteor. Super volcanoes don't currently exist with the capability to destroy the world, and they can't be perfectly predicted.

Groucho Marxist
October 27th, 2009, 01:42 AM
You wouldn't believe the otherwise intelligent, intellectual, composed and just damn smart people in everyday life who utterly believe the world will end in 2012.

#-o

It did not end when "Y2k" was supposed to destroy the world; I highly doubt anything other than "hangover" will result from the changing of 2011 to 2012 for most people.

samh785
October 27th, 2009, 01:50 AM
yeah but see this is the problem, people assume because all the previous dates and predictions weren't true that the next one won't be also.

Believe it or not there are LOTS of things that could severely harm mankind or wipe us out, and to just rule out all dates as untrue based on previous, often completely unrelated, ones is a bit silly IMO.
I wouldn't assume that it was untrue if there was the tiniest shred of evidence that pointed to 2012 specifically being the end of the world. I am well aware that there are many things capable of wiping out humanity, but there simply isn't a way to predict the future without logical reasoning. It's good to keep an open mind, but some things (e.g. Armageddon, President of U.S. being a Kenyan, People never having been to the moon) are just rubbish that have no factual basis in reality.

hoppipolla
October 27th, 2009, 02:30 AM
Both of your events can only be given time frames that can still be wrong. Any event could happen to change the course of a meteor. Super volcanoes don't currently exist with the capability to destroy the world, and they can't be perfectly predicted.

I never said most threats could be predicted for CERTAIN or within a tight timeframe, I just said they could be predicted.

And as far as I'm aware some supervolcanoes are insanely powerful, with the power to if not wipe us out then reduce our numbers to a fraction of what they are currently.

Whatever. All I'm saying it keep an open mind, I'm not saying believe every crackpot theory that comes along lol Just people should always do their research before they pass judgement ^_^

Crunchy the Headcrab
October 27th, 2009, 02:35 AM
OMG the world's gonna end in 2220!! THE SKY IS FALLLLLINNNG!!! :o
No. No. No.

The sky doesn't fall until 2036. That's when Apophis (the uncreator) hits.

nubimax
October 27th, 2009, 02:37 AM
The reason the Mayan calendar ended where it did is because the Mayans ran out of space on the rock they were chiseling the dates on. As for super volcanoes you don't need a super volcano to cause havoc. There is one sitting in Iceland right now that has been instrumental in causing disasters for the last 1500 years ie the black plague in Europe the French Revolution, at the same time killed 60% of Egypt, about the same in Japan, 90% of the natives of Alaska. and for you people in south Carolina Charleston Harbor froze over and that was just on medium volcano in Iceland Indonesia has bigger ones that have done more damage. Read a little history and look into cause and effect.
M

RichardLinx
October 27th, 2009, 02:47 AM
Look, if you really want the world to end I can always create a robot army and just get it over with.

Crunchy the Headcrab
October 27th, 2009, 02:49 AM
Look, if you really want the world to end I can always create a robot army and just get it over with.
Reporting for duty, commander!

samh785
October 27th, 2009, 02:49 AM
No. No. No.

The sky doesn't fall until 2036. That's when Apophis (the uncreator) hits.
yes.

handy
October 27th, 2009, 02:55 AM
2012 and the Long Count

According to the Popol Vuh, a book compiling details of creation accounts known to the K'iche' Maya of the Colonial-era highlands, we are living in the fourth world.[10] The Popol Vuh describes the first three creations that the gods failed in making and the creation of the successful fourth world where men were placed. In the Maya Long Count, the previous creation ended at the start of a 13th b'ak'tun.

The previous creation ended on a long count of 12.19.19.17.19. Another 12.19.19.17.19 will occur on December 20, 2012, followed by the start of the fourteenth b'ak'tun, 13.0.0.0.0, on December 21, 2012.[11] There is only one reference to the current creation's 13th b'ak'tun in the fragmentary Mayan corpus: Tortuguero Monument 6, part of a ruler's inscription.

Maya inscriptions occasionally reference future predicted events or commemorations that would occur on dates that lie beyond 2012 (that is, beyond the completion of the 13th b'ak'tun of the current era). Most of these are in the form of "distance dates" where some Long Count date is given, together with a Distance Number that is to be added to the Long Count date to arrive at this future date.

For example, on the west panel at the Temple of Inscriptions in Palenque, a section of the text projects into the future to the 80th Calendar Round (CR) 'anniversary' of the famous Palenque ruler K'inich Janaab' Pakal's accession to the throne (Pakal's accession occurred on a Calendar Round date 5 Lamat 1 Mol, at Long Count 9.9.2.4.8 equivalent to 27 July 615 CE).[12] It does this by commencing with Pakal's birthdate 9.8.9.13.0 8 Ajaw 13 Pop (24 March 603 CE) and adding to it the Distance Number 10.11.10.5.8.[13] This calculation arrives at the 80th Calendar Round since his accession, a day that also has a CR date of 5 Lamat 1 Mol, but which lies over 4,000 years in the future from Pakal's time—the day 21 October in the year 4772. The inscription notes that this day would fall eight days after the completion of the 1st piktun [since the creation or zero date of the Long Count system], where the piktun is the next-highest order above the b'ak'tun in the Long Count. If the completion date of that piktun—13 October 4772—were to be written out in Long Count notation, it could be represented as 1.0.0.0.0.0. The 80th CR anniversary date, eight days later, would be 1.0.0.0.0.8 5 Lamat 1 Mol.[14]

Despite the publicity generated by the 2012 date, Susan Milbrath, curator of Latin American Art and Archaeology at the Florida Museum of Natural History, stated that "We [the archaeological community] have no record or knowledge that [the Maya] would think the world would come to an end" in 2012.[15] "For the ancient Maya, it was a huge celebration to make it to the end of a whole cycle," says Sandra Noble, executive director of the Foundation for the Advancement of Mesoamerican Studies in Crystal River, Florida. To render December 21, 2012, as a doomsday event or moment of cosmic shifting, she says, is "a complete fabrication and a chance for a lot of people to cash in."[16] "There will be another cycle," says E. Wyllys Andrews V, director of the Tulane University Middle American Research Institute (MARI). "We know the Maya thought there was one before this, and that implies they were comfortable with the idea of another one after this." [17]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesoamerican_Long_Count_calendar

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_phenomenon#Galactic_alignment

All good fun. :)

Junkieman
October 28th, 2009, 03:54 PM
Someone actually cashed in on a 2012 movie? Where have I been? *checks the date for missing decades*

Either way, time has proven that people just love putting dates to the apocalypse, and people just *love* creating hoaxes.

This is by no means related in topic, but the concept of crystals that heal (http://www.the-crystal-chamber.net/) fall into the exact same category as dooms-day predictions. Makes for an apparent epic movie plot though! :popcorn:

Swagman
October 28th, 2009, 04:08 PM
People have said the world was going to end many times, and it never has. For the Mayan civilization, the world ended a long time ago. :P

The Mayans are still alive

http://www.mayanmajix.com/

SunnyRabbiera
October 28th, 2009, 04:40 PM
It did not end when "Y2k" was supposed to destroy the world; I highly doubt anything other than "hangover" will result from the changing of 2011 to 2012 for most people.

Thats actually the biggest misconception about the 2012 prophecy actually, January 1st 2012 is fine, its December 21st when the Mayan Long count ends.

koleoptero
October 28th, 2009, 05:14 PM
i remember posting here about this a while back , believe what you will but its better to be prepared and aware than not to be . . . , knowledge is power!!

Define knowledge...

benj1
October 28th, 2009, 05:14 PM
Thats actually the biggest misconception about the 2012 prophecy actually, January 1st 2012 is fine, its December 21st when the Mayan Long count ends.

the biggest misconception about the 'prophecy' is that the world will actually end.


whats the point of predicting the end of the world anyway, what are you going to do, stock up on beans and tinned spaghetti?


anyway i confidently predict that the world will end within the next 10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 00000000 years

teamjh14
October 28th, 2009, 05:24 PM
Heh. Funny how when no one knows what's going to happen, they just predict the end. Y2K, the Cuban Missle Crisis, 9/11...how uncreative.


Suddenly, COLE, catching the AGENTS by surprise, wrenches free,
shoves them aside, and stumbles down the rest of the staircase.

INT. FOYER/MASON MANSION

COLE heads for the front door, but there's an AGENT there! COLE
turns and limps madly toward the dining room, pushing his way
through the crowd of amazed GUESTS.

INT. DINING ROOM/MASON MANSION

SERVANTS, clearing the table, look up astonished as two AGENTS
burst into the room.

AGENT #4
Did a man just come through here...limping?

The End.

Firestem4
October 28th, 2009, 05:41 PM
Believe it or not there are LOTS of things that could severely harm mankind or wipe us out...

Yeah, I completely agree. And stupidity just keeps getting worse! :P

handy
October 28th, 2009, 05:48 PM
...
Either way, time has proven that people just love putting dates to the apocalypse, and people just *love* creating hoaxes.
...

The Christian paradox:
How a faithful nation gets Jesus wrong

By Bill McKibben

What it means to be Christian in America. An excerpt from this report appeared in August 2005. The complete text appears below.

Only 40 percent of Americans can name more than four of the Ten Commandments, and a scant half can cite any of the four authors of the Gospels. Twelve percent believe Joan of Arc was Noah's wife. This failure to recall the specifics of our Christian heritage may be further evidence of our nation's educational decline, but it probably doesn't matter all that much in spiritual or political terms. Here is a statistic that does matter: Three quarters of Americans believe the Bible teaches that “God helps those who help themselves.” That is, three out of four Americans believe that this uber-American idea, a notion at the core of our current individualist politics and culture, which was in fact uttered by Ben Franklin, actually appears in Holy Scripture. The thing is, not only is Franklin's wisdom not biblical; it's counter-biblical. Few ideas could be further from the gospel message, with its radical summons to love of neighbor. On this essential matter, most Americans—most American Christians—are simply wrong, as if 75 percent of American scientists believed that Newton proved gravity causes apples to fly up.

benj1
October 28th, 2009, 05:50 PM
Heh. Funny how when no one knows what's going to happen, they just predict the end. Y2K, the Cuban Missle Crisis, 9/11...how uncreative.


when did anyone predict the end of the world after 9/11 ?

also with the cuban missile crisis, there probably was a good chance of us all becoming radioactive fallout.

benj1
October 28th, 2009, 06:04 PM
The Christian paradox:
How a faithful nation gets Jesus wrong

By Bill McKibben

What it means to be Christian in America. An excerpt from this report appeared in August 2005. The complete text appears below.

Only 40 percent of Americans can name more than four of the Ten Commandments, and a scant half can cite any of the four authors of the Gospels. Twelve percent believe Joan of Arc was Noah's wife. This failure to recall the specifics of our Christian heritage may be further evidence of our nation's educational decline, but it probably doesn't matter all that much in spiritual or political terms. Here is a statistic that does matter: Three quarters of Americans believe the Bible teaches that “God helps those who help themselves.” That is, three out of four Americans believe that this uber-American idea, a notion at the core of our current individualist politics and culture, which was in fact uttered by Ben Franklin, actually appears in Holy Scripture. The thing is, not only is Franklin's wisdom not biblical; it's counter-biblical. Few ideas could be further from the gospel message, with its radical summons to love of neighbor. On this essential matter, most Americans—most American Christians—are simply wrong, as if 75 percent of American scientists believed that Newton proved gravity causes apples to fly up.

meh religion has been corrupted though out the ages, Christianity was defined by the council of Nicea, and people have been changing it ever since.
anyway i dont think interpreting religion can be equated with making something up that directly conrtadicts scientific fact.

sudoer541
October 28th, 2009, 06:18 PM
All the things that will likely end the world are not predictable, therefor if any predicted date happens, it is pure luck. Armageddon theories should be ignored, in my humble opinion.

+1 the world will end unexpectedly. no dates etc

spupy
October 28th, 2009, 06:30 PM
Meh, this facebook quiz says I will day in 2016, so I don't care anyway. :)

Danny Dubya
October 28th, 2009, 06:48 PM
Some new-agers think the world as we know it will start to end in 2012, not the Earth itself. Meaning, the material world where everyone is psychologically asleep would slowly dissolve away.

Just thought I'd mention that, since everyone who's posted so far appears to be literally interpreting the prediction that "the world will end in 2012".

benj1
October 28th, 2009, 07:03 PM
Some new-agers think the world as we know it will start to end in 2012, not the Earth itself. Meaning, the material world where everyone is psychologically asleep would slowly dissolve away.

Just thought I'd mention that, since everyone who's posted so far appears to be literally interpreting the prediction that "the world will end in 2012".

thats a better prediction, alot more woolly, you could argue that happened whatever occured.

handy
October 29th, 2009, 02:26 AM
meh religion has been corrupted though out the ages, Christianity was defined by the council of Nicea, and people have been changing it ever since.
anyway i dont think interpreting religion can be equated with making something up that directly conrtadicts scientific fact.

Because something is scientific doesn't mean that most (U.S. people anyway) believe in it:

http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp?PID=982

benj1
October 29th, 2009, 04:03 AM
Because something is scientific doesn't mean that most (U.S. people anyway) believe in it:

http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp?PID=982
i know, (i have to say those creationism statistics are less scary than some ive seen), my point is that its different believing something that is in direct contradiction to accepted science, and believing something that doesnt fit in snuggly with your chosen religions accepted beliefs, its faith after all that what its all about, ask 10 religious people obout theology and youll get ten different answers :D.

handy
October 29th, 2009, 04:47 AM
i know, (i have to say those creationism statistics are less scary than some ive seen), my point is that its different believing something that is in direct contradiction to accepted science, and believing something that doesnt fit in snuggly with your chosen religions accepted beliefs, its faith after all that what its all about, ask 10 religious people obout theology and youll get ten different answers :D.

This site has a great deal of info' on Religion in the U.S.:

http://religions.pewforum.org/

In reply to your ask 10 people question above, the first thing that came to mind was that we are all different points of view, with all of the subtle & not so subtle variables that go with that. :)

xuCGC002
October 29th, 2009, 04:56 AM
It's a good thing people can't start talking about religion.


Jesus

Crap. Controversy.

Junkieman
October 29th, 2009, 07:53 AM
Some new-agers think the world as we know it will start to end in 2012, not the Earth itself. Meaning, the material world where everyone is psychologically asleep would slowly dissolve away

Great way to put it! These folk are too busy with their pseudo-science, they fail with real world news; Like how most edible sea life might be consumed to death (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/11/061102-seafood-threat.html) in the next 40 years. :(

handy
October 29th, 2009, 07:54 AM
It's a good thing people can't start talking about religion.



Jesus

Crap. Controversy.

I've been misquoted & it's been put in a frame!

You have put that word in my mouth!

Junkieman
October 29th, 2009, 08:05 AM
The Christian paradox:
How a faithful nation gets Jesus wrong

I didn't mention religion, as far as we're concerned this is new-age pseudoscience humbug.

handy
October 29th, 2009, 10:16 AM
I didn't mention religion, as far as we're concerned this is new-age pseudoscience humbug.

Who is "we"?

benj1
October 29th, 2009, 04:09 PM
Great way to put it! These folk are too busy with their pseudo-science, they fail with real world news; Like how most edible sea life might be consumed to death (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/11/061102-seafood-threat.html) in the next 40 years. :(
im assuming your being sarcastic, the link title seem to indicate you dont take it very seriously
i dont think you can equate some rubbish about the world ending based on a calendar system no body uses with an actual threat, that is happening right now, did you actually read the article or just look at the title that doesnt even match up with the time scales in the article.
here i will quote the relevant passage


According to the study, the loss of ocean biodiversity is accelerating, and 29 percent of the seafood species humans consume have already crashed. If the long-term trend continues, in 30 years there will be little or no seafood available for sustainable harvest.

is that so wacky?

el mariachi
October 29th, 2009, 04:57 PM
yeah but see this is the problem, people assume because all the previous dates and predictions weren't true that the next one won't be also.

Believe it or not there are LOTS of things that could severely harm mankind or wipe us out, and to just rule out all dates as untrue based on previous, often completely unrelated, ones is a bit silly IMO.

North Korea sending a nuke to japan, activating the alliances system and thus ending the world because of some stupid all-out nuke attack against each other? I can see that coming... But that wouldn't be the end of the world! People often underestimate the power of Earth to withstand pain :D it's a bulky planet you know

Some scientist say that the planet is getting warmer due to the sun and not because of pollution.. and then some people say that ignorance is bless.

cjnkns
October 29th, 2009, 05:00 PM
My desk calendar ends this December, but that doesn't mean the world is coming to and end.... does it?

disclaimer: I wasn't the one who thought of the above, but still true in its obviousness.

cjnkns
October 29th, 2009, 05:02 PM
My desk calendar ends this December, but that doesn't mean the world is coming to and end.... does it?

disclaimer: I wasn't the one who thought of the above, but still true in its obviousness.

el mariachi
October 29th, 2009, 05:05 PM
lol my clock only has 12 numbers...

ElSlunko
October 29th, 2009, 05:14 PM
My desk calendar ends this December, but that doesn't mean the world is coming to and end.... does it?

disclaimer: I wasn't the one who thought of the above, but still true in its obviousness.


This is also an accurate statement for the Mayan Calendar. It just had an arbitrary end date. I'm sure a few thousand years later a mayan figured to carve a new calendar out.

It was modern scientists who spun the theory out of nothing.

JillSwift
October 29th, 2009, 05:16 PM
It was modern scientists who spun the theory out of nothing.
Ahahahahahahahaaaaa oh my sides!

ElSlunko
October 29th, 2009, 05:22 PM
By the way I must say I absolutely love these forums. I can get my daily nerd dose by reading about ubuntu / computer related things and have a discussion about 2012 at the same time!

J V
October 29th, 2009, 05:32 PM
I don't expect to see the universe come to an end in 2012, but I wouldn't be surprised to see civilization collapse because so many people fell for it. Humans can be pretty gullible you know.Good point :)


To be honest I think it's more shocking how quick people are to condemn things like this before they even understand them or do the research!

I mean I know there are lots of dates on which people claim the world will end or terrible events will occur and most turn out to be nonsense, but that's no reason to turn a blind eye to ALL of them!No-one needs to... You either believe that:
* Doomsday will never be predicted
* Doomsday involves killing all the infidels (In which case you are safe if you believe it)
* There is no Doomsday
* Doomsday occurs slowly over the course of the next 300-million odd years

Now while the last is certainly not the most optimistic of doomsdays, no-one really has a reason to bother wondering when (if) it will happen...


Once 2012 passes and everybody is done crapping their pants, somebody is going to make a new prediction of the end of the world, with new "scientific" theories.Nostradamus! Nostradamus!

mick222
October 29th, 2009, 05:39 PM
Does anybody actually believe this crap.

benj1
October 29th, 2009, 07:31 PM
It was modern scientists who spun the theory out of nothing.

you must use a very loose definition of scientist

Blacklightbulb
October 29th, 2009, 07:53 PM
This isn't some kind of theory that can't be proven neither right nor wrong. The reasons and proof to decline this claim are so vast that it will take you an infinity of time to list them all. People are just gullible enough to think that this actually can make some sense and so they don't decline it even with proof against it.

Junkieman
October 29th, 2009, 08:27 PM
@benj1 Im environmentally conscious so yeah its serious, much more than the 2012 theory. 30/40 years is estimating, but near wipe-out in half a generation is not cool.

Hopefully our alien overlords will be more lenient on us! ;)

Exodist
October 29th, 2009, 08:32 PM
I wonder if anyone ever thought the reason Mayans stopped the calender at 2012 was only because "they ran out of room to wright another year on it".??:D

Chronon
October 29th, 2009, 08:34 PM
To be honest I think it's more shocking how quick people are to condemn things like this before they even understand them or do the research!

I mean I know there are lots of dates on which people claim the world will end or terrible events will occur and most turn out to be nonsense, but that's no reason to turn a blind eye to ALL of them!
Yes, but I have an efficient sieve for determining which claims to reject and which to entertain. Claims that rely on logic and observations that are accessible to me I would entertain (such as possible cataclysm by Apophis in 2036). Claims that rely on superstitious beliefs fail to be caught in my sieve and I don't entertain them.

Chronon
October 29th, 2009, 08:53 PM
It doesn't make sense to say "There was some other scare, and nothing happened, so nothing will happen this time either."

If you flip a coin, the chance of it landing heads or tails is 50/50. It is always 50/50. It doesn't matter if the last ten times you happened to flip it, it landed heads. That doesn't mean it's more likely to land tails the eleventh time.

Likewise, in the story of the boy who cried wolf, the first time he "cried wolf," everyone believed him but there was no wolf. Likewise with the second time. But the third time, he "cried wolf" and the wolf actually came, but no one believed him.

Do I believe the world will end in 2012? No. But to say it won't end then because it didn't end all the other times people said it would end makes no sense. People saying the world will end has no effect on whether it actually will end.

Every day I could say "It will be 70 degrees Fahrenheit out today." The days it is 70, I will have been correct. The days it isn't, I will have been wrong. My saying it will be 70 degrees has no predictive effect, but just because I am often wrong doesn't make me always wrong in my prediction.

Let us regard the chance of cataclysm befalling us as random. As you say, the probability of this happening is independent of history. Without further information to modify our predictive model, the probability distribution should remain flat and this suggests that the observer should be just as freaked out (or not) about cataclysm befalling us every single day. There should be no special, preferred dates without further information.

Edit: Obviously, some people consider prophecy to be reliable information and use it to update their probability distributions. I do not.

lisati
October 29th, 2009, 08:55 PM
Does anybody actually believe this crap.

Sadly yes. And some people believed that planes would fall out of the sky, microwave ovens and washing machines would stop working, and stuff like that, round about 1 January 2000. As if the engineers would be stupid enough to make the ability to operate machinery safely dependent on the date. If the engineers and design boffins were doing their jobs properly, the worst thing that could happen was that the ability to use any available system logs get messed up ever so slightly.

benj1
October 29th, 2009, 08:59 PM
@benj1 Im environmentally conscious so yeah its serious, much more than the 2012 theory. 30/40 years is estimating, but near wipe-out in half a generation is not cool.

Hopefully our alien overlords will be more lenient on us! ;)

ok my appologies
i wasnt sure whether you were taking the p*ss or not the link title and the title of the article seemed a little ott

benj1
October 29th, 2009, 09:07 PM
Let us regard the chance of cataclysm befalling us as random. As you say, the probability of this happening is independent of history.

i agree with the sentiment but i dont think thats strictly true, it assumes the earth will last forever which is wrong, as for a start the sun has a finite lifespan, so there is actually an end date, so with each day that goes by the chance relatively speaking of something happening increases. so it isnt strictly independent of history in that respect.

or to put it another way, you can toss coins all day, theres no reason that it should ever land on heads, whereas the earth is bound to end some day so every day that it doesnt increases the chances that tomorrow it will.

Chronon
October 29th, 2009, 09:39 PM
i agree with the sentiment but i dont think thats strictly true, it assumes the earth will last forever which is wrong, as for a start the sun has a finite lifespan, so there is actually an end date, so with each day that goes by the chance relatively speaking of something happening increases. so it isnt strictly independent of history in that respect.

or to put it another way, you can toss coins all day, theres no reason that it should ever land on heads, whereas the earth is bound to end some day so every day that it doesnt increases the chances that tomorrow it will.

The relative fluctuation to the probabilities due to the eventual death of the sun will not alter the day to day probabilities during the course of your lifetime. I.e., unless you believe that the sun has a non-negligible probability of dying during your lifetime, this doesn't contribute to your day-to-day calculated probability for cataclysm. I consider the odds that the sun will die during my lifetime negligible, so I exclude it from my calculation of the day-to-day probability of life-ending cataclysm.

Moreover, if you wish to consider probabilities over time intervals greatly in excess of a human lifetime, the thermodynamic death of the sun is a predictable outcome based on our understanding of the sun's internal dynamics. We need not treat it as a purely random process. Sudden cataclysms of unknown origin do not benefit from such knowledge and so I consider it reasonable to treat their contribution as random.

EDIT: I understand this discussion to be about superstitious belief in sudden cataclysm, not about belief in eventual destruction of Earth by known causes.

benj1
October 29th, 2009, 10:28 PM
The relative fluctuation to the probabilities due to the eventual death of the sun will not alter the day to day probabilities during the course of your lifetime. I.e., unless you believe that the sun has a non-negligible probability of dying during your lifetime, this doesn't contribute to your day-to-day calculated probability for cataclysm. I consider the odds that the sun will die during my lifetime negligible, so I exclude it from my calculation of the day-to-day probability of life-ending cataclysm.

Moreover, if you wish to consider probabilities over time intervals greatly in excess of a human lifetime, the thermodynamic death of the sun is a predictable outcome based on our understanding of the sun's internal dynamics. We need not treat it as a purely random process. Sudden cataclysms of unknown origin do not benefit from such knowledge and so I consider it reasonable to treat their contribution as random.

EDIT: I understand this discussion to be about superstitious belief in sudden cataclysm, not about belief in eventual destruction of Earth by known causes.

my point was that assuming the earth wont last 1000000000000000000000000000000 years, at the moment this year, we have a 1 in 1000000000000000000000000000000 chance of being destroyed.
next year (assuming we arent destroyed this year) we have a 1 in
999999999999999999999999999999 chance of being destroyed,
now its perfectly reasonable (well as reasonable as the theory of the world ending in 2012) to theorise that the earth will end when the mayan calender ends the next time around (which is beyond our lifetime, and possibly beyond our ability to predict), at that point it will statistically more likely that we will have been/will be destroyed.

im not sure that its helpful to differentiate between random events and known events, as everything that could possibly destroy us is predictable (the sun going super nova, asteroid impact, blackhole), non are really random as such, just unknown to us, plus the 2012 'threat' isnt really specified, its possible aliens could cause the sun to go supernova, thus bringing about our downfall, so in that case you cant discount any threats;)

Chronon
October 29th, 2009, 11:32 PM
im not sure that its helpful to differentiate between random events and known events, as everything that could possibly destroy us is predictable (the sun going super nova, asteroid impact, blackhole), non are really random as such, just unknown to us, plus the 2012 'threat' isnt really specified, its possible aliens could cause the sun to go supernova, thus bringing about our downfall, so in that case you cant discount any threats;)

It is helpful to differentiate between them because known events stemming from well understood processes impose non-random changes to your probability density function. I am not claiming that any real event is truly random. It's our ignorance about events and how they correlate with other events that makes them appear random. An event that we have zero information about should rightly (IMO) be described in terms of a random process.

An asteroid will eventually hit us. This does not mean that the probability of being hit tomorrow is higher than the probability for us to be hit today, given that we are not hit today. Without the information we are helpless but to model such an event as a random process, like rolling dice or spinning roulette wheels. Something like the sun burning out is highly non-random because we can predict that the probability of it burning out in the next century is insignificant and as time goes on we get a better idea about precisely when it will burn out.

I am not discounting anything. You must appreciate that the burden of proof is on the person making the claim (of destruction, in this case). I am not saying it won't be destroyed on that date (or today, or tomorrow, or etc.). I am saying that no known physical mechanism predicts a greatly increased chance of destruction on that particular day compared with any other day in its neighborhood.


my point was that assuming the earth wont last 1000000000000000000000000000000 years, at the moment this year, we have a 1 in 1000000000000000000000000000000 chance of being destroyed.
next year (assuming we arent destroyed this year) we have a 1 in
999999999999999999999999999999 chance of being destroyed,
For one thing, we don't know the exact date that the sun will run out of fuel. For another, the probability function undergoes a sharp transition at around the expectation value for that date. It is not a smoothly increasing function. It remains quite small and then ramps up (like a step function) in the vicinity of our best guess as to when the sun runs out of fuel (or transitions to a red giant -- whichever event we're trying to model).


now its perfectly reasonable (well as reasonable as the theory of the world ending in 2012) to theorise that the earth will end when the mayan calender ends the next time around (which is beyond our lifetime, and possibly beyond our ability to predict), at that point it will statistically more likely that we will have been/will be destroyed.
Yes, there is some probability that we could assign each day or each year to the Earth facing a cataclysm. The probability for it to have been destroyed by a given date in the future goes up the further out we try to assess the probability (since we have to integrate the probability density). This doesn't say anything about the probability density (itself) increasing. I.e. it's not necessary to claim that the probability for the Earth to be destroyed on a given day 10,000 years in the future is larger than for it to be destroyed today.

handy
October 30th, 2009, 05:06 AM
Many in the scientific community consider a mutating virus to be the most likely possible cause of human extinction.

[Edit:] I have heard no predictions re the date on that one though...

cjminton
October 30th, 2009, 05:12 AM
I've also heard that our calendar is wrong too, todays date is actually 10-29-2016 (7 years out) so that means that the world is still going to end around 2012 in our current calendar, sorry sinners the time for your execution is imminent! Repent now!

benj1
October 30th, 2009, 03:13 PM
It is helpful to differentiate between them because known events stemming from well understood processes impose non-random changes to your probability density function. I am not claiming that any real event is truly random. It's our ignorance about events and how they correlate with other events that makes them appear random. An event that we have zero information about should rightly (IMO) be described in terms of a random process.

ok, just wanted to make it clear that just because a process is unknown, doesnt make it random, yes you can treat it as random as in this case, but i would prefer to maintain a distinction.


An asteroid will eventually hit us. This does not mean that the probability of being hit tomorrow is higher than the probability for us to be hit today, given that we are not hit today. Without the information we are helpless but to model such an event as a random process, like rolling dice or spinning roulette wheels. Something like the sun burning out is highly non-random because we can predict that the probability of it burning out in the next century is insignificant and as time goes on we get a better idea about precisely when it will burn out.

For one thing, we don't know the exact date that the sun will run out of fuel. For another, the probability function undergoes a sharp transition at around the expectation value for that date. It is not a smoothly increasing function. It remains quite small and then ramps up (like a step function) in the vicinity of our best guess as to when the sun runs out of fuel (or transitions to a red giant -- whichever event we're trying to model).

Yes, there is some probability that we could assign each day or each year to the Earth facing a cataclysm. The probability for it to have been destroyed by a given date in the future goes up the further out we try to assess the probability (since we have to integrate the probability density). This doesn't say anything about the probability density (itself) increasing. I.e. it's not necessary to claim that the probability for the Earth to be destroyed on a given day 10,000 years in the future is larger than for it to be destroyed today.

i agree the sun example could be better, i was trying to think of an example that could be guaranteed to happen within the arbitrary timescale.
i also agree that yes if you look year to year you can accurately determine the suns demise,
but in the long term, it isnt quite so easy to predict so increasing the chance of destruction towards an arbitrary date of destruction is valid, as the only 'known', long term is that we will be destroyed, although i agree that your method of calculation is more useful in general.

Viva
July 11th, 2010, 09:18 AM
The Hindu, one of the leading English language newspapers in India, daily re-publishes three articles from its archive from exactly 50 years ago. Here's one that caught my attention. It was originally published on July 8, 1960.


World will not end

The world may not end after all at 19-15 IST on July 14, a group of Italian mystics gathered in Courmayeur (Italy) for the event conceded somewhat ruefully on July 6. The mystics led by a Milan Paediatrician known as Brother Emmaan, watched in vain for two preliminary signs which were to take place on July 3 and July 5. On July 3 (Sunday), a nearby peak, Mont Chetif was supposed to throw off a telltale rock and the mystics some 90 in all, waited patiently at the foot of Mon Blanc to witness the event. Nothing happened. On July 5, the Mont De Saxe was supposed to tremble like a leaf but it didn't bulge an inch. Brother Emman whose real name is Dr. Elio Bianca tried to help things along by perching himself on a high rock and lifting his arms skyward in supplication. The mystics undaunted decided to sit anyway for July 14 when, according to revelations made to Brother Emman from the Great Beyond, the world will end in concert of nuclear blasts, earthquakes and tidal waves. Brother Emman's followers, who expect to be among the survivors, did not lose their sense of reality and rented only until July 15 the chalets where they will wait the Apocalypse in modern comfort.

The last line made me chuckle:)

fatality_uk
July 11th, 2010, 09:26 AM
I have already predicted with 100% accuracy that the World will in fact end in 09/07/2010 @ exactly, oh wait...



doh!

mick222
July 11th, 2010, 09:44 AM
yeah but see this is the problem, people assume because all the previous dates and predictions weren't true that the next one won't be also.

Believe it or not there are LOTS of things that could severely harm mankind or wipe us out, and to just rule out all dates as untrue based on previous, often completely unrelated, ones is a bit silly IMO.

All the dates are based either on the ravings of a madman Religious fanatic or some obscure writings . No one can tell when civilisation will end especially not from the Mayan calender,

Nano Geek
July 12th, 2010, 12:08 AM
As long as this woman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nibiru_collision#Origins) believes the world will end in 2012, I won't. :)

Old_Grey_Wolf
July 12th, 2010, 01:45 AM
If the world is going to end on a specific date, then I guess there isn't a lot I can do about it.

I'll just put my head between my knees and kiss my <snip> good-by.

:lolflag:

parker.casey@gmail.com
July 12th, 2010, 04:48 AM
The world has indeed "ended," before. Think of the Dark Ages. One third of the population dying of pestilence, famine, and war? Followed by many years of wretched suffering? Sounds like Revelations if anything ever did.

The one "fear," from 2012 that adds up at all is the SLIGHT possibility of the poles shifting around then. If that happens, the electromagnetic field protecting Earth from the Sun's flares would be down for a bit. If at that exact same time, a mammoth solar flare happens, and if by some freak chance it is pointing at us ... well, we'd probably see about a third the population die of "fire and brimstone from heaven."

... not likely. Wouldn't rule it out entirely, but not likely.

jperez
July 12th, 2010, 04:54 AM
As long as this woman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nibiru_collision#Origins) believes the world will end in 2012, I won't. :)


Nancy Lieder, a Wisconsin woman who claims that as a girl she was contacted by gray extraterrestrials called Zetas

BULL! They aren't called Zetas, they are the Asgard. Just watch Stargate SG-1. It has all the answers to anything alien related. They got it all correct. :lolflag:

Jesse~

djyoung4
July 12th, 2010, 08:16 AM
the parties are going to be insane the night before. People will not care what they are doing

sudoer541
July 12th, 2010, 08:25 PM
As long as this woman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nibiru_collision#Origins) believes the world will end in 2012, I won't. :)

lol another invention/myth by the Iraqis?:p
Who knows, Maybe 2012 will release the two chained Yoshies under the Euphrates river. OMG!!! Yoshies turned evil and they are ready to take over the world...OMG the sky is falling!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Groucho Marxist
July 12th, 2010, 10:39 PM
You wouldn't believe the otherwise intelligent, intellectual, composed and just damn smart people in everyday life who utterly believe the world will end in 2012.

#-o

Why do people readily embrace doomsday prophesies from civilizations that no longer exist?

mrdusty
July 12th, 2010, 10:59 PM
There was a cool movie about it.
Something may change, but certainly not the end of the world. In the Aztec belief there would be a change of sorts, but nothing drastic.
Remember Y2K?
Remember when they sold "bomb shelters for the coming nuclear holocaust? (oh God, just gave away my age!!)
Remember when kids were sent into the hall, sat down and told to cover their heads?
Been there, done that, still here. Will continue after 2012! See you afterwards.
People are getting too stupid for their own good.
Nuff said.
Rich

Half-Left
July 12th, 2010, 11:32 PM
Why do people readily embrace doomsday prophesies from civilizations that no longer exist?

Because it's a good way to sell books, spread fear and make money.

proggy
July 13th, 2010, 01:13 AM
Matthew 24:35-36 (King James Version)

35Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.
36But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.

inobe
July 13th, 2010, 01:46 AM
we have a better chance never waking up when we go to bed tonight.

Twitch6000
July 13th, 2010, 02:02 AM
Matthew 24:35-36 (King James Version)

35Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.
36But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.

Ofcourse that is true,it came from the bible. The bible knows all :roll: .

overdrank
July 13th, 2010, 02:05 AM
On that note. Thread closed