Does Anyone believe in this 2012 nonsense?

[Goggs Mackay]

This is going to be a short post.

Does anyone actually believe that 21st Dec 2012 (or thereabouts) is going to be anything other than a normal day?
For the record, I don't think it is supposed to be the end of the world. I don't think it is a change in consciousness.
As Chris has said, calenders don't end, they cycle. That's all that is happening.

I wonder who is gonna crawl out of the woodwork and try and make themselves famous or make themselves some money out of this as we get closer to the date.

Remember that Harold Camping geezer? The one who predicted the Rapture? Well, I think it is gonna go the way of his prediction. A complete non-event.

 

[stonehart]

I go for the "nothing is going to happen on that date"

If the 2012-ers really open their eyes they could see that the world is going through major change now that has nothing to do with a date on a calender and every thing to do with people being fed up to the teeth with corporations, politicians and big money interests.

If anything happens on that date it will be pure random coincidence and nothing more.

 

[Wade]

I've given thought to scenarios such as this that have popped up from time to time. The only reason I'm not completely at ease w/ a non-event likelihood is that there is a certain segment of the population... which was referenced to in another forum I just posted in, i.e. bat shit crazy people...which transcends borders and nationalities and could intentionally or even unintentionally through their actions, create a situation which could snowball and start a chain reaction of increasingly dire events maybe not immediately, but somewhere down the road.

Of course this scenario is typical of what we deal with on a daily basis but all it takes is for one person to plant an idea, a seed if you will, and come up w/ some deadline that has massive awareness and watch it take root.

Or if there is such thing as Gaia, she'll be sure to sniff out any miscreants and put a stop to the whole thing, but then I'd wonder if Gaia dropped the ball on WWI and WWII unless they were meant to happen and if that were the case maybe 12 21 12 shouldn't be taken with a grain of salt. Oh Goggs, why'd you have to go and ruin my sunday?

Full Disclosure, I was at one time (I am now wavering a bit) on mr. mckenna's time wave zero theory. I'm in love with the idea of not the end of the world, but with the end of time (as we know it) not a change of consciousness but a change to our perception and understanding of time. That in some lab(CERN) someone came up with a paradigm changing discovery of einsteins model of time. Though if that did happen, the world at large would probably be kept in the dark for some time.

 

[Goggs Mackay]

ok, so that's 2 votes for sweet F.A

 

[Randall]

This is going to be a short post.

Does anyone actually believe that 21st Dec 2012 (or thereabouts) is going to be anything other than a normal day?
For the record, I don't think it is supposed to be the end of the world. I don't think it is a change in consciousness.
As Chris has said, calenders don't end, they cycle. That's all that is happening.

I wonder who is gonna crawl out of the woodwork and try and make themselves famous or make themselves some money out of this as we get closer to the date.

Remember that Harold Camping geezer? The one who predicted the Rapture? Well, I think it is gonna go the way of his prediction. A complete non-event.

Normal? What's ever "normal" anymore? I remember when it was normal for your girlfriend to sit next to you in the front seat and rest her head on your shoulder while you cruised along a scenic highway enjoying a milkshake and some music together ... now you can't even find a car with a bench seat, and you're both belted in like you're in a freaking rally race while she sits there with her earphones in so she can't hear a word you're saying and is fixated on some stupid electronic device or another. And ohhh no ... no milkshake either man ... now they've upped it yet another notch on the way to becoming a completely dominated global police state... now you can't even taste the drink you just bought at the freakin' drive through ... why? it's called "distracted driving" ... You thought it was just for the idiot driver on the cell phone didn't you? ... but oh no ... now it's for everybody, and you know how I know? I was driving along and suddenly there before me were the words "Hands off the cappuccino!" written in giant letters on a huge freaking billboard by the side of the road. I can just imagine some other less capable driver ( because of course this would never be me ) driving along and reading this thing and thinking "what the hell ... what's that all about" while they ram straight into the car in front of them. How ironic would that be? But seriously folks, I'll tell you what distracted driving is ... it's when the 85 year old driving the car ahead of you encounters a traffic circle for the first time. It's like they've entered another dimension and everything just slows to a halt until they're just sitting there frozen all couched forward in their seat gripping the wheel and looking up at the sky as if praying for a sign from God ... please God ... show me that way! Speaking of getting old. I'm glad I'm too old to start dating all over again. I wouldn't have the first clue on what to do. and I pity the kids these days that can't appreciate what I'm saying ... Why? Because to them this is all bloody "normal" ... and they probably think I'm just some old dude ranting about how much better it was back in the good ole days. Sigh ... ( end of rant ... more rants by request only )

 

[Flatwoods]

I've been wondering if maybe there's a deep-rooted need in the human psyche to believe in end-time prophesy. From biblical times to today, there seems a need to acknowledge some sort of impending doom from time to time. In my own lifetime, I've seen numerous interpretations (mostly in the media) of Nostrodamus prophecies indicating the world would end in 1988 or 1994. When that didn't happen, we all got worried over Y2K - again, the same old paranoia.

Now it's the Mayan calendar and December 21st, 2012 - a date on which I'm quite sure NOTHING WILL HAPPEN, and after that I'm sure we'll get another apocalyptic deadline. As I've often told family and friends... "the end of the world is never more that fifteen years away".

 

[Goggs Mackay]

@UFOLOGY -now I love a tangent-come-rant-forum-post as much as the next man but I take my hat off to you for seamlessly going from 'normal' to drive-thrus, girlfriends being restricted from leaning over in the front of a car (oooh-er missus, more milkshake?) and octogenarian drivers!
Absolutely vintage tangent-rant. First class! No, really, am not taking the piss, it was vintage!!

I sympathise more than you know. Let me explain: The law here in Scotland allows driving while 'hands free' on a mobile but you cannot be holding it next to your ear. Nuh-uh!

Now, in the last few years, research into driving distractions has revealed that it is not the act of holding a phone to your ear that distracts a driver. It is the two-way conversation that does it.
Of course, the law is always behind such research and often it takes a long time for public opinion to throw enough weight at the argument for anything to change.
I may add also that in this country, there is a driving offence 'driving without due care' which basically covers anything that could cause a driver not to be paying attention. In my opinion it is a very good law, in that it requires some type of incident to cause a report to be made. People do not get harassed by this law unnecessarily.

A few months months ago, I was in a single line of traffic, going no more than 10mph. I answered my work mobile phone. Couple of minutes later, one of our large traffic police cars came behind me, sirens and blue lights and all! (Absolute overkill, I was not running, nor did I have anywhere to run to!)

The pig, sorry 'orificer', asked me if I knew why I'd been pulled over. I answered 'Because you can't tell the difference between a time a law should be used and a time where discretion and a quiet word would have done'.
Needless to say, he did not like my answer. It made no difference anyway because I knew I was going to be charged for using a mobile phone while driving.
To the letter of the law, yes I was. But seriously, I was not racing about doing 70mph. I was crawling along in a line of traffic hardly moving. Not a recipe for some pile-up on the road.

I was really angry with this jumped-up police officer. I asked him what special training he had received as a police officer that allows him to drive at high speed whilst talking into his chest-mounted radio? That shut him up. I further enquired of him if he knew that all the research pointed to a conversation being the cause of accidents, not the holding of the phone. Meaning that even if one goes hands-free, you are just as likely to have an accident as someone holding the cellphone to their ear.

I know that when I answered that phone at around 8mph, there was no chance I was going to cause an accident. I pointed out that I could have had a wife in the back of the car with whom I could have been arguing, whilst holding a banana to my left ear. That would be far more likely to cause an accident but it would not get my stopped by the police.

The officer then advised me to get a hands-free kit. I had to laugh, then I said, 'you did not listen to a word I've just said - it's like you are an automaton!'
He was basically saying, 'go have your conversations whilst driving and do it with a hands-free kit and you will have no police problems'.
I saw no point in trying to persuade him that that would be as likely to cause a lack of concentration and therefor an accident. There is no changing a policeman's mind once he decides to charge you. Probably making up the arrest numbers for the month. Everyone knows that goes on.

So to the letter of the law, of course the officer was correct. But he was not interested in the spirit of the law , i.e to prevent accidents. I think often the spirit of a law is most important.

I am not really angry with the police, they are just at the coalface and get everyone's anger. I am angry with the vote-sucking politicians who's knee-jerk reactionary laws have caused this whole thing. I consider myself a good driver. Never had an accident. I give way and allow people to cross the road. I don't drive at reckless speeds etc. And I would not answer any phone when I knew I needed all my concentration to drive safely. Oh, and I have unashemedly reported a drunk driver (was zig-zagging everywhere and a real menace). I have called the police when a cow has escaped a field, wandering the road where it could get hit.
So I am sore that a driver like me who has the common sense to only use a phone at low speed and risk is demonised instead of someone hands-free legally driving at 70mph and talking with the wife. It aint right!

Go tangent, go tangent!

 

[Goggs Mackay]

And. It was indeed better in the old days. There is no doubt about it.

 

[mike]

I will make a prediction about 21st dec 2012

That soon after someone will say they had the date wrong, and its now 2014/16/18 etc etc

 

[stonehart]

I will make a prediction about 21st dec 2012

That soon after someone will say they had the date wrong, and its now 2014/16/18 etc etc

That is a prediction I could agree with and can see happening.

 

[Randall]

And. It was indeed better in the old days. There is no doubt about it.

Hey thanks goggy ... and I like the way you stood up for yourself to the officer. Good Show! Here in Alberta when they were bringing the distracted driving law in, they had some public forums and I called in to one that was on the radio and suggested that they should simply add it as a driver's license add-on provided you could pass a driving test while using your phone. I even pointed out the benefit to the registries and government from collecting the fees. After all I really don't have a problem with drivers who can do it and some of us can walk and chew bubble gum at the same time. Well OMG you should have heard all the stupid ridiculous excuses coming out of the Provincial representative. It was obvious they were simply going to ram the law through and yet again make everyone pay for the mistakes of an incompetent few.

 

[stonehart]

on the subject of rants and distracted driving laws. Not long after we had that law thrust upon us here I saw a cop talking on his cell phone in the lane next to me while driving.. ahh the irony

 

[mike]

We have the same law here, and grab the pitchforks i agree with it, imo both hands should be on the wheel.

"We found that people are as impaired when they drive and talk on a cell phone as they are when they drive intoxicated at the legal blood-alcohol limit” of 0.08 percent

Drivers on Cell Phones Are as Bad as Drunks - University of Utah News Release: June 29th, 2006

Study after study has given similar results

Seriously if these studies are correct, and i think they are,we should be just as concerned with this issue as we are with drunk drivers, no one wants to share the roads with that sort of unnecessary risk

The problem with this

provided you could pass a driving test while using your phone.

Is how does a cop know , just looking at you that youve passed the test ?.

Cops are still going to have to pull you over if they see you using a phone, the safest thing to do is to ban em while driving.
Personally i cant see what can be so important about any phone call, its worth risking your and other road users safety over.





And yeah ive seen the local cops doing it too

 

[stonehart]

We have the same law here, and grab the pitchforks i agree with it, imo both hands should be on the wheel.


Drivers on Cell Phones Are as Bad as Drunks - University of Utah News Release: June 29th, 2006

Study after study has given similar results

Seriously if these studies are correct, and i think they are,we should be just as concerned with this issue as we are with drunk drivers, no one wants to share the roads with that sort of unnecessary risk

The problem with this


Is how does a cop know , just looking at you that youve passed the test ?.

Cops are still going to have to pull you over if they see you using a phone, the safest thing to do is to ban em while driving.
Personally i cant see what can be so important about any phone call, its worth risking your and other road users safety over.





And yeah ive seen the local cops doing it too

I am going to stand with you on this.

I had a guy a few years back run right into the rear end of my car while I was waiting at the lights... you guessed it he was texting on his cell phone at the time and speeding.
Wreaked my car and gave me very bad whiplash as well as a fractured wrist among other things.

To be honest unless the phone call is hands free its not safe so please just pull over and stop driving if that call is really that important.

 

[mike]

In a parallel example i cant listen to the paracast and play computer chess at the same time, i just cant do both, If i focus on the podcast, i crash and burn in chess, and if i focus on chess i dont hear the podcast.
Oddly enough i can play mahjong and listen ok, perhaps because mahjong is simple pattern recognition, and not strategy.

 

[stonehart]

When I listen to the paracast I am almost always in my workshop working on one of my model ships and I can do that at the same time but for some reason I can not do music practice or write out scores (well type out scores) and listen as what happens is either I mess up the score or I end up missing most of the discussion... in fact it tends to be a combination of both. I never do tech trouble shooting and listen to a pod cast at the same time I always mess the job up

 

[Randall]

How does a cop know , just looking at you that youve passed the test ?.

Simple: If a cop sees you talking on your cell phone he/she simply pulls you over and checks your license . If you are "cell phone rated" then you're OK, otherwise you get a ticket. If you were driving like an idiot they can still give you a ticket for wreckless driving. Right now there are all kinds of driver's ratings and many big rig drivers ( particularly loggers ) have to use two way radios. A cell phone is a simple affair by comparison. Police use both radios and cell phones. They have to pass a competency test to operate their vehicles and can use them in their vehicles ... why can't we have the same rights?

 

[Randall]

When I listen to the paracast I am almost always in my workshop working on one of my model ships and I can do that at the same time but for some reason I can not do music practice or write out scores (well type out scores) and listen as what happens is either I mess up the score or I end up missing most of the discussion... in fact it tends to be a combination of both. I never do tech trouble shooting and listen to a pod cast at the same time I always mess the job up

I'm working on a book and I have trouble focusing If I'm listening to talk radio. But I also have talk radio on in my car and I can't tell you how many times that has saved me from getting caught in some traffic jam or another. Hey can you post us picture of one of your boats? Maybe a link to some of your music?

 

[Goggs Mackay]

We have the same law here, and grab the pitchforks i agree with it, imo both hands should be on the wheel.


Drivers on Cell Phones Are as Bad as Drunks - University of Utah News Release: June 29th, 2006

Study after study has given similar results

Seriously if these studies are correct, and i think they are,we should be just as concerned with this issue as we are with drunk drivers, no one wants to share the roads with that sort of unnecessary risk

The problem with this


Is how does a cop know , just looking at you that youve passed the test ?.

Cops are still going to have to pull you over if they see you using a phone, the safest thing to do is to ban em while driving.
Personally i cant see what can be so important about any phone call, its worth risking your and other road users safety over.





And yeah ive seen the local cops doing it too

I agree Mike. I am just so annoyed with the cops doing exactly what they tell me not to, like they have superhuman powers. And I think screaming kids or arguing couples pose more danger than drivers on phones. I think the cops should only stop someone, whose actions have shown them to be not taking due care. Myself cruising at 8mph in a traffic jam I contend is not going to do much damage. I would not answer a phone while I knew I needed my concentration. I am irked that the law does not reflect that. A knee-jerk reaction has now made it ok to talk while driving as long as it's hands free - as if that makes a bit of difference!

No-one can argue however with your statement that no call is worth an accident. Absolutely.
I take it people are the same where you guys are? People texting every chance they get while driving. What is so important while you are at traffic lights that you need to text?
And I am going out on a limb here - I see far more women texting while driving. Far more!

 

[pixelsmith]

last week i saw a cop with a cell phone up to left ear and his right hand on his computer that is mounted in the front center of his car... WHILE HE WAS DRIVING. this is probably why we just this past weekend we had a cop go up over a curb and hit a tree on the boulevard. he hit the building side of the tree not the street side...