The big change

Other cultures were very advanced too. Take ancient Egyptians for example. Modern technology cannot replicate their pyramids, and the geometry of their structures was precise to the last centimeter. Their gods, prophecies and beliefs are not necessarily real or true.

Our culture is (somewhat) advanced, still, our scientists have predicted so many doomsdays that I've lost count. We're still alive.

Anyway, it's nothing anyone should worry about.

Modern technology does not have a large supply of expendable labour.

I saw a documentary about how we cannot build anything of identical indoor and outdoor structure as, lets say Keopses pyramid, if that's what it's called. Some Japanese architects tried to reconstruct it in miniature (it was about as tall as a three story building), but it was very unstable and collapsed after a short period. Pyramid-like structures that modern society has built all use dozens of support beams that the Egyptians didn't use, and they are the only reason that our pyramid buildings stand.

That's pretty cool. The expendable labour thing was a joke, by the way.

Perhaps the key is in the expendable labour... All the architects of a pyramid were sealed inside it when it was finished, maybe they held it form the inside! Just kidding... Pyramids were build like lego bricks, that is how they stand. No support beams needed, walls are enough. Besides, the inside of a pyramid is not large, no large ceilings = less danger of collapsing = no suport beams.

Yeah,Teh_Ephy, i got it.

By the way, lets knock this back on-topic instead of talking about pyramids.

Last note on the pyramids: the main reason we fail to replicate them is that we don't NEED it.

They NEEDED them (at least they thought they did.), so they worked their heads off on making it happen...

Practically everything humans ever made is to answer a need, or mistakenly while trying to answer a need. no need=no invention.



Anyway, back to the topic:
If you can prove the following statements then I'll believe that the end is near:
1-Group A (it does not really matter who) had predicted the world to end in year X (2012 or any other year for that matter.)
2-Group A is also capable to predict the future.
3-There is no other group that meets conditions 1, and 2 that predicted it in another time.

Problem is, not a single "testing" method for the so-called "predictions" will enable condition 2 without failing condition 3. as everything you claim as "proof" will prove at least one more group as right.

You newb, that's the point... If i wanted to discuss facts, i would have set the title to something like 'Newton's law of gravity' or 'Earth's rotation period'. I am not trying to convince anyone of you that the world is gonna explode in 2012., not even i believe that, i just wanted to hear your oppinion.

However, it is very unlikely that 1012 means the END of the world. Perhaps, if we lean on the calculations of the Mayans, it could be some meteor/asteroid/comet cataclysm (2030 is also mentioned recently) or the pinnacle of the global warming consequences, hastened by the human activity.

Originally Posted by Volvox

You newb, that's the point... If i wanted to discuss facts, i would have set the title to something like 'Newton's law of gravity' or 'Earth's rotation period'. I am not trying to convince anyone of you that the world is gonna explode in 2012., not even i believe that, i just wanted to hear your oppinion.

"You" is not you in person, its the general "you" whoever might read it, or ever claim that he knows the end of the world.

In other, more simplistic words, I said that I don't believe all the "future sight" nonsense.

Boomwolf, i got what you meant, i am not retarded so simplifications are not necessary. Anyway, i find talking about bad things that are happening now and knowing that i can't change them is kinda frustrating...

Well, by your response it was hard to know if you truly didn't understand me or what.

In any case, bad things always happen, and most people can't do anything about it.
Jest live with it, the world is generally a mistake. and the human race is the worst of it. best you can do is not give a damn, and try to have fun.

Oh come on, we are not a mistake, we are the proof of God's impeckable sense of humor.

I would have said the same but unfortunately I'm an atheist. so I am forced into the fact we are all a random error.

Originally Posted by boomwolf

I would have said the same but unfortunately I'm an atheist. so I am forced into the fact we are all a random error.

So you're saying that if you were a Christian, you would have held the belief that we were created from God's sense of humor, but because you don't believe God exists, you're forced to believe that we are some kind of accident? Weird train of thought you have there.

What determines a mistake in the first place? For all we know, all of this was destined to happen, otherwise it would not have. Or maybe every occurence in this universe is the product of randomization. Anyhow, we aren't exactly a bad thing. Intelligent life is more like finding gold than a tornado hitting your home, because it has a much larger amount of potential than, say, a clump of intergalactic dust. I personally prefer to believe that my existence is a good thing and I should therefore keep on living rather than regretting my creation for the rest of eternity, but hey, it's a matter of opinion.