resources for researching year 2012 theories/data

topic posted Fri, November 25, 2005 - 10:44 AM by  isabeau
hi all --

familiar with the website and the problems with arguellies (sp?) long count...

that being said, if anyone's got a bunch of bookmarks, or some lists of books they'd like to share that were helpful in parsing out this subject, i'd be grateful for the info so that i may add to my hardcopy/cyberspace library!

posted by:
  • hi folks,

    happy to see this tribe up and running. I am the author of a book on psychedelic shamanism, Breaking Open the Head, and have just completed a new book, titled 2012 : The Return of Quetzalcoatl, that will come out in May from Viking Penguin. I have been steeped in these thoughts and questions for the last four years.

    Some books that I found very useful for comprehending what is now happening:

    Archetype of the Apocalypse by Edward Edinger - a Jungian look at the Apocalypse as an event now constellating in the collective and individual psyche, ultimately a psychic watershed representing "the momentous event of the coming of the self into conscious realization."

    The Ever-Present Origin by Jean Gebser - long dense work on philosophy by a German thinker from the 1950s... Gebser wrote about the evolution of consciousness as passing through various "structures" which are different realizations of time and space. He believed we are on the verge of a "mutational break" into a new structure of consciousness, from the mental-rational framework to the integral framework, which was self-conscious realization of origin.

    Time & the Technosphere, The Mayan Factor, Earth Ascending by Jose Arguelles - probably most of you know these already?

    Maya Cosmogenesis 2012 by John Major Jenkins

    The Mayan Calendar and the Transformation of Consciousness - Carl Calleman

    These three have argued against each other in various ways that I don't think are as important as their agreements. Each is bringing a different fractal shard of the whole picture to us. Definitely Calleman's nine-step model is absolutely incredible, and seems right on target.

    Amit Goswami - The Self-Aware Universe

    Rudolf Steiner and Sri Aurobindo - Auobindo thought we were moving towards a "supramental condition." His essays on this are available on line, as are most of Steiner's essays.

    F David Peat - Synchronicity - A physicist, Peat argues that synchronicity is the bridge btw psychology and physics. He sees the possibility of the "end of time" as a movement into a synchronic order, based on "transformations and unfoldings," rather than our current linear time.


    • Going back to the original question: Here is a link showing how mistakes were made by Tony Shearer in calculating the Harmonic Convergence: plus other errors in the Mayan Factor. Here is a link showing how Arguelles' Dreamspell correlation was generated by a faulty reading of the Chilam Balam of Mani:
      The information on the first link is also included in the book Beyond 2012: Catastrophe or Ecstasy, by Geoff Stray, (more shameless self-promotion) which also covers the Calleman "solution" and its faults. The foreword is by John Major Jenkins. See
      By the way, Daniel, do you remember I lent you that issue of the Salvia Divinorum magazine, with my article in it? Can you bring it with you next time you're over for the Glasto Symposium? Thanx.

      • Unsu...
        there are no problems with Arguelles' long count. Arguelles has no long count. the dreamspell is based on the 'synchronic order' of the 52year cycles of the tzolkin/13moon count.

        the dreamspell is derived from the 'Cuceb' section of the Books of Chilam Balam, and not due to an error. The article linked below written by Geoff negelects any consideration of Jose's article '"Adjusting the Discrepancies within the Cuceb-Chilam Balam Correlation " which was written about 7 or 8 years ago. Thus the author's conclusions are off base.
        The Chilam Balam tradition consistently begins their base calculations off a new year of July 16, Julian (July 26 Gregorian). For instance, the Chilam Balam Books of Chumayel takes the initial calculation date from July 16 (26) 1555, While the Tizim starts on July 16 1581.
        Since there were about 7 leap days in between these two dates the mayan scribes must have been inercalating leap years to maintain this adjustment.
        this has everything to do with the arrival of cortez and the beginning of the period of 9 hells. The original prophets would have known that when the 13hells ended the haab would be very near the accepted mayan solar-new-year (when there was a solar zenith at Chicchen Itza (see Michael Finley, John Major Jenkins, etc)) on the equivalent of July 26.
        Therefore the beginning of the 9 hell period and the arrival of the Christian calendar marked the perfect time for the maya of the Yucatan to correlate the calendar year to the solar year, which they did, even implementing a new calendar (the Mayapan calendar) complete with new year-bearers. The tradition of the Mayapan calendar has been re-established as the Dreamspell PAN calendar.

        The last date given in the Cuceb section of the Chilam Balam book of Mani is 11-Chen 18-Zac. These are Two Haab days 47 days apart. This is obviously a play on words (written in the 'language of the Zuvuya' which Jenkins calls "a mystical poetry developed by Yucatec Maya Shamans") that brings in the idea of a single date 11-Chuen 18-Zac.
        what the scribe mystically points out is that in any year that begins on (1-Pop) July 26, 18-Zac will fall on Feb. 28, thus serving as the double leap-day. The 47-day interval between 11-Chen and 18-Zac indicates the 47day difference that the traditional count and the reformulated-chilam-balam count will display in the omega year 2012-2013.
        Oh by the way, Arguelles' (PAN) galactic signature, is 11-Chuen, hence the 47-day monkey-business as regards leap year.
        It is notable that nowhere does Arguelles use the word 'mistake' or 'fix' when contemplating the Chilam Balam books, but instead 'discrepancies' and 'adjustment', for indeed the problems that the scholars grapple with (and therefore end up claiming 'mistake') were intentional on the part of the scribes in order to mask their knowledge from the unininitiated... 'let those that have ears to hear...'

        As far as Shearer's calculation, the 117 day difference could be a 'coincidence'... but as anyone living the codes of mayan time knows, there is no such thing as coincidence. Not only was 117 days the interval between Cortez' landing and his confrontation of Moctezuma, it is also one idealized Mercury-synod (1 Mercury synod = 116 days; idealized by Mayan mathematics as 13x9=117)and this period can be utilized, along with Saturn's synod, to arrive at a very accurate leap-year calibration (see Lillemoen and Vaughn). And as mentioned before the 117 difference in calculation has everything to do with the prophecy of 13heavens & 9hells (13x9=117)
        let us keep in mind that a linear mind will not understand the complexities of living prophecy

        i responded to these matters earlier here:

        albeit in a time-crunch frenzy

        i have been too immersed in the garden to spend much time bothering with these matters on the computer, but now that winter's here (in the north) i plan to fully flesh this info out, get it all referenced and coherent in hopes that we may finnally begin to put a rest to all the misunderstanding, and come together as one people, unitied in natural time, ready to bring peace to this grieving earth.

        • TreeFrog, an interesting response. Can you supply a url or place where we can access the Arguelles article you mention - '"Adjusting the Discrepancies within the Cuceb-Chilam Balam Correlation "?

          Could you let us have the page number of the The Book of the Chilam Balam of Tizimin (not Tizim), in which July 16, 1581 is mentioned, please? (& let us know if its the Makemson edition?)

          The date of the solar zenith passage is May 20th, which is not very close to July 26th.

          The "Zuvuya" interpretation of the 11 Chen 18 Zac date is ingenious, but the July 26 to Feb 28 idea would actually only work if the year started on zero Pop, (as July 26 to Feb 28 = 217 days, but 1 Pop to 18 Zac = 216 days), whereas the zero Pop start was not used in the Yucatan - see

          Why has Arguelles propmoted the word "Zuvuya", when it is actually "Zuyua" in the Chilam Balams and all the Mayanist books?

          Your hyperlink to your previous article does not work, could you give us another, please? Thanks.

          I am looking forward to seeing the article when its done.

          • Unsu...

            Re: resources for researching year 2012 theories/data

            Wed, December 14, 2005 - 10:23 AM
            so i have an hour on the computer here at the library...

            i'm working on getting this stuff organized and available but i've got a lot going on. thanks for the positive feedback.

            first, thank you Geoff for the awesome site and database... i love it and i'm glad to have the chance to communicate direct with you

            i think it's important in studying these matters to remain open and not leap to judgement. Arguelles has recieved a lot of undue criticism because people attack before doing their research.

            for example, nowhere in the original dreamspell does it claim to be The mayan calendar. Immediately after the release of the dreamspell Arguelles published a little book (in 1992) called "13 Moons in Motion" which apparently none of the critics bothered to read since (and this was published before Jenkins' first 'Key to the Dreamspell' piece) it explicitly states "Dreamspell years are not the same as Classic Maya reckoning." (pg 49)
            this is not a huge tomb with the info buried. it's a little book easily read in a single sitting.
            yes, in 'the mayan factor' Arguelles does reference a dreamspell date as 'the mayan calendar' but clearly he corrected his own oversite, and as usual was further ahead of his time than most realize.

            and i ramble...

            given a 1-Pop start on July 26, 18-Zac does indeed fall on Feb. 28
            the 26th, 27th, 28th, 29th, 30th, & 31st of July = 6 days
            plus 31 in Aug
            plus 30 in Sept
            plus 31 in Oct
            plus 30 in Nov
            plus 31 in Dec
            plus 31 in Jan
            plus 28 in Feb
            =218 according to my math

            that is 10 uinals plus 18 days
            which is 18 Zac

            you can even use the date calculators on your own site Geoff
            start with July 26 1544 (will come up 1-Pop)
            then check Feb 28 1545 (will come up 18-Zac)

            i don't have the Tizimin with me... just moved way far... but it's on it's way... the source is munro edmonson

            there are 2 solar zenith a year at any lattitude between the tropics. in the central Yucatan one falls on May 20 and the other on July 26

            according to michael finley (the web's most reliable source on such matters)
            "To this day, the Indians call the year Jaab or Haab, and, while heathens, they commenced it on the 16th of July. It is worthy of note that their progenitors . . . sought to make it begin from the precise day on which the sun returns to the zenith of this peninsula on his way to the southern regions . . . " --- Juan Pio Perez, appendix to John L. Stephens, Incidents of Travel in the Yucatan (1843)

            The 365 day haab was not equated to the true solar year until after the conquest, but July 16 (Julian calendar) was almost certainly used to mark the beginning of the solar year before the conquest. Perez believed the date to be in error by two days. The zenith passage date reported by Perez (and in other post-conquest sources) is in fact correct in the central Yucatan, but not farther north, near Merida, where Perez resided. It is likely that the date of zenith passage in the central Yucatan was adopted as a conventional beginning of the solar year throughout the Maya world. Malmströmhas recently argued that beginning of the the solar year was fixed by scribes at Edzna in the central Yucatan during the Classical period.

            Jenkins has much the same to say in 'cosmogenesis 2012' but don't have it with for page reference

            i'm not saying that the dreamspell was actually planned by the chilam balam scribes and that Arguelles found the 'code'... i imagine that both the scribes and Arguelles went where study and intuition took them, and the result is something of great value.

            here is his essay on the correlation (he mentions the date 0-Pop, but the Dreamspell (as well as the Mayapan calendar) actually places the year-bearers on the day 1-Pop, thus keeping the 18-Zac/Feb 28 consistent)
            actually this is just part (tho most) of the essay.... it seems to have dissappeared from the internet... i think i have the whole thing somewhere... this is taken from Hummingbird's post in the 2012tribe 'Ian Lungold vs Jose Arguelles' discussion (discussion topics pg. 21, Feb. 01)

            "Adjusting the Discrepancies within the Cuceb-Chilam Balam Correlation”

            The Cuceb count of the Books of Chilam Balam (Chumayel, Mani, and Codex Perez) all agree on the correlation of the Gregorian Calendar date, July 26, with the sequence of four years coded by Kan (Seed), Muluc (Moon), Ix (Wizard) and Cauac (Storm) = 0 Pop of the Haab. Remember the 20-day sequences of the green ring of the compass are the 20 day-intervals marked by the 18 Vinals of the Haab. However, when projected over time the Chilam Balam tradition shows discrepancies in tone accorded to the four year-bearers. This is because in the later tradition Katuns were sometimes calculated as 24-year cycles. As a result there is a 4 to 12-year-tone difference that results. E.g. 13 Cauac, 1736 (Part 2, Codex Perez) projected 260 years forward should be 13 Cauac 1996, but is instead, in Part 3, Codex Perez ,12 Cauac. The consistency of solar seal, however, is maintained in that Cauac (Storm) always codes years that are multiples of 4: 00, 04, 08, 12, 16, 20, etc.

            ...In the case of the Chilam Balam tonal-year discrepancy, the Dreamspell Overtone Harmonic Adjustment maintains a perfect pulsar order which synchronizes and accommodates the 12-year discrepancy within the system. The Dreamspell overtone harmonic sequence takes for its point of adjusted departure, July 26, 1971. The Dreamspell count at this point begins with the overtone power of 5 (Wizard), establishing a 13-year sequence, which is then infinitely repeatable. It is this adjusted sequence, followed faithfully by the Closer of the Cycle, which provided the thread by which all of the prophetic cycles of Pacal Votan and the demonstrations of the Law of Time were made possible. Without this harmonically adjusted thread, none of the revelations of the Telektonon would ever have occurred!

            ...Remember, that the purpose of this New Dispensation count is to enable a complete demonstration of the Law of Time. Rather than be a means of abolishing or eliminating the Traditional or any other count, the New Dispensation is meant to demonstrate the infinite harmonic capacities of the radial mathematics of fourth-dimensional time to embrace and synchronize all counts and seeming discrepancies."

            Unadjusted Chilam Balam 1971 = 13 Wizard
            Dreamspell Adjustment 1971 = 5 Wizard


            my original response to the 'Investigating' article can be found at on pg 6 of the discussion topics
            (you may be interested to see it 'time-stamped')

            Re: Investigating the Origins of Dreamspell
            in response to: Re: Investigating the Origins of Dreamspell
            greetings planetary kin:

            I have a dilemma. That is I have too much vindicating information for the law of time and not computer time to share.

            let me just say that the full 'Investigating' article, when combined with the article by Jose "Adjusting the discrepancies' and the 7777 book do nothing more than completely redeem the info in the Chilam Balam sources.

            one little example that i have time for:

            in the part of the the investigating article that deals with the mixed dates 18 Zac , 11 Chuen, 11 Chen, and 3 Kan I feel our author spent too much time correlating dates and not enough in simply meditating on the codes. It simply came to me: 11 Chen and 18 Zac occur 47 days apart. 3 Kan and 11 Chuen occur 47 days apart. Therefore in a Lunar Wizard (2 Ix) year 3 Kan will occur on the day 11 Chen and 47 days later 11-Chuen will fall on 18 Zac.

            In the year 2012 the traditional count and dreamspell with have a 47 day difference so that the day 3-Kan traditional will be 11-Chuen (Jose's galactic sig) dreamspell.

            This realization came to me along with many other crystallizations over the last few days, beginning two days ago on 11-Chuen dreamspell, and I post it today 3-Kan traditional.

            This is the proof: Dreamspell opened the law of time within myself to discover the prophetic merit of the Chilam Balam 'errors' and is therefore the code upon which it is predicated.

            Writers who engage in criticism of the Chilam Balam, reformulated and otherwise, forget that they used the 'language of the zuvuya' which was not meant to be logically clear, but intuitively profound. To say there are errors of calculation or calibration between Dreamspell and the Chilam Balam books is to say there are errors of punctuation and grammar in Finnegan's Wake.

            The reason the Dreamspell assigns, for example 5-Muluc to the year -bearer role 1594-95 rather than 1-Muluc is explained in Jose's essay, circa 1997 "Adjusting the Discrepancies within the Cuceb-Chilam Balam Correlation"

            By trying to analyze the correlations without immersing ourselves in the codes of natural time we treat the Chilam Balam texts as though we were conquering europeans rather than as though we were dream-centered time-travelling maya ....

            wish i had the time to say what i really wish to convey... but i guess that all summs up,

            just love and please share with geoff and whoever may be interested



            to finish... the dreamspell is here so that we can include teachings found all over the world and all through history in a single unified practice.
            this is not the function or purpose of the traditional count. the traditional count is for maintaining the spirituality and culture of indigenous meso-americans in it's purest, most direct form.
            to include the i-ching, runes, and radial-plasmas as part of the traditional count would be a misrepresentation... however these things are a part of the PAN count, as are the mayan icons and numbers... it's the demonstration that the whole earth can indeed unify, and will!
            the traditional count is from the past, the PAN count is from the future. there is no confilict!

            oh, and the zuvuya dealie... i've seen zuyua, zuyuya, and zuvuya all from different sources. to me it's how you say tomato... i think zuvuya is fun to say... so's zuyuya come to think...

            • Treefrog: more facinating and convincing responses, but I still say July 26 to Feb 28 = 217 days, but 1 Pop to 18 Zac = 216 days.

              To see what I mean, how many days are there between July 26 and July 27? I say one day. By your math, where you unclude the first AND last day, that means there are 2 days.

            • Here's what I mean in detail:

              Days from 26th July to 28th Feb:

              27th, 28th, 29th, 30th, & 31st of July = 5 days
              plus 31 in Aug
              plus 30 in Sept
              plus 31 in Oct
              plus 30 in Nov
              plus 31 in Dec
              plus 31 in Jan
              plus 28 in Feb
              Total:217 days

              1 Pop to 19 pop = 18 days
              Uo: 20
              Zip: 20
              Zotz: 20
              Tzec: 20
              Xul: 20
              Yaxkin: 20
              Mol: 20
              Chen: 20
              Yax: 20
              Zac: 18
              Total: 216 days

              • Unsu...

                Re: resources for researching year 2012 theories/data

                Mon, December 19, 2005 - 12:00 PM
                i love these paradoxes of the zero

                its the whole conusion over astronomical and historical dating... when its all so fragmented anyway by our linear perspecitve

                it seems the mayan codes have build in them a sort of 'blurring' effect whereby the correlational day-energies can never be fully sifted from those arising before and after

                for example i did run across a source on the dreamspell which has July 26 as 0-Pop, although 0-Pop is the first day of Pop, and 17-Xac would be the 18th of Zac...
                then making 18-Zac correlate to March 1 or Feb 29, being the 19th day of zac.

                but we generally begin counting with one not zero. While you equate July 26th with zero even though it is the first (#1) day of the year, you fall a day (or two because you count to 19 rather than a possible 20) short.
                i suggest again. check the dates on the calculator on your own site for July 26 1544 and Feb 28 1545
                • Okay, I have found the error, and it is mine. This is what I should have said:

                  1 Pop to 19 pop = 18 days
                  Uo: 20
                  Zip: 20
                  Zotz: 20
                  Tzec: 20
                  Xul: 20
                  Yaxkin: 20
                  Mol: 20
                  Chen: 20
                  Yax: 20
                  Zac: 19
                  Total: 217 days

                  Zac should have counted as 19, because I didn't count 0 Zac, therefore, my point is invalidated. Kudos to you, Treefrog. Looks like I may have to update the article!

                  • This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
                    Well good news! I've been collabrating with some of the top scientists in the field of electromagnetics (EM) and some of them are going to provide me with quotes on the latest evidence that sopports the EM to consciousness thoery in respect to 2012. They just need, "A little more time".

                    As soon as I receive the official quotes I will encorporate them into the "Call to worldwide awareness" paper, refine it some more (edit?), and post it for feedback. Is there anyone here, perhaps an english major, that can help us edit the paper? Would really appreciate the support .

    • Re: Daniel,nice one!

      Fri, December 30, 2005 - 8:48 PM
      thank you,your work sounds beautiful ,is psychedlic shamanism based on the writings of A.Hulxey,C.Castanada,A.Vivillio,T.Leary,sacred conscience and the inner journey? At present I am a student of shamanism with the Irish School of Shamanic Teaching's.