2012 End-of-the-World Countdown Based on Mayan Calendar Starts Today
2012 End-of-the-World Countdown Based on Mayan Calendar Starts Today
The countdown to the apocalypse is on.
We're one year away from Dec. 21, 2012, the date that the ancient Mayan Long Count calendar allegedly marked as the end of an era that would reset the date to zero and signal the end of humanity.
But will it?
There have been many end of times predictions over the years. Christian radio host Harold Camping faced widespread ridicule when his predictions that the world would end twice this year - on May 21, and then on Oct. 21 - failed to materialize.
But in the flurry of doomsday predictions - there have been similar dire warnings about the world coming to an end from various cultures, including Native Americans, the Chinese, Egyptians and even the Irish - the supposed Mayan prophecy seems to have held the most sway with believers.
The Mayan civilization, which reached its height from 300 A.D. to 900 A.D., had a talent for astronomy. Advanced mathematics and primitive astronomy flourished, creating what many have called the most accurate calendar in the world.
The Mayans predicted a final event that included a solar shift, a Venus transit and violent earthquakes.
Their Long Count calendar begins in 3,114 B.C., marking time in roughly 394-year periods known as Baktuns. Thirteen was a significant, sacred number for the Mayas, and they wrote that the 13th Baktun ends on Dec. 21, 2012.
The doomsday theories stem from a stone tablet discovered in the 1960s at the archaeological site of Tortuguero in the Gulf of Mexico state of Tabasco that describes the return of a Mayan god at the end of a 13th period.
"The Maya are viewed by many westerners as exotic folks that were supposed to have had some special, secret knowledge," said Mayan scholar Sven Gronemeyer. "What happens is that our expectations and fears get projected on the Maya calendar."
Gronemeyer, of La Trobe University in Australia, compares the supposed Mayan prophecies to the "Y2K" hype, when people feared all computer systems would crash when the new millennium began on Jan. 1, 2000.
For some reason, Gronemeyer says, people have ignored evidence that dates beyond 2012 were recorded.
The blogosphere exploded with more speculation when Mexico's archaeology institute acknowledged on Nov. 24 a second reference to Dec. 21, 2012, on a brick found at other ruins.
"Human beings seem to be attracted by apocalyptic ideas and always assume the worst," Gronemeyer said.
Believers have taken the end-of-the world fears to the Internet with hundreds of thousands of websites and blogs. Yet others are capitalizing on the heightened interest. Films depicting the end of the world - including the 2009 movie, "2012? - are contributing to the mounting hype as well as to misinformation, experts say.
In southern Mexico, the heart of Maya territory, a yearlong celebration is planned.
Mexico's tourism agency expects to draw 52 million visitors by next year only to the regions of Chiapas, Yucatan, Quintana Roo, Tabasco and Campeche. All of Mexico usually lures about 22 million foreigners in a year.
It's selling the date, the Winter Solstice in the coming year, as a time of renewal. Many archeologists argue that the 2012 reference on a 1,300-year-old stone tablet only marks the end of a cycle in the Mayan calendar.
"The world will not end. It is an era," said Yeanet Zaldo, a tourism spokeswoman for the Caribbean state of Quintana Roo, home to Cancun. "For us, it is a message of hope."
For those who are thinking about how to spend what could be their last year on earth, here's another message of hope: According to recent research, the mythological date of the "end of days" may be off by 50 to 100 years.
To convert the ancient Mayan calendar to the Gregorian (or modern) calendar, scholars use a numerical value (called the GMT). But Gerardo Aldana, a professor at the University of California, Santa Barbara, has said the data supporting the widely-adopted conversion factor may be invalid.
Aldana isn't the only detractor.
The National Aeronautics and Space Administration - yes, that's NASA - has also weighed in on the issue.
The agency's scientists posted answers to the most popular questions about the end-of-times theory associated with the prophecy.
"Remember the Y2K scare? It came and went without much of a whimper because of adequate planning and analysis of the situation. Impressive movie special effects aside, Dec. 21, 2012, won't be the end of the world as we know," the 2009 web page post says.
The answers addressed questions about whether there were any known threats to the Earth and the truth about the calendar.
One of answers posted was to the question of the possible approach of Nibiru (or Planet X or Eris), a supposed wayward planet that is said could pose a threat to Earth. The answer was a definitive rejection of the idea.
"Nibiru and other stories about wayward planets are an Internet hoax," scientists wrote. "There is no factual basis for these claims. If Nibiru or Planet X were real and headed for an encounter with the Earth in 2012, astronomers would have been tracking it for at least the past decade, and it would be visible by now to the naked eye. Obviously, it does not exist. Eris is real, but it is a dwarf planet similar to Pluto that will remain in the outer solar system; the closest it can come to Earth is about 4 billion miles."
ABC News' Susan Donaldson James and The Associated Press contributed to this story.
Read more at news.yahoo.com
Sequoyah Nuclear Plant's Radioactive Tritium: Tennessee Valley Authority Finds Elevated Levels In Groundwater Sample
Sequoyah Nuclear Plant's Radioactive Tritium: Tennessee Valley Authority Finds Elevated Levels In Groundwater Sample
The cooling towers at the Tennessee Valley Authority's Sequoyah Nuclear Plant in Soddy-Daisy, Tenn., rise above the trees near a residential neighborhood Tuesday, March 15, 2011. (AP Photo)
CHATTANOOGA, Tenn. -- The Tennessee Valley Authority has reported finding elevated levels of radioactive tritium in a groundwater sample from a new onsite monitoring well at the Sequoyah Nuclear Plant near Chattanooga.
TVA said in an email Tuesday that the elevated levels pose no threat to public health and safety.
Sequoyah plant manager Paul Simmons said new groundwater monitoring wells were placed in an area known to have contained tritium that was previously reported.
The highest level found in the sampling on Friday was about 23,000 picocuries per liter. A "curie" is the standard measure for the intensity of radioactivity contained in a sample. A picocurie is one-trillionth of a curie.
TVA said there were no detectable levels of tritium in any sampling of the Tennessee River where the plant discharges water.
Romneycare faces financial meltdown
'At some point you run out of other people's money to spend on your promises'
Romneycare faces financial meltdown
'At some point you run out of other people's money to spend on your promises'
According to several insurance and public-policy analysts, Massachusetts' much heralded health-insurance reform plan, labeled "Romneycare" by its critics, is facing a potential financial crisis and may have to be scaled back.
A senior analyst at a Virginia-based think tank that has monitored Massachusetts' health care system says that Gov. Deval Patrick will have to take the budget-cutting axe to the program because of a major stress on the state health-care system.
Citizens Council on Health Freedom President Twila Brase says the stress on the system is no surprise.
"With the economic downturn, what is happening is that people are losing their jobs or that their employers have decided that one of the ways to cut their own costs is to eliminate their employer-sponsored coverage," Brase told WND. "So either of those could put more people into the category of getting subsidies."
The economic downturn and the Massachusetts individual mandate have led to huge spending increases in Massachusetts state-funded insurance programs.
According to Patrick's fiscal year 2011 budget summary, MassHealth program spending is projected at $9.8 billion, which is $601 million, or 6.5 percent, above last year's projected spending of $9.2 billion.
The program is also estimating that more people will be enrolled: The 2011 budget projection assumes coverage of 1.26 million MassHealth members , a 3-percent increase from last year's projected caseload.
Brase said the individual mandate from former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney's program is directly connected to the present situation. She recalled that former Massachusetts State Treasurer Tim Cahill issued a warning about the program being used as a model for Obamacare.
"I know that prior to Obamacare being passed, the state treasurer of Massachusetts had put out some kind of letter talking about the fact that he thought Obamacare would be a problem," Brase said, "because already 68 or 69 percent of the residents of Massachusetts were subsidized in some manner."
Brase was referring to Cahill's letter stating, "If the federal plan is the Massachusetts plan writ large, then we should stop it, because we're going to be in the same place four or five years down the road."
The think-tank analyst – a Massachusetts resident who asked not to be named for security reasons – said the need for increased funding is directly related to cost increases.
Pioneer Institute health-care and insurance analyst Amy Lischko's March 2011 report, called "Fixing the Massachusetts Health Exchange," verifies the cost increases.
Lischko documents a nearly $1 million increase in administrative costs in both Commonwealth Care and Commonwealth Choice programs in the five months from December 2009 to May 2010. During the same five-month period, investment income for the two programs declined.
The changes were for only two of the state's insurance programs and were for only a five-month period.
Brase said she's not surprised because she's already seen reports that the system is broken and losing ground.
"I saw in the Boston Herald a report by the Beacon Hill Institute, a Massachusetts outfit, that says Romneycare has already cost Massachusetts 18,000 jobs and has increased health insurance costs by over $4.3 billion," Brase said.
"There's a high rise in costs as a result of Romneycare," she added, "so I think they may or may not be willing to admit it, or it will be cleverly couched, but at some point you run out of other people's money to spend on whatever your promises are."
Brase also believes that not only are Massachusetts residents paying more than they bargained for, but they're also getting less return for their money.
"It sounds like they'll actually have to cut back on the program," she said. "The other thing I know about Massachusetts is that doctors have been leaving the state. … There's been an exodus of doctors, which means that there is decreased access to care for all the patients who thought they were going to be guaranteed coverage.
"They may get coverage, but will they get access to care? Who is going to take care of them once they get access to coverage?" Brase asked.
Brase said that in an economic downturn, demand for the subsidized insurance program only grows, further stressing the system.
"In an extended recession or an extended downturn, more people are going to go after the subsidies. And of course, if they have an individual mandate, it also means that all comers must be taken into insurance plans, so everybody that can goes for the subsidies," Brase said.
The analyst said the stress is most evident in the backlog of applications. Brase reports a MassHealth employee in the Boston main office told her a "massive backlog" in processing applications for health care and renewals has been underway for over a year.
"Despite the time that has lapsed, they are not making headway at reducing the backlog," the analyst said. "Large numbers of people are finding that for months and months they cannot reach the regional departments by phone where their paperwork is processed."
"People who finally succeed have only done so because of perseverance and relentless attempts over a period of time," the analyst said.
Brase added that any backlog is a logical consequence of a mandated system.
"When you have a mandate like that and you do not have the bureaucracy big enough to handle the potential requests for the service you have offered," Brase reasoned, "then it's just another instance where there is a promise of coverage without a guarantee of access."
She added: "If there is a one-year backlog, [you've] promised people they're going to have care and they're going to have insurance to pay for it, but they don't have any idea of how long they're going to be waiting before they can actually get this access."
Brase said consumers are further caught in the middle, because there will be no option to go to another health exchange.
Abortion: Salvation Army at war with itself
Salvation Army at war with itself
Official: 'When I saw position, there was smoke coming out both my ears'
After WND reported that the Salvation Army's International Social Justice Commission published a position paper accepting abortion in the cases of rape, incest or fatal deformity of the child, many members of the group scrambled to re-examine their denomination's position.
The re-examination, in turn, revealed the American branch of the Salvation Army in sharp disagreement with their international brethren.
"That statement is not the Salvation Army USA's position on abortion," said Jeff Stanger, development director of the Salvation Army, Indiana Division.
Stanger said the commission's website is connected with the Army's international headquarters and directed WND to the Salvation Army USA's position statement instead, which, indeed, makes no exceptions in asserting the sanctity of life.
"When I read [the international group's position] I was stunned," confirmed Major George Hood, chief communications officer for Salvation Army USA. "It appears that the International Social Justice Commission worked on a position statement through the London office that does not reflect the position we've taken in the U.S. on abortion.
"When I saw the language," Hood continued, "there was smoke coming out of both my ears."
As WND reported, the international commission's statement asserts, "The Salvation Army believes that [abortion] can occur only when carrying the pregnancy further seriously threatens the life of the mother; or reliable diagnostic procedures have identified a foetal [sic] abnormality considered incompatible with survival for more than a very brief post natal period."
It continues, "In addition, rape and incest are brutal acts of dominance violating women physically and emotionally. This situation represents a special case for the consideration of [abortion] as the violation may be compounded by the continuation of the pregnancy."
The Salvation Army USA's position statement, however, is very different.
"The Salvation Army believes in the sanctity of all human life and considers each person to be of infinite value and each life a gift from God," the American branch's statement asserts. "Therefore, when an unwanted pregnancy occurs, The Salvation Army advises that the situation be accepted and that the pregnancy be carried to term, and offers supportive help and assistance with planning."
The only reference to rape or incest could be inferred from a following statement that nonetheless does not affirm abortion as an acceptable option: "The Salvation Army recognizes tragic and perplexing circumstances that require difficult decisions regarding a pregnancy. Such decisions should be made only after prayerful and thoughtful consideration, with appropriate involvement of the woman's family and pastoral, medical and other counsel. A woman in these circumstances needs acceptance, love and compassion."
What's The Salvation Army going to do about it?
Officials from The Salvation Army told WND that steps are already being taken to clear up the discrepancy in the statements.
"In a way, you may have done us a favor by calling attention to it," Stanger told WND. "We were a bit caught off guard."
Hood told WND that though Salvation Army members in the USA were "blindsided" by the position statement, a mechanism has already been put into place to make sure the Army's position statement is "even more tight, more anti-abortion."
"The Salvation Army is structured around multiple territorial organizations that meet in a commissioner's conference three times a year to coordinate policy," Hood explained. "With operations in 122 countries, position policies tend to lean toward the culture of the area, but through the commissioner's conference, we come to consensus on policy issues and statements.
"That body has already been contacted," Hood said. "There will be correspondence sent objecting to this statement being released in the U.S., because it has no bearing in the U.S."
Hood explained the next meeting is scheduled for February and the current position statement on abortion is already on the agenda.
Christmas has been taken over by Santa Claus
In the White Corner
Christmas has been taken over by Santa Claus. Sure, there’s the occasional recognition that Christmas is also a celebration of the birth of Jesus, but that gets lost in the battle for sales and the mad rush for that just-right gift.
I’m no Scrooge who says, “Bah . . . humbug!” to Christmas. Far from it. There are many things I enjoy about Christmas. It’s the competition that’s been created between Santa and Jesus that troubles me.
It’s become something like a boxing match. In the red corner is Santa. In the white corner (white seems somehow appropriate, rather than boxing’s traditional blue corner) is Jesus. The match is heavily weighted against Jesus during the Christmas season.
Of course, you’ll find a sign here and there, a bumper sticker, perhaps, proclaiming that Jesus is the reason for the season. But come September, the world’s marketing people are already introducing their Christmas campaigns. Shops are stocking up for what they hope is a rush. And Christmas music is dusted off.
There’s so much attention to the Santa side of Christmas; so little about Jesus.
Thomas Nast has been credited with
creating the modern day Santa with his
Harper’s Weekly drawing in 1863.
Previous depictions of Santa showed a thin, tall man.
in the red corner
Saint Nicholas of Myra (in Turkey), a fourth-century Greek bishop, became the Christian inspiration for Santa Claus. He was known for his generous gift-giving to the poor. He’s best remembered for presenting the three daughters of a poor but pious Christian with dowries so they could marry instead of becoming prostitutes to support themselves.
He was generally pictured as a thin, bearded man wearing bishop’s robes. The Santa Claus of today is quite different and along the way he’s picked up a variety of pagan, folklore and modern influences.
The Charles Dickens’ classic, A Christmas Carol, presents Santa Claus as the “Ghost of Christmas Present,” who takes Scrooge through busy London streets on Christmas morning and sprinkles the essence of Christmas on its citizens. The Santa in the book and of that era commonly wore a long green coat.
The 1823 publication of the poem “A Visit From St Nicholas” (better known as “The Night Before Christmas”) was a defining moment for Santa. Here he’s described as driving a sleigh drawn by eight reindeers that all have names. The sleigh is full of toys and lands on rooftops so Santa can climb down chimneys and fill stockings. He’s described as a “jolly old elf” with ruddy cheeks like roses and a nose like a cherry. His health habits come into question because he’s a pipe smoker with a round belly “that shook when he laughed, like a bowl full of jelly.” This became the classic description and defined Santa forever.
In 1863, a drawing of Santa by American cartoonist Thomas Nast appeared in Harper’s Weekly. It set the trend for the modern Santa, including the red clothing.
So Santa is a fat, happy gift-giver who somehow gets down chimneys on Christmas Eve with a bag full of gifts—impossible, of course, in many of today’s homes that have no chimneys. He’s a cuddly character who is sometimes used as a threat to children to get them to behave.
“Our jolly old Saint Nicholas reflects our culture to a T,” says Carol Jean Swanson in a 1992 edition of Mothering, “for he is fanciful, exuberant, bountiful, overweight and highly commercial. He also mirrors some of our highest ideals: childhood purity and innocence, selfless giving, unfaltering love, justice and mercy. . . .
“The problem is that, in the process, he has become burdened with some of society’s greatest challenges: materialism, corporate greed and domination by the media. Here, Santa carries more in his baggage than toys alone!”
in the white corner
A few Christians refuse to celebrate Christmas. They claim, and with good reason, that December 25 can’t be the date of Jesus’ birth. An obvious problem with the date is that it’s mid-winter in the northern hemisphere—too cold for shepherds to be in the fields.
There’s no record of the true date and no consistency in dates suggested. For instance, around a.d. 200, Clement of Alexandria wrote that some people in Egypt celebrated Jesus’ birth on May 20; and a calendar of feasts from a.d. 243 gives March 28 as the date for the Nativity.
The December 25 date is further discounted by the fact that this is the ancient date of the winter solstice in the northern hemisphere, which links it to paganism and the Roman celebration of Dies Natalis Solis Invicti—“the birthday of the unconquered sun.”
However, the date is not nearly as important as the event, whenever it’s celebrated. The birth of Jesus, as presented in the Bible, is God’s greatest gift to humankind.
Here’s how Jesus Himself described it: “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life” (John 3:16).
The apostle Paul described Jesus in terms that were adopted by creeds: “[He] made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness.” (Philippians 2:7).
December 25 or not, this is something far bigger than Christmas.
Santa versus Jesus
Red corner, white corner—who should win?
Notice the attraction of both. There is an attraction in the wide-eyed innocence of children at Christmas time and the act of gift giving. And there’s something magical about Santa, who is a doting grandfather figure.
Then there’s the attraction of the Baby in the manger. At one level He’s part of the magic of Christmas—the story of the Baby born among the animals in the stable because there’s no room for Him in the inn. At another level it’s the greatest demonstration of love the world has witnessed. Love enough for angels to sing; to have shepherds run to the stable; to have wise men bow low in worship.
Their impacts differ. Santa has been moulded by marketers from Saint Nicholas the gift-giver into the saint of commercialism. He can’t separate himself from the shopping frenzy his appearance now encourages.
Jesus’ message, His challenges and His claims, haven’t changed from when He first said them. “Love your enemies”; “Do to others what you would have them do to you”; “No-one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again”; “I am the light of the world”; “I am the resurrection and the life”; “Go and make disciples of all nations”; “I am coming soon.”
Santa is about gift giving; Jesus is the Gift given. Santa drives sales; Jesus saves souls. Santa encourages selfishness; Jesus demonstrates selflessness.
An editorial appearing in the September 21, 1897, edition of the New York Sun responded to a question asked by an eight-year-old girl, Virginia O’Hanlon. Her friends had told her that Santa Claus didn’t exist.
In his response, the editor said, “Yes, Virginia, there is a Santa Claus. . . . How dreary would be the world if there were no Santa Claus. It would be as dreary as if there were no Virginias. . . . Not believe in Santa Claus? You might as well not believe in fairies!”
This may make a good answer for an eight-year-old, but it wouldn’t work for her as an eighteen-year-old. There is no Santa Claus.
The 1947 movie classic Miracle on 34th Street (redone in 1994), features Christmas-time events and involves those who do or don’t believe in Santa. It calls for people to have “faith” in Santa. Faith is defined as “believing what you know is not so.”
That definition fits Santa.
But it doesn’t fit Jesus. There’s no doubting His historicity. There was a real Person named Jesus born, who was in the real village of Bethlehem, who lived in the real town of Nazareth, who walked the real streets of Jerusalem and talked to real people.
Significantly, the New Testament, which focuses on the life and meaning of His life, was written within the memory of those who knew Jesus. Having faith in Jesus is a faith that’s based on the life and teachings of a real Person.
There’s a hope difference. The children who line up to tell their Christmas wishes have in mind December 25. That’s when they hope their wishes will be fulfilled. And even if they get their wish, it can be so temporary. Some toys don’t survive the day! The only things that Santa can promise are exactly that—things.
Compare this to the words of the apostle Peter: “Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! In his great mercy he has given us new birth into a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead” (1 Peter 1:3). There’s no comparison.
Finally, there’s availability. Santa only appears briefly in a store near you in December. And that’s for information gathering. He only acts on Christmas Eve.
Jesus, the resurrected One, lives still. Ever living, ever present, He says, “I am with you always” (Matthew 28:20). That’s a promise.
For one month of the year, Santa may dominate, but it’s no contest—not really. Not when you look at the evidence. The winner is in the white corner.