Mayan Calendar, 2012 Prophecies Overview – Part 1 – Where Did The Dates Come From??
By Kashonia Carnegie PhD
If you’ve been researching the Mayan Calendar and 2012 prophecies for some time, you’d be aware that Dr Carl J Calleman has always said that the Mayan Calendar ends, or should I say ended, on October 28th, 2011. By contrast, as you’re probably aware, the popular end-date is December 21st, 2012.
Even though I’ve mentioned a number of times before, in previous articles, that these dates are being guided by different models of predictions for this time, I still get many questions about the differences.
And so as we start out in 2012, I again want to highlight these differences, but from a slightly different perspective.
I’m sure you, like me, have had the experience of reading a book, or having heard a talk and not really understood why it was so popular. Then some time in the future, you’ve gone back to the book or the information and thought it was fantastic. The first time you heard it, the time was not right for you to absorb the insights, or even understand, the gems it contained.
Therefore, in this three part article, I want to cover three aspects of the fundamental prophecies associated with the Mayan Calendar and the end-date. That “end-date” is NOT the end of the world, although many people will insist that it is, but the end of one age-cycle and the start of the next cycle.
This will not be an in-depth article. Indeed, I’ll just skim over much of the information or put it in dot points. You will have enough information to get the basic idea of why people are saying what they are. And if you are interested in finding out more, you’ll have a starting point for further research.
In this first part I’ll look at where the date of December 21st, 2012, or in the case of Carl Calleman – October 28th, 2011, comes from.
Part two, is scheduled for publication next week. It is the longest of the three parts and will look at why so many people erroneously believe in doomsday predictions as well as additional evidence supporting this time, in general, as the time of change.
In Part three, I explain why I really like Dr Carl Calleman’s model and why I have followed it so closely and even have a special category set up for him in our new Raising Love Consciousness journal.
Where did the two dates come from?
First, the actual dates of October 28th, 2011 or December 21st, 2012 were never actually carved on any of the Mayan monuments. As I’m sure you’re well aware, the Mayans certainly didn’t have a calendar such as ours. So where did these dates come from? When they were calculated, was the change from the Julian to the Gregorian calendar taken into account? What about the change from BC or BCE to AD or CE. Remember, there was no year zero.
Jesus of Nazareth was not born in the year zero, or in 1 BC/BCE or 1 AD/CE for that matter. The general feeling is that Jesus was born somewhere around 3 CE, although I have read other sources that say he was born about 3 BCE. Basically, we have no real idea when he was born. There were no real-time records of his birth or life. As I’m sure you realise the books in the Bible were written many decades and in some cases centuries after he existed. But I don’t want to get into an argument about the Bible at this stage. Let’s leave that to another time and another article.
Even the traditional stone that is always used to represent the Mayan Calendar – see the following photo – is not even Mayan. This is an Aztec Sun stone. In Part two I talk about where the Mayan calendar and prophecies did come from.
So any actual, specific dates for this special time can be a bit if-ie to say the least.
I definitely believe that a new global age is beginning. But as for any specific date, for me, specific dates are just VERY rough guides.
Nevertheless, we do have two dates – October 28th, 2011, and December 21st, 2012 – so how did they come about.
Carl Calleman, has spent many years defending his October 28th, 2011 date, and he recently wrote an excellent piece on how he calculated the October 28th date, and he demonstrates why October 28th is more accurate than December 21st, 2012.
If you are the least bit interested in this topic, I strongly recommend that you read Calleman’s article at http://www.raisingloveconsciousness.com/summary/october-28th-2011-v-december-21st-2012
I must say that I really learned a great deal from this specific paper. I was going to copy and paste an edited version of how he calculated the date but the associated arguments that he has are too valuable to be cut out. So I strongly recomment that you read the paper if you haven’t already done so.
In the paper, Calleman mentions an interview that he did with Mark van Stone which supports the October 28 arguments. I will post this interview in full next Wednesday.
So at this stage, apart from the Mark van Stone interview next week, I’ll leave that specific date discussion up to you to read and think about. And then add any comments about it at the end of the paper in the comment box.
For now, I’m going to set aside the specific correct date and fill in a few more pieces about this general time that has been chosen.
The question must be asked – WHY? Why is this THE important time (forgetting about specific dates) in history? How do the prophecies indicate that “this” is the time?
I’ll answer those questions in Part two which is scheduled for publication next Thursday.






{ 1 comment… read it below or add one }
The Maya used a completely different calender than we do today. They must have known that other civilisations in other times would not measure time as they did hence they simply used the number of days elapsed between the date of the prophecy and the fulfilment date. The Maya possessed an amazing knowledge of astronomy, and I cannot believe that they did not know that the Earth year was approximately 12 minutes short of the 365 days and 6 hours which we normally refer to. If this difference is taken into account then the date of 21.12.2012, reckoned from the Summer solstice of 628 AD, is in any case incorrect. The Maya also recorded a number of disasters which had befallen Earth in the past, but nowhere do they mention all of life on Earth being wiped out – although such extinction level events have occurred a number of times millions of years ago. I agree that the ‘end of the world’ does not necessarily mean total destruction of all life on Earth, but rather the end of the lifestyle to which we have become accustomed.
Great work Kashonia and dr Calleman!