This post and all it's contents were taken from the Emergent Culture website. The URL for AH is:http://emergent-culture.com.
The world of 2012-Mayan Calendar (2012-MC) studies is dominated by two major scholastic camps—mainstream university professor types (MUPTs) and independent researchers (INREs). This article is a critique and maybe considered an informal kind of peer review.
The INRE’s are still mostly lone wolf types, but my hope is that an association of Maya-Meso-American Calendrical (MMAC) researchers will eventually form so that we can put our house in order. At this point quality control of MMAC information is done informally by other INRE’s and informal articles by the MUPTs. As an independent researcher myself I welcome constructive criticism of my work.
MUPT’s Versus The INRE’s
The MUPTs have but the very driest things to say about the 2012-MC matter, but they are for the most part in agreement about the 5125 year Maya Long count cycle that restarts on December 21st 2012. While the INRE’s predict everything from doomsday to worldwide utopia in the blink of an eye. The INRE’s presentation of the 2012-MC phenomena is riddled with failed prophets, sensationalism, mysticism, messianic fever and vulgar scholarship. The Mayan calendar has become the butt of jokes the world over and who can blame them for making fun of it.
Unlike the formal peer reviewed world of the MUPT’s, the INRE’s have no formal review process and therefore anything goes. Not that INRE’s can’t make significant contributions to Maya-Meso-American Calendrics (MMAC) or any other field of study for that matter, but the lack of a formal peer review system has created a vast ideological quagmire for those following the 2012-MC phenomena.
MMAC is a new field of study. There are no college courses in MMAC so most experts become so by virtue of their independent study. All branches of science start out similarly until an association of sorts is formed to insure quality control. The problem with most MMAC INRE’s is that they’ve failed to respect the most basic conventions of good scholarship and so they have little or no endorsements from the MUPTs. Despite their shaky foundation the various MMAC INRE’s have significant followings. Lay people untrained in the discipline itself, the rules of logic, rigorous scholarship, or unfamiliarity with the scientific method tend to follow who they do based more on subjective feelings rather than on a strict logical and evidence based assessment. There is nothing wrong with subjectivity but, science is built upon empiricism or universally accessible evidence.
Of the many MMAC INREs there are only 3 worth mentioning, the late Jose Arguelles, John Major Jenkins and Carl Johan Calleman. Of the 3 Jenkins is the only researcher to strive for rigorous scholarship and when he speculates he at least admits he is doing so. Calleman and Arguelles are both failed prophets whose writings are overflowing with hyper-speculations, mysticism, messianic fever and sloppy scholarship.
The Arguellen Contribution to MMAC
Arguelles was the first INRE to publish his ideas regarding 2012-MC and despite his questionable presentation of MMAC he did make several very significant contributions to it. Arguelles rediscovered the correct tzolkin sequence and he gave us tzolkin dynamics. Thus far the Arguellen contribution to MMAC is paramount for without a correct and empirically verifiable tzolkin sequence the entire MMAC system is nothing more than a clever method for tracking cycles of inconsequence.
The only reason I can cite Arguelles is because I have empirically verified his version of the tzolkin sequence and his elucidation of tzolkin dynamics. Not only did Arguelles not provide empirical support for his many claims, but he rarely if ever showed his work.
Arguelles had a lot to say about a lot of things, but the only thing of relevance for me was what he had to say about the tzolkin. But I did not take his word for it. I sought to verify it for myself and the preliminary results of my ongoing studies maybe be here, here and here. For more on the Arguellen contribution to 2012-MC please see Jose Arguelles: Origins of The Present Day Mayan Calendar – 2012 Phenomena
John Major Jenkins’ Contributions to MMAC.
As mentioned earlier of the three best known MMAC INRE’s Jenkins respects the conventions of scholarship the best and he is the only INRE to get positive reviews from the MUPT’s. Jenkins’ work gives us the most comprehensive and accurate overview of the Long Count’s cycles origins and of December’s 21st 2012 Galactic Alignment. And he also gives the most sweeping insights into the main thrust of ancient mesoamerican cosmology. From a cosmological standpoint the ancient mesoamericans were concerned with three overriding quests.
They sought to center themselves in relation to heavenly fixtures, they sought to discern cyclical renewal and those two quests gave them their third quest their cosmology— or the order of the cosmos. I highly recommend Jenkins two key books the Galactic Alignment and Maya Cosmogenesis 2012. The only part where Jenkins and I differ is that he follows what he thinks is the traditional tzolkin cycle and I follow the Arguellen account of the tzolkin. And so Jenkins knows only the most basic things about the very core of the entire MMAC system.
So When Does the Mayan Calendar Really End: The Calleman Conundrum
For starters there is no Mayan Calendar per se, but rather a Maya calendrical system and calendars map cyclical phenomena and therefore do not “end”. Calendars mark starting and restart points in a cycle. To say that a calendar ends is an oxymoron. The Maya kept track of at least 17 to 20 different calendrical cycles.
Calleman is the only researcher to propose a different “end to the Mayan Calendar” and he has no backing for his October 28th, 2011 end date from either the MUPTs or other INRE’s. Not that that fact automatically disqualifies his assessment, but it should be noted. Calleman’s first transgression for his proposed end date is that he call his interpretation of Maya calendrics “the Mayan Calendar” when what he in fact presents is his own convoluted invention.
Calleman first introduced his take on the Maya calendrical system in his book entitled The Mayan Calendar: Solving the the Greatest Mystery of Our Time. After reading Calleman I can’t say what his contributions to MMAC are except perhaps more confusion and more reason for MUPT’s and the general mainstream public to continue making fun of 2012-MC
His work is so garbled that it would take another book to thoroughly expose all of his errors, misinformation, speculations, contradictions and outright nonsense. Fortunately one needn’t even read his books to get a thorough taste of his style. The passages on the back on his book The Mayan Calendar are more than enough of a sample. At the end of my critique I have included an extensive critique of Calleman’s work by Johaan Normark a certified MUPT. Normark’s critique substantiates my following summary review. Doing calendrical work requires uncommon patience and the ability to endure extensive tedium, but exposing Calleman’s chaotic works requires hair-pulling patience and torturous endurance. I must thank the cosmos for Normark’s incredible patience. At the end of this article you will find links to other critiques of Calleman’s work.
On the back cover of his book the Mayan Calendar we find the following claims. My comments are included.
1. “For a long time it has been suspected that the solution to the great enigmas of human existence will come from the Maya”
Suspected by whom… him and Arguelles. And bear in mind Arguelles was first published in 1987 and Calleman in 2001. And what enigmas is he talking about of the many that exist. He does not point them out in his books.
2. “My book will explain in a larger perspective the true meaning of the calendrical system of the Maya.”
And that is? Nowhere does he state what that “true meaning” is. Unless I refer to the title of his other book the Mayan Calendar and the Transformation of Consciousness, but even there he does not show how our consciousness is to be transformed by the misnomer (Mayan Calendar) his insists on using. After reading his hodge-podge of dates, world events, new age mysticism, pseudo-science and Maya calendrical terms the only thing I got was a headache and a severe aversion to Calleman’s writings.
Calleman does not present the Maya calendrical system (MCS) in his book except in the most basic form. The book is primarily about how he takes major world events over the span of billions of years and how he then overlays selective pieces of the MCS and voila somehow his doing so solves the “greatest mystery of our time”. A “mystery” that he does not even bother to identify anywhere is his book.
3. “This is however, not a book meant primarily for us to understand the Maya, but for us to understand our own place in the cosmos through the eyes of their calendar”.
Well Calleman makes that impossible because he does not present their calendar system as much as he presents his version of their calendar. What we get in his book is Calleman’s take on our place in the cosmos through the eyes of his hybrid calendar.
4. The Mayan Calendar is the most important tool for our understanding of what it means to be a human being.
And I ask how does the overlaying of arbitrarily selected events against his own arbitrarily devised timeline help me understand what it means to be human “through the eyes of their calendar”.
5. “This book reflects one of the greatest changes in human thinking ever to have taken place, one that unifies Western and Eastern thinking.
Nowhere is his book did I find what the greatest change is nor what qualifies as Western or Eastern thinking, much less how they are unified in his mad scramble of ideas. He also makes the statement as if the great change in human thinking has already taken place.
6. “The Mayan Calendar provides a common perspective on the emergence of all human religions and schools of thought“.
If anybody can pull a rabbit out of a hat its got to be Calleman. How could a multi-layered cycle tracking system provide a common perspective on the emergence of all human religions and schools of thought? Well it must be because Callemans says so. The Maya left us with no narrative or users manual on their calendrical system. We have only symbols inscribed in stone marking dates on which events important to them happened. And only four manuscripts managed to survive the European book burning jamboree and they simply deal with tables of dates. Everything we know about the ancient Maya is derived from our interpretations of their artifacts.
7. As the true meaning of the calendar is solved it becomes clear that we are living in a creation that evolves according to a preset schedule provided by the Mayan Calendar, aiming at a completion on October 28, 2011.
Again its not the Mayan Calendar that Calleman presents, but rather his own invention. Calleman’s work solves absolutely nothing and there is nothing clear about Calleman’s presentation. Calleman’s work is the clearest example of vulgar scholarship and cultural pollution. Nowhere is there a date inscribed by the Maya pointing to October 28th, 2011.
8. What makes this book unique– and immensely powerful – is that it is not based on pseudo-science or esoteric schemes, but on the established factual basis of modern science.
This has to be his most laughable statement! Calleman’s books are a perfect example of pseudo-science and are nothing but an esoteric scheme. The dictionary definition of esoteric reads: “intended for or likely to be understood by only a small number of people with a specialized knowledge or interest”. At present there are 3 well known writers on the non-mainstream study of MMAC. I would say that that qualifies MMAC as estoeric and then Calleman presents a story on the Mayan calendar system that no other researcher supports, but they instead decry his blatant disregard of scholastic rigor.
His work is about as esoteric as it gets. And what is the “established factual basis of modern science”? And what would modern science have to say about about a subject as confused and misrepresented as is the MMAC system. If we would all strive to adhere to the scientific method then maybe we can get some respect, but that has not been the case.
9. It (his book) presents a perspective that not only unifies all the modern branches of science, but unifies science with religion as well”.
I spoke too soon this statement is just as preposterous as the last one. Calleman throws together the most ungainly jumble of dates, world events, calendrical terms, new age mumbo-jumbo, religious and scientific buzz words and somehow all of the sciences are unified and so are science and religion. Where is this man’s Nobel prize he should qualify for at least a dozen or so based on his claims.
10. It (his book) scientifically proves the existence of a cosmic plan in whose evolution we all all taking part, and also of God her/himself.
I’m telling you the fun never ends with Calleman. He himself offers a disclaimer in his introduction on page 12 that he will not “unnecessarily burden us with too much detail”. Any scientist knows that science is all about the details and solid science is hard rigorous work.
What Calleman does is save himself the burden of rigor. His book was designed for the new age crowd. A segment of the population known for their voracious consumption and volumnious production of pseudo-scientific mysticism. You can ask any scientist if there is anything scientific about Calleman’s work and I can assure you that all of them will say hell no!
The foregoing is found on just the back cover of the book, his entire book is 256 pages of incredulous garble he preposterously presents as scientific. I have nothing against Calleman himself, it is his misleading and utterly confused message that I seek to expose. I too am an independent Maya calendrical researcher, but my goal is introduce some rigor into a domain that has thus far given little or no regard for rigorous scholarship. There is some truth to the 2012-Mayan calendar phenomena and part of the work in uncovering it involves dispelling all of the mumbo-jumbo and pseudo-science that it’s currently plastered with.
I ask how can any intelligent and educated person believe in the following statement… “global humanity will attain nondualistic enlightened consciousness by the end of October 2011. It will simply not be possible not to be enlightened after October 28, 2011″ ~ Carl Calleman
Calleman’s work is rife with contradictions, vulgar scholarship and wholly unsubstantiated claims. I cannot in any way consider Calleman’s work as anything more than poorly faked scholarship. The foregoing is of course my own assessment of Calleman’s work. For the sake of balance I will present a mainstream university professor type’s assessment of Callemans work as well. Please bear in mind that no researcher from either the INRE’s or the MUPT’s backs or endorses any part of Calleman’s thesis or his October 28th “Mayan calendar end date” so I am not able to provide any arguments for Calleman’s work besides his own. That says something.
Johan Normark Exposes Calleman
The following critiques of Calleman’s work are presented by Johan Normark an archaeologist, traditional Maya scholar and postdoctoral researcher with the Department of Historical Studies at University of Gothenburg. I have included excerpts from his blog with links to the complete articles. My comments are interspersed in brackets.
Calleman: Get the simplest facts correct please
Calleman: The Maya Calendar Explains Ice Age Fashion
[This article is key to exposing Calleman's hokey October 28th MC end date]
2012: Calleman’s Purposeful Universe. Pt 1 – overview
2012: Calleman’s purposeful universe. Pt 5 – Evolution as intelligent design
2012: Calleman makes sure his business continues beyond the “end”
I am sorry to have burdened you with Calleman’s world, but for the sake of clarity we should all know who is a reliable source of information and who is not. There are many people mindlessly parroting Calleman’s end of the Mayan calendar claims. You now have something to answer them with.
In closing I would like to say something about my own work. While I have yet to publish my own book (work in progress) on 2012 and the Maya Meso-American Calendrical (MMAC) system I do offer over a books worth of articles on the subject. The focus of my work deals with the tzolkin cycle, the very heart and hub around which the entire MMAC system revolves, a subject that Calleman gives only scant attention to.
Calleman claims to have solved the greatest mystery of our time, but fails to mention what that is. Since he doesn’t tell us what the greatest mystery is then we will have to look at what the other researchers have to say.
All researchers including myself will concur and say that the greatest mystery surrounding MMAC, is how did the Ancient MesoAmericans (AMA) come up with the tzolkin cycle since it does not match up with any observable process or the cyclical movements of any heavenly body. Every attempt thus far to correlate it are mere approximations, such as the average length of human gestation (266 days) and the average length of the agricultural cycle in mesoamerica.
There is one problem with those suggestions. The tzolkin cycle does not vary, it is a specific and fixed 260 days long. Now some have pointed out that there is a 260 day period between the two solar zenith passages at the ancient city of Izapa.(Jenkins) That maybe so, but the Olmecs who preceded the Izapan culture by hundreds of years where already using the tzolkin cycle.
There are in actuality two great mysteries surrounding the MMAC system, one I have already mentioned and the other one that nobody else addresses or why did the AMA attribute specific qualities to each day of the tzolkin cycle? Why did they use it as an astrological and forecasting system? Did they just invent it like other cultures have invented religion for socio-political reasons or is it based on aspects of reality that Westerners and all other cultures have yet to discover?
My experience and study compels to say that it maps subtle, but empirically verifiable cycles of distinct qualities as per the Arguellen account of tzolkin. Please note that I do not present my work as the “Mayan Calendar”.
If the tzolkin is what I have found it to be then it is a fact of nature and not just some cultural artifact without universal application. As a fact of nature it belongs squarely in the realm of the scientific and it must therefore become a universalized body of knowledge articulated in the most universal way possible, but not so dumbed down so that it’s meaning becomes diluted. I therefore present my work as the Art and Science of Synchronicity (ARTSOS) and as the Art and Science of a Social Physics (ASSP) as based on the Arguellen account of the Tzolkin.
The Tzolkin cycle as a fact of nature is no more Mayan than the science of genetics is British and therefore universalization or de-ethnitization of MMAC is mandatory. I also must admit that the Arguellen account of the tzolkin is not accepted by MUPT’s or the other 2 INRE’ researchers mentioned in this article. But that is due to Arguelles’ Calleman like presentation and that is no evidence to back up his claims. On the contrary I do present preliminary evidence with regards to the Hyper-Day facet of the Arguellen tzolkin here, here and here.
I also provide people with all the tools and methods they need to verify it for themselves experientially. I will not release the results of my empirical studies and the methodologies by which anybody will be able to employ to verify what I consider to the greatest natural history discovery of all time, until my book is published early next year.
In the mean time you may become acquainted with my work found in the Synchronicity and 2012 sections of Emergent-Culture.com To understand why I consider the tzolkin cycle to be the greatest natural history discovery of all time please see Introducing The Cosmocycle: God As A Universal Cyclical Process The Tzolkin Unmasked.
Until the tzolkin cycle is empirically verified the entire MMAC system is a mere cultural curiosity of the ancient Mesoamericans with little if any relevance for us today. In other words the empirical validation of the tzolkin cycle is the greatest challenge facing MMAC.
Links To Other Critiques of Calleman’s Work
“I am grateful that it will soon be October 28 and that we finally will get to the “end;” not of the Mayan calendar, but of the absurdity that has come to surround this date. Not a single serious scholar in the entire world supports Dr. Calleman’s ideas concerning the Mayan calendar and his principal theories have no basis in Mayan culture, past or presen” ~ Robert Sitler
Robert Sitler is a Professor of Modern Languages and Director of Latin American Studies at Stetson University in DeLand, Florida. He is also author of the recent book “The Living Maya: Ancient Wisdom in the Era of 2012″ as well as the translator of Mayan author Gaspar Gonzalez’s “13 B’aktun: Mayan Visions of 2012 and Beyond.”
Calleman’s Pyramid Scheme - By Mark Healy
Mark Heley, author ‘The Everything Guide to 2012’
Geoff Stray Shows Calleman’s Calendar Wrong,
Geoff Stray is the Author of “Beyond 2012“
How to spot a Maya prophet’s hoax
By Johan Normark
Carl Calleman’s Long Count End Date Proved Wrong
By Shay Addams
shareshare
© 2009-2011 Emergent Culture. All Rights Reserved.
The world of 2012-Mayan Calendar (2012-MC) studies is dominated by two major scholastic camps—mainstream university professor types (MUPTs) and independent researchers (INREs). This article is a critique and maybe considered an informal kind of peer review.The INRE’s are still mostly lone wolf types, but my hope is that an association of Maya-Meso-American Calendrical (MMAC) researchers will eventually form so that we can put our house in order. At this point quality control of MMAC information is done informally by other INRE’s and informal articles by the MUPTs. As an independent researcher myself I welcome constructive criticism of my work.
MUPT’s Versus The INRE’s
The MUPTs have but the very driest things to say about the 2012-MC matter, but they are for the most part in agreement about the 5125 year Maya Long count cycle that restarts on December 21st 2012. While the INRE’s predict everything from doomsday to worldwide utopia in the blink of an eye. The INRE’s presentation of the 2012-MC phenomena is riddled with failed prophets, sensationalism, mysticism, messianic fever and vulgar scholarship. The Mayan calendar has become the butt of jokes the world over and who can blame them for making fun of it.
Unlike the formal peer reviewed world of the MUPT’s, the INRE’s have no formal review process and therefore anything goes. Not that INRE’s can’t make significant contributions to Maya-Meso-American Calendrics (MMAC) or any other field of study for that matter, but the lack of a formal peer review system has created a vast ideological quagmire for those following the 2012-MC phenomena.
MMAC is a new field of study. There are no college courses in MMAC so most experts become so by virtue of their independent study. All branches of science start out similarly until an association of sorts is formed to insure quality control. The problem with most MMAC INRE’s is that they’ve failed to respect the most basic conventions of good scholarship and so they have little or no endorsements from the MUPTs. Despite their shaky foundation the various MMAC INRE’s have significant followings. Lay people untrained in the discipline itself, the rules of logic, rigorous scholarship, or unfamiliarity with the scientific method tend to follow who they do based more on subjective feelings rather than on a strict logical and evidence based assessment. There is nothing wrong with subjectivity but, science is built upon empiricism or universally accessible evidence.
Of the many MMAC INREs there are only 3 worth mentioning, the late Jose Arguelles, John Major Jenkins and Carl Johan Calleman. Of the 3 Jenkins is the only researcher to strive for rigorous scholarship and when he speculates he at least admits he is doing so. Calleman and Arguelles are both failed prophets whose writings are overflowing with hyper-speculations, mysticism, messianic fever and sloppy scholarship.
The Arguellen Contribution to MMAC
Arguelles was the first INRE to publish his ideas regarding 2012-MC and despite his questionable presentation of MMAC he did make several very significant contributions to it. Arguelles rediscovered the correct tzolkin sequence and he gave us tzolkin dynamics. Thus far the Arguellen contribution to MMAC is paramount for without a correct and empirically verifiable tzolkin sequence the entire MMAC system is nothing more than a clever method for tracking cycles of inconsequence.The only reason I can cite Arguelles is because I have empirically verified his version of the tzolkin sequence and his elucidation of tzolkin dynamics. Not only did Arguelles not provide empirical support for his many claims, but he rarely if ever showed his work.
Arguelles had a lot to say about a lot of things, but the only thing of relevance for me was what he had to say about the tzolkin. But I did not take his word for it. I sought to verify it for myself and the preliminary results of my ongoing studies maybe be here, here and here. For more on the Arguellen contribution to 2012-MC please see Jose Arguelles: Origins of The Present Day Mayan Calendar – 2012 Phenomena
John Major Jenkins’ Contributions to MMAC.
As mentioned earlier of the three best known MMAC INRE’s Jenkins respects the conventions of scholarship the best and he is the only INRE to get positive reviews from the MUPT’s. Jenkins’ work gives us the most comprehensive and accurate overview of the Long Count’s cycles origins and of December’s 21st 2012 Galactic Alignment. And he also gives the most sweeping insights into the main thrust of ancient mesoamerican cosmology. From a cosmological standpoint the ancient mesoamericans were concerned with three overriding quests.They sought to center themselves in relation to heavenly fixtures, they sought to discern cyclical renewal and those two quests gave them their third quest their cosmology— or the order of the cosmos. I highly recommend Jenkins two key books the Galactic Alignment and Maya Cosmogenesis 2012. The only part where Jenkins and I differ is that he follows what he thinks is the traditional tzolkin cycle and I follow the Arguellen account of the tzolkin. And so Jenkins knows only the most basic things about the very core of the entire MMAC system.
So When Does the Mayan Calendar Really End: The Calleman Conundrum
For starters there is no Mayan Calendar per se, but rather a Maya calendrical system and calendars map cyclical phenomena and therefore do not “end”. Calendars mark starting and restart points in a cycle. To say that a calendar ends is an oxymoron. The Maya kept track of at least 17 to 20 different calendrical cycles.Calleman is the only researcher to propose a different “end to the Mayan Calendar” and he has no backing for his October 28th, 2011 end date from either the MUPTs or other INRE’s. Not that that fact automatically disqualifies his assessment, but it should be noted. Calleman’s first transgression for his proposed end date is that he call his interpretation of Maya calendrics “the Mayan Calendar” when what he in fact presents is his own convoluted invention.
Calleman first introduced his take on the Maya calendrical system in his book entitled The Mayan Calendar: Solving the the Greatest Mystery of Our Time. After reading Calleman I can’t say what his contributions to MMAC are except perhaps more confusion and more reason for MUPT’s and the general mainstream public to continue making fun of 2012-MC
His work is so garbled that it would take another book to thoroughly expose all of his errors, misinformation, speculations, contradictions and outright nonsense. Fortunately one needn’t even read his books to get a thorough taste of his style. The passages on the back on his book The Mayan Calendar are more than enough of a sample. At the end of my critique I have included an extensive critique of Calleman’s work by Johaan Normark a certified MUPT. Normark’s critique substantiates my following summary review. Doing calendrical work requires uncommon patience and the ability to endure extensive tedium, but exposing Calleman’s chaotic works requires hair-pulling patience and torturous endurance. I must thank the cosmos for Normark’s incredible patience. At the end of this article you will find links to other critiques of Calleman’s work.
On the back cover of his book the Mayan Calendar we find the following claims. My comments are included.
1. “For a long time it has been suspected that the solution to the great enigmas of human existence will come from the Maya”Suspected by whom… him and Arguelles. And bear in mind Arguelles was first published in 1987 and Calleman in 2001. And what enigmas is he talking about of the many that exist. He does not point them out in his books.
2. “My book will explain in a larger perspective the true meaning of the calendrical system of the Maya.”
And that is? Nowhere does he state what that “true meaning” is. Unless I refer to the title of his other book the Mayan Calendar and the Transformation of Consciousness, but even there he does not show how our consciousness is to be transformed by the misnomer (Mayan Calendar) his insists on using. After reading his hodge-podge of dates, world events, new age mysticism, pseudo-science and Maya calendrical terms the only thing I got was a headache and a severe aversion to Calleman’s writings.
Calleman does not present the Maya calendrical system (MCS) in his book except in the most basic form. The book is primarily about how he takes major world events over the span of billions of years and how he then overlays selective pieces of the MCS and voila somehow his doing so solves the “greatest mystery of our time”. A “mystery” that he does not even bother to identify anywhere is his book.
3. “This is however, not a book meant primarily for us to understand the Maya, but for us to understand our own place in the cosmos through the eyes of their calendar”.
Well Calleman makes that impossible because he does not present their calendar system as much as he presents his version of their calendar. What we get in his book is Calleman’s take on our place in the cosmos through the eyes of his hybrid calendar.
4. The Mayan Calendar is the most important tool for our understanding of what it means to be a human being.
And I ask how does the overlaying of arbitrarily selected events against his own arbitrarily devised timeline help me understand what it means to be human “through the eyes of their calendar”.
5. “This book reflects one of the greatest changes in human thinking ever to have taken place, one that unifies Western and Eastern thinking.
Nowhere is his book did I find what the greatest change is nor what qualifies as Western or Eastern thinking, much less how they are unified in his mad scramble of ideas. He also makes the statement as if the great change in human thinking has already taken place.
6. “The Mayan Calendar provides a common perspective on the emergence of all human religions and schools of thought“.
If anybody can pull a rabbit out of a hat its got to be Calleman. How could a multi-layered cycle tracking system provide a common perspective on the emergence of all human religions and schools of thought? Well it must be because Callemans says so. The Maya left us with no narrative or users manual on their calendrical system. We have only symbols inscribed in stone marking dates on which events important to them happened. And only four manuscripts managed to survive the European book burning jamboree and they simply deal with tables of dates. Everything we know about the ancient Maya is derived from our interpretations of their artifacts.
7. As the true meaning of the calendar is solved it becomes clear that we are living in a creation that evolves according to a preset schedule provided by the Mayan Calendar, aiming at a completion on October 28, 2011.
Again its not the Mayan Calendar that Calleman presents, but rather his own invention. Calleman’s work solves absolutely nothing and there is nothing clear about Calleman’s presentation. Calleman’s work is the clearest example of vulgar scholarship and cultural pollution. Nowhere is there a date inscribed by the Maya pointing to October 28th, 2011.
8. What makes this book unique– and immensely powerful – is that it is not based on pseudo-science or esoteric schemes, but on the established factual basis of modern science.
This has to be his most laughable statement! Calleman’s books are a perfect example of pseudo-science and are nothing but an esoteric scheme. The dictionary definition of esoteric reads: “intended for or likely to be understood by only a small number of people with a specialized knowledge or interest”. At present there are 3 well known writers on the non-mainstream study of MMAC. I would say that that qualifies MMAC as estoeric and then Calleman presents a story on the Mayan calendar system that no other researcher supports, but they instead decry his blatant disregard of scholastic rigor.
His work is about as esoteric as it gets. And what is the “established factual basis of modern science”? And what would modern science have to say about about a subject as confused and misrepresented as is the MMAC system. If we would all strive to adhere to the scientific method then maybe we can get some respect, but that has not been the case.
9. It (his book) presents a perspective that not only unifies all the modern branches of science, but unifies science with religion as well”.
I spoke too soon this statement is just as preposterous as the last one. Calleman throws together the most ungainly jumble of dates, world events, calendrical terms, new age mumbo-jumbo, religious and scientific buzz words and somehow all of the sciences are unified and so are science and religion. Where is this man’s Nobel prize he should qualify for at least a dozen or so based on his claims.
10. It (his book) scientifically proves the existence of a cosmic plan in whose evolution we all all taking part, and also of God her/himself.
I’m telling you the fun never ends with Calleman. He himself offers a disclaimer in his introduction on page 12 that he will not “unnecessarily burden us with too much detail”. Any scientist knows that science is all about the details and solid science is hard rigorous work.
What Calleman does is save himself the burden of rigor. His book was designed for the new age crowd. A segment of the population known for their voracious consumption and volumnious production of pseudo-scientific mysticism. You can ask any scientist if there is anything scientific about Calleman’s work and I can assure you that all of them will say hell no!
The foregoing is found on just the back cover of the book, his entire book is 256 pages of incredulous garble he preposterously presents as scientific. I have nothing against Calleman himself, it is his misleading and utterly confused message that I seek to expose. I too am an independent Maya calendrical researcher, but my goal is introduce some rigor into a domain that has thus far given little or no regard for rigorous scholarship. There is some truth to the 2012-Mayan calendar phenomena and part of the work in uncovering it involves dispelling all of the mumbo-jumbo and pseudo-science that it’s currently plastered with.
I ask how can any intelligent and educated person believe in the following statement… “global humanity will attain nondualistic enlightened consciousness by the end of October 2011. It will simply not be possible not to be enlightened after October 28, 2011″ ~ Carl Calleman
Calleman’s work is rife with contradictions, vulgar scholarship and wholly unsubstantiated claims. I cannot in any way consider Calleman’s work as anything more than poorly faked scholarship. The foregoing is of course my own assessment of Calleman’s work. For the sake of balance I will present a mainstream university professor type’s assessment of Callemans work as well. Please bear in mind that no researcher from either the INRE’s or the MUPT’s backs or endorses any part of Calleman’s thesis or his October 28th “Mayan calendar end date” so I am not able to provide any arguments for Calleman’s work besides his own. That says something.
Johan Normark Exposes Calleman
The following critiques of Calleman’s work are presented by Johan Normark an archaeologist, traditional Maya scholar and postdoctoral researcher with the Department of Historical Studies at University of Gothenburg. I have included excerpts from his blog with links to the complete articles. My comments are interspersed in brackets.
Calleman: Get the simplest facts correct please
“Just a quick look through it (Callemans latest book) reveals that it is littered with small mistakes (apart from his major distortions of the whole calendar which I shall focus on in other blog posts). One of them can be found on page 43. In the text below the photo of Temple I at Tikal you can read that it is the highest pyramid in the Americas. This is a statement from a person claiming to be an expert on the Maya.
Well, the simple fact is that Temple I is not even the highest pyramid at Tikal. Temple III, IV and V are all higher than this structure. Then we have other Maya sites with pyramids higher than Temple I, such as Calakmul and El Mirador. The Sun pyramid at Teotihuacan is also higher. These facts are basic knowledge to a Mayanist/Mesoamericanist. If he cannot even get these facts straight in topics that he himself is a self-proclaimed expert I wonder how accurate the rest is. [read more]
Calleman: The Maya Calendar Explains Ice Age Fashion
Calleman: “Among the Ice Age people in the Regional Underworld [...], which was activated about one hundred thousand years ago, we know from archaeology that change was very slow, and there is no reason to believe that they were aware of any evolution of their lifestyle. Because of the slow rate of change, you could wear a mammoth fur your whole life without this going out of fashion”. (Calleman 2009:57)2012: Calleman’s October 28, 2011 Correlation
Normark: Nice to see the Maya calendar being used to study Ice Age fashion… The book is so full of mistakes and stereotypes like the ones in the quote so it will easy keep me busy. [read more]
[This article is key to exposing Calleman's hokey October 28th MC end date]
There are several major distortions of the Maya calendar going on in Calleman’s world. Calleman criticizes Jenkins for distorting the Maya calendar but Jenkins is actually far more accurate. [I hold the same view] In Calleman’s book (p 44) he places his nine period/rhythms within a pyramidal shape with the largest period/rhythm at the bottom of the pyramid. Not only does this reverse the order of Long Count positions on monuments where the highest period is placed at the top, it also gives a single column of dates rather than the double column in which the calendar inscriptions originally were recorded.2012: Calleman’s Contradictions – The End of Time Means the End of all Existence
Calleman even invents his own period! Winals are no longer existent in Calleman’s calendar although they are quite common on Classic period Maya monuments. A winal is a period of 20 days and 18 winals equals one tun (360 days). The tun is for Calleman the crucial unit/constant in his home made system. Twenty tuns equal a katun and twenty katuns equals a baktun, etc. In Calleman’s system the tun must therefore be divided by twenty rather than by eighteen. Hence, the winal is replaced by the oxlahunkin, a period of 18 days. I just wonder what two days he has erased [...]
Calleman says that “the creation cycles described by the Maya, including the tzolkin, are fundamentally of a spiritual, non-astronomical, nature. Thus, any theory that implies that the Mayan Long Count would have been designed to reflect astronomical phenomena, be it the precession of the earth or a solar zenith, is a warning signal that its originator is off the mark. It should be obvious that if the Mayan calendar is a prophetic calendar describing cosmic energy cycles of a universal nature then the particular date at which the sun was in zenith in the particular location of Izapa is totally irrelevant for us who live today and must be considered as nothing but a result of a tradition too strong to be changed.”
Apparently Calleman is completely unaware of the astronomical data used to correlate the Long Count with the Julian calendar. His usage of GMT depends on astronomical correlations that he at the same time criticizes… He also relies on the skeptical notion that the Long Count was invented at Izapa and that it relates to a solar zenith. [..]
Calleman’s calendar is complete bogus and I will let you know what I think about his research that depends on his so called “periodic system of evolution” in the near future. [read more]
What does 2011 have in store for us then? According to Calleman “the Universal Underworld in 2011 is what all creation has been waiting for: its very purpose (all revealed by himself) It is when all things are brought together and all the conflicting ways of being, acting, and thinking will be resolved and unified in a light that makes it possible for everyone to understand everyone else and everything at once” (p 87). Now this is exactly what we need in order to find peace, love and understanding (please sense a bit of irony here). According to Calleman everything is separated by dualisms that create conflicts.
The unification he sees is a transcendent one. Calleman seems unaware of the existing philosophical traditions that see the world as already united but from an immanent perspective where the entities of the world actualizes from the virtual that is monistic. Ironically, this was most likely the way the ancient Maya viewed the world where “animistic” forces abound in objects, organisms, phenomena, etc. In any case, those with dualist minds, according to Calleman, will wither when his Nine Underworlds all end on October 28, 2011.
Here one of the more illuminating inconsistencies in Calleman’s world appears. Ironically it is his interest and focus on time that is riddled with logical fallacies. Time will indeed end according to him, on this very date and only an eternal now will remain: “there is every reason to believe that, at the same point, ‘time’ will come to an end…” (p 88). Two pages later he writes that “it will simply not be possible not to be enlightened after October 28, 2011, or at least from a certain time afterward when the new reality has definitely manifested” (p 90, my emphasis). So time ends but not quite… In fact, according to Calleman “we will need to adapt to the fact that everyone around us is now [after the end date] enlightened and has full faith that a millennium of peace, the Golden Solar Age, has finally dawned on Earth” (p 91, my emphasis).
Contrary to what Calleman claims he actually prophesizes the end for us all (although no cataclysms appear in his account). He simply believes there is a transcencent/Platonic existence beyond this one which is to be One with the almighty designer. He fails to see that the creative power comes from within, it is immanent and open ended, such as in Bergson’s writings. Calleman’s view is negative to life since it proclaims we are all destined to cease to exist as mortal beings. [read more]
2012: Calleman’s Purposeful Universe. Pt 1 – overview
I have in several blog posts discussed the Swedish New Ager/pseudoscientist Carl Johan Calleman’s ideas and distortions concerning the Long Count (and various other Maya associated topics). Calleman is not a Mayanist and very little of what he has to say has any connection to the ancient Maya. He continues to spread the myths and illusions prevalent within New Age and attempts to combine these with science.2012: Calleman Muddles Events in the Arab World
In his latest book The Purposeful Universe: How Quantum Theory and Mayan Cosmology Explain the Origin and Evolution of Life he launches what I believe he sees as his magnum opus. Too bad it is riddled with not only distortions of the Maya but also with evolutionary theory as well.[...]
The last thing you as a scientist should do is to manipulate your data to fit your idealized model. This book is an invaluable source in how not to practice science. [...] [read more]
The Swedish Maya calendar bender/twister Carl Johan Calleman urges you to buy one of his books “if you want to understand the decisive time we are now entering. No book about the Mayan calendar has proven to be so accurate in its predictions and understanding”. First, I guess his urge comes from a realization that his own business will come to an end in October this year.2012: Calleman’s Purposeful Universe. Pt 3 – Self-Organization
Hence, you must buy more of his books to secure his financial future. Second, his books are not accurate at all. Apart from some major distortions, such as creating a completely different “end date” and creating a new period that does not exist in the Maya calendar (the uaxaclahunkin rhythm), he has not proven anything and he has never said that Mubarak would fall, etc. He just retreats to vague predictions.
Now, Calleman is a master of twisting and bending data to fit his bogus calendar. [..] [read more]
In this book Calleman criticizes the idea that “the universe and its biological organisms have an inherent tendency to self-organize” (p 85). On the following page he asks the question: “If the big bang was self-organized, what is then meant by “self”?” Well, it is supposed to mean from “within itself” (it is immanent). Parts form greater wholes and thereby greater complexity without the need of an external transcendent source (the Tree of Life in Calleman’s cosmology).Calleman’s Purposeful Universe. Pt 4 – Time
Calleman then falsely claims that “there seems to be no experimental evidence that [a trend toward higher complexity] would be the result of any “self-organization”” (p 86). Just check out Wikipedia and you will see plenty of examples of how self-organization creates greater complexity. If you are going to open the Black Box of complexity you’ll need to develop a more detailed critique than less than half a page. All Calleman does is to make use of intelligent design rhetoric that attempts to disclaim self-organization as explanation. He states that “if we mix together the different components of a cell, they will fail to “self-organize” into a cell” (p 86). That is absolutely true and Calleman has proved nothing by that statement. [.... [read more]
[read more]2012: Calleman’s 2011 calendar
Here is an image of his 2011 calendar. I guess it is supposed to represent Calleman’s idea that all life is formed in the image of the Tree of Life, a rotating axis that through quantum levels (the Maya time periods) create higher forms.
It is also supposed to include Calleman’s own made up period which he calls uaxlahunkin (13 x 18 days). This period does not exist in the real Maya calendar and it has been created by Calleman in order to replace two other periods in the Maya Long Count. Otherwise he would have ended up with ten levels and ten Underworlds (and that would not have worked with the prevalence of number nine in the Maya numerology). Calleman simply mistreats the Maya.[cultural pollution] Do not buy this stuff. It is pure nonsense. The only good thing to come out of this year is that we hopefully will not see a Calleman calendar for 2012. [ I whole heartedly concur] [read more]
2012: Calleman’s purposeful universe. Pt 5 – Evolution as intelligent design
In this post and in some future ones I will show that Calleman’s model of the universe and the evolution of life is nothing but an idealistic fantasy based on selected data and biased interpretation. These topics will be covered before the 28th of October when Calleman says that the Maya Long Count ends and our consciousness will be transformed. After that it will be obvious to anyone that he is a false prophet. [...]
I will treat his highly speculative and unrealistic idea of speciation later on, which is kind of a “virigin-birth” speciation event. It simply follows the idealistic model he has set up for himself. Calleman is a good example when an ideal model is used to interpret science. This is the way creationists and pseudoscientists thinks: “we have the answer, let’s go out and find evidence that support it (and ignore everything else)” [read more]
2012: Calleman makes sure his business continues beyond the “end”
I have always wondered what the various 2012 prophets will do when their predictions on what will happen on the day the Maya Long Count fails to deliver what they have promised. It is quite obvious that Calleman has given it a bit of thought since he otherwise would be running out of business at the end of this month. His back-up plan is revealed in his most recent interpretation of what will happen after the 28th of October. Earlier today he published a blog post where he says: “I do not think it is possible to judge yet if the waves will come to an end or not even if I am increasingly inclined to believe that they will continue indefinitely.”2012: Calleman’s purposeful universe. Pt 6 – The periodic system of biological evolution
Why will they continue indefinitely? Because, when “the universe attains its highest quantum state there will however be no higher state to evolve to. Rather if indeed the waves continue indefinitely this would be experienced more like a grinding process of the world and the human beings. This would go on until the unity consciousness of the Ninth wave has finally been established and all phenomena inconsistent with this weeded out.”
What this means is that Calleman will continue to spread his ideas until “the unity consciousness of the Ninth wave” is firmly established and everything that does not fit this wave is removed from existence (I assume that Calleman is synonymous with the wave itself). I’ll bet that if asked why the consciousness has not improved by October 29 Calleman will claim that the process is not finished yet. He will keep letting us know how things are proceeding, what more has been weeded out.
See and learn how to extend your business indefinitely. It is always good to have a back-up plan. Therefore, Sitler’s response to Calleman’s post misses the point to some extent. Sitler says that he is “grateful that it will soon be October 28 and that we finally will get to the “end;” not of the Mayan calendar, but of the absurdity that has come to surround this date.” Yes, we will get over the absurdity of the date, but not the absurdity of Calleman’s ideas.
[read more]
He continues with more false and misinformed statements when it comes to the Cretaceous-Tertiary mass extinction. The reason dinosaurs went extinct was their “incompatibility with the new quantum state […]. The dinosaurs, which had small brains with little lateralization, may have been inconsistent with the new yin/yang polarity introduced at the beginning of Day 7” (p 193).Summary and Conclusion
Apparently Calleman is unaware that birds are feathered dinosaurs and that there are more bird species than mammal species today? Birds also dominated the early Tertiary period. Further, if non-avian dinosaurs went extinct because higher mammals had better brains, why did not crocodiles, lizards, amphibians, and fish also die out? No explanation is given why such animals still remain.
Most revealing of this whole yin/yang nonsense is that Calleman’s contradicts his own predictions. He claims that because “we ourselves have not experienced any similarly strong yin/yang-polarity shift should however not be a reason for us to deny that they may have had a powerful effect in the past” (p 194). Well, we should have experienced at least three such polarity shifts according to his own calendar (at least one when he wrote his book)! These three should have happened in 1992, on the 3rd of November last year and two days ago (October 10). Did you notice it? Did you record any mass extinctions? Please let me know. The last post will reveal the most bizarre part of his model. [read more]
I am sorry to have burdened you with Calleman’s world, but for the sake of clarity we should all know who is a reliable source of information and who is not. There are many people mindlessly parroting Calleman’s end of the Mayan calendar claims. You now have something to answer them with.
The Tzolkin cycle chart in code form
Calleman claims to have solved the greatest mystery of our time, but fails to mention what that is. Since he doesn’t tell us what the greatest mystery is then we will have to look at what the other researchers have to say.
All researchers including myself will concur and say that the greatest mystery surrounding MMAC, is how did the Ancient MesoAmericans (AMA) come up with the tzolkin cycle since it does not match up with any observable process or the cyclical movements of any heavenly body. Every attempt thus far to correlate it are mere approximations, such as the average length of human gestation (266 days) and the average length of the agricultural cycle in mesoamerica.
There is one problem with those suggestions. The tzolkin cycle does not vary, it is a specific and fixed 260 days long. Now some have pointed out that there is a 260 day period between the two solar zenith passages at the ancient city of Izapa.(Jenkins) That maybe so, but the Olmecs who preceded the Izapan culture by hundreds of years where already using the tzolkin cycle.
There are in actuality two great mysteries surrounding the MMAC system, one I have already mentioned and the other one that nobody else addresses or why did the AMA attribute specific qualities to each day of the tzolkin cycle? Why did they use it as an astrological and forecasting system? Did they just invent it like other cultures have invented religion for socio-political reasons or is it based on aspects of reality that Westerners and all other cultures have yet to discover?
My experience and study compels to say that it maps subtle, but empirically verifiable cycles of distinct qualities as per the Arguellen account of tzolkin. Please note that I do not present my work as the “Mayan Calendar”.
If the tzolkin is what I have found it to be then it is a fact of nature and not just some cultural artifact without universal application. As a fact of nature it belongs squarely in the realm of the scientific and it must therefore become a universalized body of knowledge articulated in the most universal way possible, but not so dumbed down so that it’s meaning becomes diluted. I therefore present my work as the Art and Science of Synchronicity (ARTSOS) and as the Art and Science of a Social Physics (ASSP) as based on the Arguellen account of the Tzolkin.
The Tzolkin cycle as a fact of nature is no more Mayan than the science of genetics is British and therefore universalization or de-ethnitization of MMAC is mandatory. I also must admit that the Arguellen account of the tzolkin is not accepted by MUPT’s or the other 2 INRE’ researchers mentioned in this article. But that is due to Arguelles’ Calleman like presentation and that is no evidence to back up his claims. On the contrary I do present preliminary evidence with regards to the Hyper-Day facet of the Arguellen tzolkin here, here and here.
I also provide people with all the tools and methods they need to verify it for themselves experientially. I will not release the results of my empirical studies and the methodologies by which anybody will be able to employ to verify what I consider to the greatest natural history discovery of all time, until my book is published early next year.
In the mean time you may become acquainted with my work found in the Synchronicity and 2012 sections of Emergent-Culture.com To understand why I consider the tzolkin cycle to be the greatest natural history discovery of all time please see Introducing The Cosmocycle: God As A Universal Cyclical Process The Tzolkin Unmasked.
Until the tzolkin cycle is empirically verified the entire MMAC system is a mere cultural curiosity of the ancient Mesoamericans with little if any relevance for us today. In other words the empirical validation of the tzolkin cycle is the greatest challenge facing MMAC.
Links To Other Critiques of Calleman’s Work
“I am grateful that it will soon be October 28 and that we finally will get to the “end;” not of the Mayan calendar, but of the absurdity that has come to surround this date. Not a single serious scholar in the entire world supports Dr. Calleman’s ideas concerning the Mayan calendar and his principal theories have no basis in Mayan culture, past or presen” ~ Robert Sitler
Robert Sitler is a Professor of Modern Languages and Director of Latin American Studies at Stetson University in DeLand, Florida. He is also author of the recent book “The Living Maya: Ancient Wisdom in the Era of 2012″ as well as the translator of Mayan author Gaspar Gonzalez’s “13 B’aktun: Mayan Visions of 2012 and Beyond.”
Calleman’s Pyramid Scheme - By Mark Healy
Mark Heley, author ‘The Everything Guide to 2012’
Geoff Stray Shows Calleman’s Calendar Wrong,
Geoff Stray is the Author of “Beyond 2012“
How to spot a Maya prophet’s hoax
By Johan Normark
Carl Calleman’s Long Count End Date Proved Wrong
By Shay Addams
shareshare
No comments:
Post a Comment