2012: The Truth!

[ShadowBrain]

An overview.
A more in-depth look.

I know there's sort of been threads about this before, but... I think this pretty much puts the issue to bed. Discuss!

[MaxVance]

There's a larger chance of the Large Hadron Collider being the end of the world than the rotation of the Mayan calendar.

[PaperLuigi]

I don't believe the world will end on December 21, 2012. The world will end when it ends. It could be tomorrow. It could be 100 years from now. It could be 2036 (a likely date since an asteroid will come close to impacting Earth). But these aren't definite answers to the ultimate question. They're just educated guesses (I use the term lightly). I really don't see why everyone is getting hyped up about this date and these articles prove that anyone who's freaking out over something they don't really understand just need to chill.

[Glorb]

I have it from a reliable source that the world will either end on December 31st, 1999, or when the Terminators take over in 2029.

[MushroomJunkie]

No I'm pretty sure the world ended in 1978 when the space invaders aliens killed everything.

[Turtlekid1]

Just as long as it's after 2063.  I want to meet a Vulcan!

[PaperLuigi]

Some people even believe that 2008 will mark the end of the world. They're the same people who predicted that 2007 spelled doom for the human race.

[MushroomJunkie]

I think that the end of the world maybe a century away, maybe less, maybe more.  No one will ever know what year the world will end no matter how hard they try, but it will happen someday.

[The Chef]

The world ended yesterday.

[ShadowBrain]

"Don't worry about the world coming to an end today. It's already tomorrow in Australia."

"Unless you're in Australia. Then start worrying."

[Chupperson Weird]

The world isn't going to "end" for another few billion years, guys.

[Glorb]

I was always under the assumption that the world ends with you.

[CrossEyed7]

Any tree can drop an apple. The Mayans'll drop the freaking moon.

[missingno]

Remember when everyone thought the world was going to end on 06/06/06?

Seriously, the world isn't going to end until the sun burns out millions of years from now.

[BP]

Any tree can drop an apple.

Only apple trees.

[WarpRattler]

Sho Minamimoto was obsessed with math. He didn't have time for plant biology, even rudimentary stuff like that.

[ShadowBrain]

Only apple trees.

When otherwise... it is the end of the world.

[MushroomJunkie]

The world isn't going to "end" for another few billion years, guys.

Are you refering to living things or to the actual world?

[PaperLuigi]

MushroomJunkie...please don't. Please don't start a religious argument.

EDIT: Wasn't looking forward to participating in that. Also, he's referring to the actual planet, not human civilization.

[MushroomJunkie]

Thats all I wanted to know!

[Shyguy92]

It doesn't even matter.

The world isn't going to "end" for another few billion years, guys.

Also this is funnnnnnnnnny hahahahahahahahaha.

[PaperLuigi]

The world is going to end someday, as will the human race. Personally, I think it'll end when God wants it to, but this is just one opinion. From a scientific point of view, global warming or an asteroid will wipe us out, but a super volcano is also likely (this might not wipe out the entire human race). The actual Earth will end when the Sun expands and becomes a Super Giant, unless something totally weird happens before that (a blackhole could make its way into the Solar System).

[MushroomJunkie]

I think it'll end when God wants it to

I agree with what you said their PL "it'll end when God wants it to".  But  if you read the Bible (which I'm sure you do) it says clearly what will happen in Revelations.  It's too much to go into here so I'm gonna leave it at that.

(not trying to start any arguments here, just agreeing with PL)

[BP]

I don't care when the world ends. I mean, if it takes me with it, it's no big deal--it's not like I would have been able to do anything with my life if I survived the end of the world, because there'd be nowhere to do it, no one to do it for. It'd probably be pretty scary, as long as it was happening and I hadn't gone yet. But I doubt I'll be around when it happens anyway. Humanity will probably end first, and I hope I don't have to see that.

[Glorb]

I only want the world to end while I'm alive if:

1) I've already lived a full life
2) It ends in a srsly pwnsome way, like a Covenant invasion or zombie pandemic or some such
3) It turns out there actually is an afterlife so I can brag that I died in the end of the world

Also,

Sho Minamimoto was obsessed with math. He didn't have time for plant biology, even rudimentary stuff like that.

WP is my new bestest friend.

[Toad]

Heh.. that second website seems to be nicely prepared for the end of the world: most of the links at the bottom of the page are broken.

[Zarkanthesmasher]

I'm currently leaning towards the theory that the world will end via a giant volcanic explosion. I once saw a special on NOVA about how there is a huge amount of lava building up under the surface of the earth, which very well could be released in the next few hundred years. This kind of seismic explosion, which I believe would be equivilant to thousands of volcanoes going off at the same time, would probably incinerate the entire surface of the earth, and might even cause the earth's structure to decay. Whatever the case, the earth will be destroyed.

Personally, I think this is much more likely than an asteroid collision, both scientifically and spiritualy. Scientifically, because there still is little likelyhood that an asteroid will hit the earth in any reasonable period of time. Spiritually, because since I don't believe the earth will be destroyed by a flood again, a fire related destruction makes a lot more sense.

(Note: like the others, I'm not trying to start a discussion about theology - this is just my personal opinion and doesn't need to be turned into a huge debate with multiple sides. :P )

[Chupperson Weird]

I'm not sure that's the way to avoid one.

[ShadowBrain]

I think it's ironic that this thread was kind of supposed to dispel one of the largest end-of-the-world theories... and now the apocalypse, by any means, is all anyone can talk about.

Then again, maybe that's not too ironic, but something about it irks me.

[Glorb]

since I don't believe the earth will be destroyed by a flood again

I didn't realize the earth can be destroyed twice.

[Luigison]

It wasn't destroyed by a flood the first time.  It also was not, nor will be, destroyed by a volcano. 

So far Chup's answer seems best, but I guess this all depends on how you define "world" and according to other posts, what movie you have most recently seen.  Oh, and, just because the "Earth" is destroyed doesn't mean the human race would end.  At least not billions of years from now.  Who knows what humans could accomplish in that amount of time.  Or, maybe we'll just kill ourselves.  Me, I hope to live forever, and I don't mean by some religious or spiritual means.  I guess the same methods that could conceivably radically extent our life expectancy could also kill us.  Image every living thing on Earth being consumed by nanobots or a virus transmitted cancer. 

[PaperLuigi]

I think it's ironic that this thread was kind of supposed to dispel one of the largest end-of-the-world theories... and now the apocalypse, by any means, is all anyone can talk about.

Any topic that tries to disprove something will inevitably bring about those who will try to prove it (and vice versa).

I do not want to live forever in this world. It is simply too much to bare for even one lifetime. If we ever figure out how to extend the human life expectancy beyond what anyone thought possible, I will die knowing that I did what I could with the time I was given to begin with.

[Chupperson Weird]

I'm just waiting to go full cyborg.

[Zarkanthesmasher]

I didn't realize the earth can be destroyed twice.

If you've read the flood story, you'll know what I mean. :P

[Glitchy]

Personally, I think this is much more likely than an asteroid collision, both scientifically and spiritualy. Scientifically, because there still is little likelyhood that an asteroid will hit the earth in any reasonable period of time. Spiritually, because since I don't believe the earth will be destroyed by a flood again, a fire related destruction makes a lot more sense.

If this is the cause, however, then somehow humans will cause it themselves.

[PaperLuigi]

If you've read the flood story, you'll know what I mean. :P

*facepalm*

Dude, the world wasn't destroyed. A great deal of humanity was wiped out by the flood, but the actual planet survived.

[Luigison]

If you've read the flood story, you'll know what I mean. :P

At the time of the flood story the size of the Earth was not known.  Therefor, the destruction of the entire Earth could not have been certain.  It seems more likely that the flood was a massive flood of a small region of the Earth (as known today) even though it caused vast destruction for the time it occurred.

[PaperLuigi]

Exactly. Even though the flood killed off a good number of people and caused mass destruction, the size of the Earth was much larger. The only way to truly end the world is by getting rid of it entirely. This will take something like a black hole or a super nova star, and even then it's likely that a little piece (at an atomic level) of the Earth will survive.

I think the problem here as that some members can't distinguish between the end of the world and end of humanity. They are two totally different things.

[Glorb]

I think the only way a flood could physically destroy the planet would be if we lived on a giant piece of bread right next to a giant 7-Eleven Double Gulp cup full of Mountain Dew.

[ShadowBrain]

Two words: False vaccuum. I'll let you all fret over that.

[Zarkanthesmasher]

*facepalm*

Dude, the world wasn't destroyed. A great deal of humanity was wiped out by the flood, but the actual planet survived.

Well, the  "the world" doesn't necessarily mean the whole planet. The world can also just mean "civilization." Back in ancient times, geology didn't exist, so if you wiped out the whole surface, you were wiping out the known world. In Genesis, it DOES states that the entire world was destroyed by a flood, which makes sense if you use that definition. Also, a great deal of humanity is a bit of an understatement - everyone was wiped out except for the 8 people on the ark, which is eight out probably millions.

At the time of the flood story the size of the Earth was not known.  Therefor, the destruction of the entire Earth could not have been certain.  It seems more likely that the flood was a massive flood of a small region of the Earth (as known today) even though it caused vast destruction for the time it occurred.

Keep in mind that the earth may have very well been just one continent back before the flood - and after the flood, it broke apart. Before than, covering the entire earth with  a flood probably wouldn't have been as big a feat as it would be now.

[PaperLuigi]

Two words: False vaccuum. I'll let you all fret over that.

Yeah dude, that is a scary thought. Our destruction could be 8 seconds away and there'd be no forewarning.

[ShadowBrain]

I worry about it even less in that case, because then it'd just be so fast that no one would have any time to suffer or fret over it.

Bring on the universe-sized needle!

[Luigison]

Well, the  "the world" doesn't necessarily mean the whole planet. The world can also just mean "civilization." Back in ancient times, geology didn't exist, so if you wiped out the whole surface, you were wiping out the known world.

I know "the world" can have different definitions. 

In Genesis, it DOES states that the entire world was destroyed by a flood, which makes sense if you use that definition. Also, a great deal of humanity is a bit of an understatement - everyone was wiped out except for the 8 people on the ark, which is eight out probably millions.

The book of Genesis also has two opposing creation stories so I don't know how much validity a destruction story would have.  Besides, there is evidence that the region Noah probably lived was flooded, but no evidence that the whole world flooded nor that only eight survived.  There's actually archeological and genetic evidence contrary to that.

Keep in mind that the earth may have very well been just one continent back before the flood - and after the flood, it broke apart. Before than, covering the entire earth with  a flood probably wouldn't have been as big a feat as it would be now.

I suggest studying some historical geology.  Besides, rearranging the continents would make very little difference on how much water would be required to cover all of them.  

[Zarkanthesmasher]

I know "the world" can have different definitions. 

The book of Genesis also has two opposing creation stories so I don't know how much validity a destruction story would have.  Besides, there is evidence that the region Noah probably lived was flooded, but no evidence that the whole world flooded nor that only eight survived.  There's actually archeological and genetic evidence contrary to that.

I suggest studying some historical geology.  Besides, rearranging the continents would make very little difference on how much water would be required to cover all of them.  

Okay, I dunno where you're getting the "multiple creation stories" from - there's only two chapters in Genesis that deal with creation, and neither contradict each other. The real problem is that we're getting into another debate - and they are never really resolved on here. I don't want to spend pages and pages arguing with people if none of us can end it - so I'm not going to post in this topic after this.

[jmdblazer]

Back to the main topic. Why are people so worried about this? Do they seriously believe that Mayans could predict the future?

[Rao]

The Mayan calendar doesn't end in 2012!!!

[Toad]

Two words: False vaccuum. I'll let you all fret over that.

I can't fret over it if I don't know what it is. What is it?

[Luigison]

Okay, I dunno where you're getting the "multiple creation stories" from - there's only two chapters in Genesis that deal with creation, and neither contradict each other. The real problem is that we're getting into another debate - and they are never really resolved on here. I don't want to spend pages and pages arguing with people if none of us can end it - so I'm not going to post in this topic after this.

Creation Stories:
1) In Genesis 1:25-27 Animals come before man and woman.  Man and woman are apparently created at the same time.
That is:
  1 - Animals
  2 - Man and woman

2) In Genesis 2:18-22 Man came before animals.  Woman was created after man and the animals.
That is:
  1 - Man
  2 - Animals
  3 - Woman

Flood Survivors:
1) In Genesis 7:21-23 only those on the ark survived.
2) In Genesis 6:4 and Numbers 13:33 other (giant) humans survived.

[ShadowBrain]

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

I couldn't find the exact link that I learned that from/spurred me to reference it, but I think this'll do the trick.

[goodie]

Creation Stories:
1) In Genesis 1:25-27 Animals come before man and woman.  Man and woman are apparently created at the same time.
That is:
  1 - Animals
  2 - Man and woman

2) In Genesis 2:18-22 Man came before animals.  Woman was created after man and the animals.
That is:
  1 - Man
  2 - Animals
  3 - Woman

They don't contradict each other. Chapter 1 tells the whole creation story in chronological order, while chapter 2 goes back and fills in some details about the creation of man and stuff, not necessarily in the order it happened.

Flood Survivors:
1) In Genesis 7:21-23 only those on the ark survived.
2) In Genesis 6:4 and Numbers 13:33 other (giant) humans survived.

Genesis 6:4 is before the flood even happened. Numbers takes place quite a while after, so those giants would obviously be descendants of those on the ark, just like everyone else.

[Luigison]

They don't contradict each other. Chapter 1 tells the whole creation story in chronological order, while chapter 2 goes back and fills in some details about the creation of man and stuff, not necessarily in the order it happened.

It seems to me that chapter 2 is specific on order.  Man was lonely so God made animals for him.  Man was still lonely so God made a woman for him.  As for the first story I could go into what's wrong with the physics of it, but I've already strayed too far from the topic.  This is supposed to be about the destruction of the Earth and not its creation.  So, I'll drop this for now. 

Genesis 6:4 is before the flood even happened. Numbers takes place quite a while after, so those giants would obviously be descendants of those on the ark, just like everyone else.

Okay, but that's not how I see it.  It seems to me that the race of giants lived before the flood and the same race lived after the flood.  Noah's family were not giants.  This is up to interpretation though.  So, I'll also drop this argument. 

[jmdblazer]

I remember reading that people were short in bible times.

[superstarMASIAH]

   I have actually looked into this and studied this in college, I had to write a theory on it.  All the research I have done, and personal emotions have lead me to believe that only the world as we know it is going to come to an end.  This doesn't mean the world is going to end in chaos and the earth will be destroyed, but by the year 2012 we're going to experience something so extrodinarily fantastic that its going to shift our conciousness to the next level.  I am positive that we are going to experience a transdimensional step for the first time in a very long time.  This would mean we are actually in the process of slipping into the fifth dimension.

      I honestly believe we are in this process with transdimensional beings as our guides, but they affect us indirectly because we are not at the breakthrough we would be at in 2012.  I've studied dialogues and dialogues of text and the last time we experienced a shift of concsiousness was when man started using his vocal chords instead of communicating through body motions.  I believe what started this was when our ancestors in the evolution time line picked and ate psilocybin containing mushrooms or other hallucinogenic fungi such as the amanita-muscara.  This fungis opened up our innner eye (our mind's eye) and lead us to see the world in a different way.

       I don't believe that the mushrooms that grew back then and the mushrooms we manifest today were an accident.  They were put there by a transdimensional or devine being so that would could evolve into what we have come to be today.

     This global shift of conciouness is going to work as a process, we've been working up to this point in history with little baby steps.  Now its time for this whirlwind of events to take place.  Our shift into the 5th dimension will fly in because our minds are being linked, slowly but surely.  We will begin to know stuff that hasn't happened yet, we will be able to communicate via extra sensual perception.  After this happens the transdimensional beings can come through, greet us, and harminize with us, wether they be extra-terrestrial life forms or spirits.  To a lot of people this would be catastrophic, and people wouldn't know how to handle it because what they were living will seem like a lie, all of their material wants and objects will mean nothing.  This is why we are going to take baby steps until 2012.  From then on we'll move into what I'll refer to as hyper speed, we will just be flooded with loads of new information, get in touch with our inner being or spirit, and most importantly we will live for the society, no more living for your own selfish needs.

        I didn't read any of the links people have put up about 2012 and the truth.  I refuse to.  I refuse to on the basis of which I know what is going to happen, I have seen things that none of you would imagine possible.  If you want the real truth I highly suggest you read 2012: by Daniel Pinchbeck, or read some Terence McKenna.  If anyone wants to learn more but directly from what I know feel free to ask in a reply or personal message.

[Chupperson Weird]

I don't think they were recording history when people started talking, bud.

[Luigison]

This thread has a lot of references to people, websites, and/or books saying the world is going to end.  Does anyone have any actual physical evidence to support their hypothesis?  I can reference the age and lifespan of our sun, the approach of another system, and the regularity of planetary impacts, but what physical evidence points to 2012?  If such an end is a change in human consciousness I can reference many exponential growths in fields like computer science, genetics, and brain research, but what physical evidence points directly to 2012?  Some mushrooms?  I think not.  An ancient calendar?  Again, no.  Someone selling a book to capitalize on end-of-the-world paranoia.  Please.