Survive 2012 by Robert Bast - Special Offer at Amazon - Click Here!
Powered by MaxBlogPress 

Dark Comets »

Another Expert Agrees With Dark Comet Theory

February 21, 2013 – 11:31 am | No Comment

Astronomer David Asher (from Armagh University) has agreed with Bill Napier and Janaki Wickramasinghe (Cardiff University) that “dark comets” are real and dangerous.
The following quotes are from a paper by Napier and Asher published in Astronomy & Geophysics.
http://star.arm.ac.uk/preprints/2009/539.pdf

We know that about one bright comet (of absolute magnitude as bright as 7, comparable to Halley’s Comet) arrives in the visibility zone (perihelion q<5AU, say) each year from the Oort cloud. It seems to be securely established that ~1–2% of these are captured into Halleytype (HT) orbits. The dynamical lifetime of a body in such an orbit can be estimated, from which the expected number of HT comets is perhaps ~3000. The actual number of active HT comets is ~25. This discrepancy of at least two powers of 10 in the expected impact rate from comets as deduced from this theoretical argument on the one hand, and observations on the other, is …

Read the full story »
Bunkers

From DIY to Russian megabunkers

Survivalism

Preparing for when the SHTF

Pole Shift

Crustal displacements and magnetic pole shift – both are scary

Comets

Don’t believe NASA – these are a genuine threat

Earthquakes

More likely during eclipses and perhaps Comet Elenin is a factor?

Home » Mayan Calendar

Further Evidence for a Dec 2012 End Date

Submitted by on April 22, 2013 – 3:12 pmOne Comment

I find it a little odd, but not at all surprising, that 2012 debunkers are now seizing on evidence that Dec 21 2012 was the end of the Long Count calendar (now that the world didn’t end). Of course last year that were latching on to anything that suggested 2012 was not the year.

For me though, nothing has changed. 21 Dec 2012 is still the date, and IMHO we are still close enough to that date for it to be proven correct. Hopefully not.

An example of the confusion this has caused is the date of a decisive battle that shaped the course of Mayan civilisation. It occurred 1,390,838 days from the start of the count, but attempts to transcribe this into the European calendar have given estimates that vary by hundreds of years.

Anthropologists led by Douglas Kennett at Pennsylvania State University took a sample from a carved wooden lintel found at a temple in the city of Tikal. The carvings recount the key event when Tikal’s king, Jasaw Chan K’awiil I, defeated Yich’aak K’ahk, known as ”Claw of Fire”, who headed a rival kingdom at Calakmul, 90 kilometres away.

Using a technique called accelerator mass spectrometry, the team concluded the tree was cut down and carved about AD658-696. The estimate closely matches that of a decades-old benchmark for Mayan dating, the Goodman-Martinez-Thompson method, which put the battle at about AD695-712.

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/world/beam-holds-clue-to-mayan-calendar-20130412-2hqqu.html#ixzz2RAAj4jWg

The tree wasn’t necessarily carved immediately after it was chopped down, so it is a very good fit.

One Comment »

  • Johan says:

    I still have your blog in my Google Reader and I was waiting to see how long it would take for you to hook up on this (over a week too late). I am just curious who those 2012 debunkers are that you are referring to?

    No, this study does not prove that the “end” occurred on December 21, 2012. It only proves that the GMT-family of correlations are more probable than others (nothing new, carbon dating has been done before). To show which correlation is the correct one you need other data and it is most likely that a combination of GMT+2 and GMT+3 is the correct use.

    Distance numbers from many monuments indicate that the Long Count will continue for a long time.

    You may also ask why a study like this is published? My guess is that since Kennett and others are on the “climate-change-caused-the-Maya-collapse” bandwagon they need the GMT correlation(s) to be accurate. Unfortunately, but not surprisingly, they leave out the carbon dated lintels from Chichen Itza and other lintels at Tikal that do not confirm this study (in Chichen’s case it is off by two centuries…).

    I look forward to see what will be the next straw you will grasp.

Leave a comment!

Add your comment below, or trackback from your own site. You can also subscribe to these comments via RSS.

Be nice. Keep it clean. Stay on topic. No spam.

You can use these tags:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

This is a Gravatar-enabled weblog. To get your own globally-recognized-avatar, please register at Gravatar.