Old Project Avalon Forum (ARCHIVE) - View Single Post

truthseeker · 09-12-2008, 07:54 PM

Hi Guys,

I would first like to thank Kerry and Bill making this forum possible. So far it is has been a resounding success. I suspect that it has surpassed even their expectations.

This is my first post on this forum. I have decided to post it on both the Michael St. Clair and David Wilcock threads because the first part at least concerns both of these extremely intuitive and spiritual men. Be warned it is going to be a rather long, but important, comment. It may also provoke some conflict and discussion, though really it is only bringing to the fore the differences between the St. Clair and Wilcock frameworks. I have also written my own take on the Mayan Long Count Calendar end date and galactic alignment in this post. I hope it will help to dispel some of the frequently repeated errors made by many researchers writing on this subject.

I have listened to all of Michael and David’s interviews on Project Camelot and have been impressed by both of them. I am a regular visitor to David’s website and am probably a little more familiar with his work than with Michael’s. However, I have also been to Michael’s site and read two of his books (‘Zen of the Stars’ and ‘Foreseen’). I also have another commonality with Michael, as I have been a keen student of astrology for the past 20 years or so. I have found his astrological forecasts very inspiring and can see that he is clearly a master of this fascinating symbolic system. Michael’s threads on this new forum have been amongst my favourites, particularly those on astrology and the Wingmakers.

However, I am slightly troubled by what I am beginning to see as a polarisation between the views of David and Michael. I sense that quite a lot of folk here are either becoming ‘Wilcockian’ or ‘St. Clairian’ in their spiritual and philosophical perspectives of past, present and future. Maybe this, to some degree reflects, the up and coming opposition between Uranus and Saturn that Michael has been expounding upon. I would love to hear both Michael and David in dialogue with each other, as their views seem pretty irreconcilable in at least two areas. Firstly, in terms of their favoured political candidates in the up and coming US elections, and secondly, but more significantly, in terms of the imminence of humanity’s ascension into a higher density of being. I do not doubt the integrity of either of these men. Both believe that their intuitive and spiritual sources can be relied upon. However, these separate sources appear to be totally at odds with each other. Despite their commitment to certain sources, frameworks and philosophy’s, I have some significant doubts and questions on both counts.

Let us deal first with the lesser problem of their polar opposite political forecasts on the up and coming US elections. Like so many others here I personally I have severe doubts about both presidential candidates, together with their running mates and backers. It seems to me, that like virtually every other world leader in recent history, they completely buy into the system that appears to be destroying both us and our planet. Having said that, if by some miracle any one of the candidates or their running mates can truly transcend and transform the current system, then bring them on! For Michael, McCain and Palin are favoured, particularly the latter. Michael’s arguments for Palin seem to be rooted in his understanding of her birth chart with a strong Aquarian stellium of planets. He feels she is a free spirit with a mind of her own. He believes that Obama is completely bought by the PTB and that this is reinforced by his running mate, Biden, and his chief backer, Brzezinski, both of whom are well and truly part of the corporate elite. I have not studied any of these political figures well enough to really know the truth about them. However, I find his confidence in the Fundamentalist Christian, Palin, who probably awaits an imminent rapture and judgement day, somewhat surprising. Unless, she undergoes a major transformation in her thinking, then I severely doubt she is going to be good for either America or the world. David, on the other hand is really pushing for Obama. His dreams seem to have given him a clear message that despite appearances, Obama as president will be good news for the USA and the world. I find this almost as hard to believe as Michael’s faith in Palin. David suggests that Obama is keeping his enemies (i.e. the likes of Biden and Brzezinski) close to him so that he can turn the tables on mainstream politics when the time is right. I am a fraid I need a lot of convincing on that one. I suppose he too could undergo a major transformation, but from where I am standing (which is admitedly on the otherside of the Atlantic, in the UK), this does not seem very likely. So I am not holding my breath for either Palin or Obama, though I would love to be wrong about either one or both of them.

I would be less bothered by all this were Michael and David not so convinced about what they were saying. But they both seem so sure of themselves. They can’t both be right can they? Maybe they can? Maybe we will end up with a US leadership with them working together to transform the world? Not very likely me thinks!

Anyway, that’s the more minor polarity of thinking between these two incredibly intuitive men. Now onto the bigger and more important stuff regarding our spiritual destiny as both a species and a planetary civilization. The bigger issue for me is really their very different visions on the future for humanity and planet Earth.

David seems convinced, mainly from his ‘Law of One’ source (The ‘Ra’ material) that humanity is facing ascencion on or around the end of the Mayan Long Count calendar on 21st December 2012. Apparently, those of us that are 51% or more in ‘service to others’, as opposed to ‘service to self’ will ascend from a 3rd to 4th Density of being during that short time window. This is because the entire planet, according to David, will be ascending into 4th Density at that time. The rest of humanity, it seems, will either reincarnate on another 3rd Density planet elsewhere in the galaxy, or a relatively small number (mainly those within the current elite groups) will survive in undergound bases as 3rd Density beings. The latter will eventually evolve into the J-Rods (i.e. the Grey’s) who will one day come back to visit us from the distant future (see also the Dan Burish material). Generally, though it appears that it will be difficult, if not impossible for 3rd Density human beings to survive on the surface of the Earth. So, that is roughly David’s very soon to occur ascension scenario.
Just a side note here. Following David’s scenario, I have often wondered what will happen to all the plants and animals on Earth when it moves from 3rd to 4th Density? Will they ascend from 2nd (rocks and minerals are 1st Density and Plants and animals are 2nd Density in David’s system, as far as I understand) to 4th Density? Or will they join the 3rd Density humans and be reincarnated on another planet? Alternatively, in what way will plants and animals on a 4th Density Earth differ from there 3rd Density counterparts. I have not found any clear explanation of what will happen to the Earth’s wildlife in David’s writings. Maybe I am just missing something her?

Anyway, back to the difference between David and Michael’s spiritual framework. Michael takes a much slower and longer-term look at the future of humanity. He sees an ascension process that is gradual over the next couple of hundred years. For me, on a gut level, this seems the more realistic scenario. Of course I may well be wrong. Like anyone else I am biased to things continuing to some degree as they are, which at the moment is a slow, but speeding up, spiral downward. Out of the ashes of the current madness, I incline to the idea of us rising, like the Phoenix, into a new age for man, the planet and our relationship with higher beings. I guess I find it hard to see things changing as radically and quickly as David and the ‘Law of One’ material suggest. However, I do try to keep an open mind! I also like Michael’s use of astrology and the various planetary cycles to make sense of these changes. This, I believe, he combines with the information he regularly receives from his Nordic Being sources.

So which scenario is the correct one? Both can not be true, surely? That is unless we are looking at two different timelines?

I do not have the confidence that David has in the ‘Law of One’ material. I am suspicious of the motives and agenda of both channelled and contact entities at the best of times. David himself questions other channelled sources, but states that he has found the ‘Law of One’ material to be much more consistent with his own extensive research than any other. I have no doubt that he believes that to be true. I am equally suspicious of Michael’s Nordic Being sources. I am also equally sure that he believes what they tell him to be true. In both cases, how do we know these beings are telling us the truth? Intuition? Gut feeling? Some kind of higher rational knowing?

This brings me onto yet another source of greater knowledge, that Michael refers to frequently. In fact he has a whole thread on this forum relating to that material. I am of course refering to the Wingmakers material. I first heard of this from Michael when it was mentioned in his last interview with Bill and Kerry. I immediately sought out the site, read much of the material there and even bought the CD. I was initially very impressed. I loved the Ancient Arrow Project story and the related interviews between Dr. Neruda and Sarah. Also the music and art is pretty incredible. However, I did later become a little concerned about the way the story and interviews changed over time, as several people on the Wingmakers thread on this forum have already noted. The apparent endorsement of a New World Order and Globalization slightly bothered me. However, I can see a difference between the ‘New World Order’ type of globalization that conspiracy theorists are so rightly concerned about, with its poulation reduction and rule by force and control, as opposed to the one world or one universe concept where we are all connected in a peaceful and co-operative way. I was also a little disapointed at Michael’s response to the website (http://www.wanttoknow.info/wingmaker...gmakerschanges) suggested by Lightbeing. I am guessing Michael was tired and probably more than a little overwhelmed by the quantity of response there has been to his ideas on this forum. He is only human, like the rest of us, after all. However, I think refering to the author as both ‘mentally ill’ and ‘anal’ was rather unfair and unreasonable. I read the same comments and letters at that website and felt that most of the authors questions to Mark Hempel and ‘James’ were reasonable. I do accept that he may have gone a little far in is his implied accusation that ‘James’ (the author of the Wingmaker material) is a liar. However, I thought his questions and doubt were perfectly reasonable. If I never questioned or doubted, I would not be on this forum today. I would still be stuck in the old school Methodist Christian mind set in which I was brought up. It is my questioning of, and doubt about particular belief systems, ideologies and philosophies that has allowed me to be where I am today. I was not entirely convinced by ‘James’ response either. However, that will not stop me exploring the Wingmaker material further.

Heh, perhaps I am ‘mentally ill’ as well! I am a mental health nurse after all! Seriously though Michael, we do need to be careful of the labels we lay on others. Within mainsrtream Psychiatry, virtually everyone one on this forum would be labelled ‘mentally ill’ and suffering from a whole variety of delusions and auditory and visual hallucinations. Of course, I do not buy into mainstream Psychiatry, but we must be careful that we do not stigmatize others in the same way that our mainstream society does.

Hope you don’t mind me picking you up on that one Michael?

Another thing I noticed on the Wingmaker site was embedded in James’ Q & A Session 3. It is of rather minor concern in the greater picture of things I guess, but relevant to both Michael and myself, because it concerns astrology. Here is the quote: -

Question 58 – Will the next material give reference to the "Harmonic Concordance" that is being talked about now? This relates to a special astrological geometric pattern, which will be formed on November 8, 2003, at 8:12 AM EST. The primary feature is a Grand Sextile and at the time of total lunar eclipse. Does astrology play any part in the WingMakers philosophy or cosmology?

Answer 58 – The teachings of Lyricus do not involve astrology. The reason is simple: astrology is subjective to time and place, and because of this subjectivity it is impossible to embed fundamental truth that is sustainable and relevant across multiple places and times. This does not suggest that heavenly bodies do not impact on humans. They most certainly do, in more ways than astrology recognizes. The Harmonic Concordance – like all astronomical events that seem orderly (non-random) – is indicative of how the grander scale of the universe can imprint on the consciousness of a species and an individual. The universe is a powerful catalyst of the inborn instinct to ascend in consciousness, but our species has fallen to the gaze of a ten-foot experience called television, and seldom, if ever, searches the night sky.

On re-reading this now, I must admit, it makes more sense to me and does not devalue astrology as a local phenomenon, as I initially seem to remember thinking. In fact James quite rightly implies that the local positions of the Sun, Moon and planets in our solar system are going to be of little relevance in the bigger space-time universe from which the Lyricus teachings are derived. However, Michael, I would be interested to hear your view on this. I am less concerned about the specific question on Harmonic Concordance (a dubious concept relating to the 1987 Harmonic Convergence created by Jose’ Arguelles and his Dreamspell version of the Mayan Calendar), and more interested in James’ reply about astrology in general.

Also there are quite a lot of other questions and answers in this 3rd Q & A Session with James that might well lead quite a few who visit here to question the agenda of James and the Wingmaker material. I would reccomend that everybody reads this entire web page (http://www.wingmakers.com/answersfromjames.html) before completely accepting everything James tells us. I too need to read it again, as it is now sometime since I read this material. I do remember it left me feeling unsure about the goals and direction of the Wingmaker material.

Michael, sorry to question something you regard as so very important, beautiful, true and inspiring. However, that is what we are here for, I believe; to find some answers about what is really going on and who we can really trust? Nothing is too good or inspired to be questioned and debated, from my point of view. Lets not have any ‘Sacred Cows’ here. My own doubts about the material, and those of others, may well be unfounded. I keep an open mind until something confirms things definitely one way or the other for me. I have similar reservations about some other alleged contact material that has been explored on this forum. This includes the Andromeda contacts experienced by Alex Collier and the Pleiadian/Plejaryian contacts of Billy Meier. Some of the material presented by both these contactees seems to me to be fairly dubious. Certainly none of Collier’s Andromeda predictions mentioned in his 1996/7 video appear to have manifested. As for Meier, he seems to believe that all other ET contactees are either liars or mentally ill. I do not doubt for a minute that both Collier and Meier really have experienced a significant contact with something or someone and that they believe what they have been told is the truth. I feel similarily about Michael’s Nordic contacts and David’s channellings. However, can any of these sources be truly trusted?

Now I want to make a rather extended comment about the the Mayan Long Count Calendar and the apparently related galactic allignment, that many have mentioned on this forum. I would also apreciate Michael’s comments (and David’s, if he is around) on my own suggestions and studies here. I am in the process of writing an increasingly long article (I started my explorations in 2000/2001 – at this rate it will be a book by the time I have finished) on the precessional cycle and the so-called astrological ages.

I have recently been reading loads of stuff, on and off the Internet, regarding this now increasingly discussed calendar date. There is so much out there now, that it is really hard to discern the ‘forest for the trees’ or the ‘wheat from the chaff’, and boy, there is a hell of a lot of ‘chaff’ circulating on the ether. It is enough to confuse anybody who has been exploring this subject material for some years, let alone those looking at it all for the first time. There are multiple errors that are repeated over and over by so-called researchers that have not checked their data and sources thoroughly, or in many cases at all. Even some of the best researchers seem to make some basic mistakes. So lets try and sort out fact from fiction and fantasy.

I shall refer to various web pages here rather than attempt to define and explain this complex subject matter in too much detail, which would take a book or two! John Major Jenkins website (http://alignment2012.com/) is my primary source for this. His website and books (‘Maya Cosmogenesis 2012’ and ‘Galactic Alignment’) are the best referenced and most accurate sources that I am aware of. I strongly recommend a close study of Jenkins website as a definitive introduction to all the Maya Calendars (yes there are more than one). I also recommend Geoff Stray’s website (http://www.diagnosis2012.co.uk/) and book (‘Beyond 2012’) for perusal. He covers anything and everything (the Maya and beyond) relating to 2012, from the sublime to the ridiculous.

Firstly, it is important to remember that the current ‘Age’ is either the 4th or 5th in a series, depending upon which Mesoamerican tradition (e.g. differing Mayan and Aztec groups) is being followed. Thus, the implication here is that the current Mayan Long Count Calendar is the 4th or 5th in a succession of Long Count Calendars that are each of the same length in years and days (i.e. 5125 years, 133 days). So the end of the current Long Count Calendar does not necessarily mean the end of the world, as some would have us believe. The end date thus represents the end of an old ‘Age’ (the current one) and the beginning of a ‘New’ age (the next one).

When translated into our own Calendar (the ‘New Style Gregorian’ as opposed to ‘Old Style Julian’), the current Mayan Long Count Calendar commenced on 11th August 3114 BCE and is due to end on the 21st December 2012 CE (see http://alignment2012.com/fap3.html for a discussion on the history of the correlation issue). In fact, it appears that this calendar was created by a Pre-classic Mayan civilization from Izapa in south-west Mexico, probably somewhere around 100 BCE (for details about the monuments in Izapa that support this see http://www.alignment2012.com/Izapa.html).

Various erroneous beginning and end dates have been given by various authors and writers over the years. For example, sometimes you may see a beginning date for August 3113 rather than 3114 BCE. This error appears to be rooted in writers not realizing that there was never a year zero between BCE and CE (AD) dates. Basically, the year 1 BCE was followed by the year 1 CE. By adding a year zero date you get the erroneous 3113 BCE date. Other writers have got this wrong in the other direction, coming up with a 2011 end date instead of 2012. However, I do not believe this is the explanation for Carl Calleman’s 2011 end date, which I will explore in a minute.

Other smaller errors in terms of the actual beginning and end date (e.g. whether the end date is the 21st or 23rd December) can at least in part be explained by the two most dominant correlation theories (see again http://alignment2012.com/fap3.html). The now most commonly accepted beginning and end dates are 11th August 3114 BCE and 21st December 2012 CE respectively. The latter is the winter solstice date of that year in the northern hemisphere. The other correlation hypothesis suggests beginning and end dates of 13th August 3114 BCE and 23rd December 2012 CE (2 days after the solstice) respectively. The latter hypothesis is, of course, two days removed from the former. This may explain some of the differing dates quoted for the Mayan Calendar. However, again, it does not explain Carl Johan Calleman’s date of 28th October 2011 CE.

As far as I can understand, Calleman’s end date has no basis within Mayan Calendrics. It appears to be a creation of Calleman himself, which others such as Ian Lungold and Barbara Hand Clow (a well known astrologer and proponent of the New Age) have taken to heart. I believe it is based on Calleman’s own explorations of the past to seek out key historical events that he can equate with his own version of the calendar. This erroneous end date is the primary reason why I find Calleman’s version of the calendar highly dubious. For reference and dialogue between Calleman and Major Jenkins, view the following web pages at Jenkins’ website: -

http://alignment2012.com/Calleman-debate.html,
http://alignment2012.com/Exchange-in-2000.html
http://alignment2012.com/MayanCalendarBasics.htm
http://alignment2012.com/eldersand2012-exchange.html,
http://alignment2012.com/debate2001.html

Jenkins states that “the idea of conceiving the 13 baktuns of the Long count Great Cycle in terms of seven days and six nights is Calleman’s own, and it serves Calleman as a template for modeling history. It is these same ‘seven days and six nights’ applied to his ‘Nine Underworlds of Creation’ that Calleman uses to correlate his calendar end date. According to Calleman we are currently in the 8th of these 9 underworlds, the ‘Galactic Underworld’, which is 12.8 years long. Each underworld is 20 times shorter in historical time than its predecessor, beginning with the ‘Cellular Underworld’ of 16.4 billion years and ending with the ‘Universal Underworld’ of 260 days (11th February – 28th October 2011, according to Calleman). All end on his proposed end date of 28th October 2011.

Calleman is also very dismissive of astronomical and astrological correlations with the Long Count Calendar and does not buy into Jenkins’ idea that the 2012 end date corresponds roughly with the current galactic alignment between the December Solstice Point and Galactic Equator. Calleman argues that the Long Count Calendar is purely prophetic and has no astronomical or astrological relevance at all. He makes this very clear in his written debate with Jenkins (see above web page references). Calleman dismisses astrology as an entirely materialistic subject and seems to fail to grasp the spiritual symbolism that astrology can often reflect. In the debates he never seems to answer Jenkins questions and queries, but keeps coming back to a very fixed and negative response to Jenkins astronomical/astrological perspective, which is also very spiritual. It really is worth a read to get a sense of how frustrating this so called debate was for Jenkins. I am very surprised to see Calleman’s version of the Long Count calendar endorsed by renowned astrologer, Barbara Hand Clow. I truly wonder if she has ever read the above debate between Jenkins and Calleman. Michael, I was also surprised to see your own endorsement of Calleman’s work in this forum. I strongly suggest you read the debate material just mentioned. Calleman may well speak with much spiritual truth. However, I strongly feel is version of the Mayan calendar is in error.

Though I find Calleman’s version of the long count calendar rather dubious, I do find the general concept of accelerating time toward a singularity or novelty point in the era around 2012 quite an interesting and attractive one. It certainly reflects my own subjective feeling of time speeding up as we approach that time. I am sure his system could actually be applied to the more commonly accepted 2012 end date. Maybe someone should give it a try as I am sure there is much within Calleman’s model which does have great value? Maybe it would work better if applied to the correct end date?

This concept of accelerating time is not a new idea unique to Calleman, though his chosen end point and the speed and momentum of the acceleration do seem to be his own creation. Terrence and Dennis McKenna suggested something similar back in the 1970’s in their book “The Invisible Landscape: Mind, Hallucinations and the I Ching”. This was based upon the McKenna brothers shared hallucinogenic experience in the Amazon jungle in 1971. Their hypothesis is known as ‘Timewave Zero’ or ‘Novelty Theory’, which they base on the 64 Hexagrams of the King Wen version of the I Ching. I can not pretend that I understand the math behind this theory, as mathematics has never been an easy subject for me (however, see http://www.hermetic.ch/frt/math_twz.htm if you are really interested), as lots of graphs, statistics and numbers tend to befuddle my mind. The theory allegedly synchronizes the 64 Hexagram I Ching with the 384 day and 13 month lunar year (i.e. thirteen 29.53 solilunar cycles, as measured from one new moon to the next), the precessional cycle and 11.1 years, which is the average length of each sun spot cycle.

However, the most important fact relating to the Mckenna brothers theory, to my mind, is that they independently came up with a 2012 end date to the timewave. This was well over a decade before the Mayan End Date became widely known, largely through the publication of “The Mayan Factor” by Jose Arguelles’ in 1987 (famous for his idea of ‘Harmonic Convergence’ in 1987). The McKenna brothers initially came up with a zero point of 17th November 2012. However, in a later edition of their book in the 1990’s, when they had discovered the Mayan End Date, they adjusted this to 21st December 2012 (actually 22nd December first and later still the 21st December, when it was clarified that that was the Mayan End Date). This adjustment might perhaps raise some suspicions about the McKenna model, though, as far as I know, they were open and up front about this change.

The earlier zero date of 17th November 2012 was the end result of the fine tuning of the timewave to a chosen historical event that the McKenna brothers chose as of the greatest novelty within the 20th Century. They chose 6th August 1945, when the first atomic bomb was released upon a human population, in Hiroshima, Japan. This was certainly an exceptional, not to mention both tragic and murderous, event. Indeed, perhaps it was the most significant event in the 20th Century. However, it all feels far too subjective to me to base a theory on this singular, though important, historical date. If you are interested see http://www.hermetic.ch/frt/zerodate.html for a well grounded and sober critique of the McKenna ‘Novelty Theory’ by Peter Meyer.

Whether this model of accelerating time is any more valid than Calleman’s or not, I really can not say. However, the use of hallucinogens by the McKenna brothers to receive their proposed pattern of accelerating time theory, is clearly Shamanic in orientation and may well reflect a similar process utilized by Shamans over 2000 years ago, when the Long Count Calendar is believed to have been first conceived by the pre-Classic Mayan people of Izapa, in current day Mexico, very close to the Guatemalan border.

There are still other accelerating time models that seem to focus, very broadly, upon the era of around 2012. I will not go into depth about these now, but they include the ‘Auric Time Scale’, written up in a paper authored by Sergey Smelyakov and Yuri Karpenko. The former is a Ukrainian Professor of mathematics with an interest in astrology. Geoff Stray critique’s this model in his book, “Beyond 2012” and also at his website (http://www.diagnosis2012.co.uk/). However, if closely examined the end point of that model should in fact terminate around 2037, rather than 2012.

A fourth expression of accelerating time is the ‘Logarithmic Time Scale’ proposed by astrologer A. T. Mann in the 1970’s and 1980’s. His ideas were rooted in the theories of Rodney Collin, who was a student of George Gurdjieff and P.D. Ouspensky. Initially Mann applied this idea to the individual life cycle (in his books “The Round Art” and “Life Time Astrology”), in relation to our subjective experience of life going faster and faster as we get older. He later adapted this to history (in his book “The Divine Plot”), his focal end point being the year 2000, as it was for so many before that year passed without any epochal life-transforming event. Maybe there is a lesson there for all of us, as we approach 2012? I have attempted, in the past, to apply this same model of logarithmic time to the 2012 end date. I have never completed those explorations, but did seem to get some interesting correlations.

However, to my mind, the truth is that which ever model and/or speed of time acceleration one chooses, whether Calleman’s, McKenna’s, Smelyakov’s, Mann’s or any other, one will inevitably discover significant historical events and prehistoric epochs that will support a given model. However, there will also be other significant events and epochs that will not. Does this invalidate all or any of those models? I know not. Maybe by creating and applying our consciousness to such models we make them real and manifest, especially if a critical mass of people apply themselves to such a model. Maybe this explains why prediction and prophecy within and outside mainstream religion can often seem to work?

So if enough of us believe something positive or negative will occur in 2012, then maybe such will happen? If so, it might be a good idea for us to focus on positive, rather than the negative, manifestations of our near future. There is, in fact, growing scientific support for the idea that mass positive or negative attention can effect the physical and manifest world in which we live, both on a personal and a collective level.

So, now we have looked at the Mayan Long Count calendar and the 2012 end date, to complete this rather extensive post, I want to look at the related phenomenon of galactic alignment. Among much else, John Major Jenkins suggests that the 1998 galactic equator-solstice alignment is the same phenomenon to that which the civilizations of Mesoamerica alluded to when they calculated the end of the current age to occur in 2012. Jenkins explores much within Mesoamerican mythology, astronomy and calendrics to support his thesis. The 14-year difference between 1998 and 2012 is considered negligible within the greater expanses of time covered by these ages and alignments.

So, is this a reasonable suggestion?

The current alignment of the December Solstice Point and the Galactic Equator is an unquestionable fact. The bigger question for each of us, is whether or not such an alignment is either meaningful or important? To the materialistic society in which we live, which is based on a reductionist science that tells us there is no meaning in the world and everything happens by chance or luck, this alignment will have no relevance whatsoever. However, for those of us who believe we do live in a meaningful universe full of signs, symbols and synchronicities, such a rare alignment will indeed seem to be significant. This will be the case even if we feel unable to fathom exactly how and in what way it is relevant to our lives and the world in which we live. I am sure you have already realized that I reside in the latter camp of a meaningful universe. I suspect most who read and comment on this forum are also in that camp. So, assuming it is meaningful, lets just define exactly what this alignment is, from our perspective here on Earth.

The December Solstice Point (DSP) is a fixed point in the sky along the Ecliptic. The latter is the great celestial circle around which our Sun appears to transit each year. Of course in truth it is the Earth that is orbiting the Sun. More roughly, from our view on Earth, the moon and the planets also appear to transit this same great celestial circle. The ecliptic thus represents the plane of our solar system. The DSP corresponds to the Sun’s location each December 21st or 22nd (the presence of leap years in our calendrical system varies the day). The Galactic Equator (GE) is another example, like the ecliptic, of a great celestial circle, this time derived from the location of the Milky Way as it appears in the sky from Earth. The Milky Way Galaxy, of which our own solar system is a tiny part, appears in our sky as a broadly linear phenomenon along which many stars and constellations appear to conglomerate. Its appearance, on a clear night, away from the artificial lights of civilization, can be likened to a ‘milky cloud’ of subdued light stretching across the sky.

The GE is, in fact, an imaginary circle that marks the centre plane of the Milky Way. It crosses the ecliptic, at an angle of approximately 61°, at two opposing points along the zodiacal belt. The first of these, as viewed from Earth, lies in the direction of the Galactic Centre (GC) between the constellations of Scorpio and Sagittarius. It currently aligns with the December Solstice Point (DSP). The second crossing of these to great celestial circles lies in the opposite direction, toward the Galactic Ante-centre (GA) and is located between the constellations of Taurus and Gemini. It currently aligns with the June Solstice Point (JSP). It is the first crossing point that is most important here, largely because of the location of the GC, which lies along the GE just 5° (or thereabouts) below the ecliptic circle.

As stated earlier, this alignment was exact in 1998. However, owing to the fact that the solar disc is almost exactly ½° wide, it will eclipse the DSP on the December Solstice of every year from 1980 until 2016, a period of 36 years (see http://alignment2012.com/truezone.htm). It is also worth remembering that the Sun also eclipses the JSP at the June Solstice over the same time period. Really this is just the other end of the same alignment. In both cases it can safely be said that the alignment is exact throughout the 36 year period, which of course includes Mayan Long Count end date of 21st December 2012 CE.

I find it more than a little irritating that many writers on the Mayan End date imply that this alignment only occurs on the December Solstice of 2012. This is clearly not the case and gives a false impression of that particular December Solstice being more important than any other. If we want to find the most significant December Solstice for the period, then that of 1998, would be the most obvious choice. However, I feel this is all missing the point of the alignment as a whole, which is clearly evident from 1980 to 2016. So folks, if a transformation is going to occur, we should be in the midst of it right now. I think most of you reading this now would agree that we certainly are in the midst of some pretty mind blowing global changes at this time in history.

The other quibble I have with many writers on the galactic alignment and 2012, is their claim that the December Solstice Sun is both conjunct and eclipsing the Galactic Centre (GC) on 21st December 2012. Firstly, the GC-DSP conjunction will not actually occur until around 2225 CE, over two centuries from now. Secondly, the solar disc will never eclipse the GC, as it is 5° below the ecliptic right between the sting of the Scorpion (Scorpio) and the arrow point of the Archer (Sagittarius). Remember, the ecliptic is the apparent path of the Sun, which is just ½° in diameter, so it could never reach a point 5° away from that great celestial circle. This GC-DSP alignment in over 200 years will be, I believe, as significant as the present one. Indeed, I think the whole period between these two alignments is going to be significant for both the human species and the entire planet upon which we live. It remains to be seen as to whether we can actually survive that period of time at all. Interestingly, Michael, that timescale of over 200 years, seems to tie in well with your own forecast for humanity.

Anyway, back to the current GE-DSP alignment. It really is a unique alignment within the known history of humanity. The last time it occurred was one full precessional cycle back in our past, somewhere between 24,000 and 26,000 years ago. However, between then and now three comparable alignments have occurred at 6,000 to 6,500 year intervals. The last of these involved an alignment between the September Equinox Point (SEP) and the GC end of the GE somewhere between 4500 and 4000 BCE. This seems to tie in nicely with the rise of the Sumerian civilization in current day Iraq. It is interesting to note so much activity in that same region during the current alignment. Before this, somewhere between 11,000 and 10,000 BCE it was the JSP that was aligning with the GC end of the GE (i.e. the opposite to the present alignment). Many believe that it was around that time that the legendary civilizations of Atlantis and Lemuria came to an end as a result of some kind of cataclysm. The two alignments before that are well beyond our current historical record, so I shall say little of them here. The GC end of the GE aligned with the March Equinox Point (MEP) somewhere between 17,500 and 16,000 BCE. It’s last alignment with the DSP occurred between 24,000 and 22,000 BCE. One can speculate endlessly about those time periods, but I will not go there at this time.

So, what of the current alignment period? Is it the end of the world as we know it? Is it the end of humanity as a species? Do we evolve into a new species? What is happening and what will have happened by end of 2016 when the current galactic alignment comes to an end? Indeed is that the end of the alignment?

When astrologers work with fixed stars in astrology, they generally allow 1° of orb for a meaningful alignment. The Galactic Equator Points and the Galactic Centre (GC) traverse the sky, in relation to the solstices and equinoxes, at a very slow speed that approximately corresponds with the precessional rate. This is precisely the same for the fixed stars. A 1° orb for the current GE-Solstice alignment would give us an alignment period from 1926 to 2070 CE, thus most of both the 20th and 21st Centuries. The same orb for the GC alignment of 2225 CE, would begin and end in 2153 and 2297 CE respectively. That would actually leave only 83 years between the end of the GE and the beginning of the GC alignments. Such long periods of time for alignments are very difficult for us conceive of. No single historical event can mark such lengthy conjunctions, so we would have to look at the whole historical period for trends that will presumably come to a head around the time when the alignment is exact (i.e. the 1980 – 2016 era with the current alignment).

Finally, relating to all the above, how relevant is all of this to the evolution of a more spiritual consciousness involving us, the Earth and all its other occupants (animals’ plants, etc.) plus any other beings (physical or ethereal) that exist in this part of our galaxy? It is the potential for a collective spiritual transformation that seems to me to be the most important opportunity for all of us during this 36 year window of time as represented by the current GE-DSP alignment. Only 8 years now remain until the end of 2016, when this short window of time could be closed to us for hundreds (maybe the GC alignment in 200 years or so will be another window of opportunity), if not thousands of years. Our window of opportunity might go beyond 2016, if my suggestion of a 1° orb for the alignment is allowed, but can we afford to take that chance and not act before then? If we succeed in some kind of transformation of consciousness, then we may be able to leap a head to another level of being. If we fail, then we may well go the way of Giant Sloth’s, Sabre-toothed cats, Dodo’s and Passenger Pigeons.

That will do for now as I have probably bored you all to tears by now.

Best Wishes

Andrew (Truthseeker)

09-12-2008, 07:54 PM	#93
truthseeker Avalon Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Near Halifax, W. Yorks, England Posts: 26	Re: David Wilcock. Hi Guys, I would first like to thank Kerry and Bill making this forum possible. So far it is has been a resounding success. I suspect that it has surpassed even their expectations. This is my first post on this forum. I have decided to post it on both the Michael St. Clair and David Wilcock threads because the first part at least concerns both of these extremely intuitive and spiritual men. Be warned it is going to be a rather long, but important, comment. It may also provoke some conflict and discussion, though really it is only bringing to the fore the differences between the St. Clair and Wilcock frameworks. I have also written my own take on the Mayan Long Count Calendar end date and galactic alignment in this post. I hope it will help to dispel some of the frequently repeated errors made by many researchers writing on this subject. I have listened to all of Michael and David’s interviews on Project Camelot and have been impressed by both of them. I am a regular visitor to David’s website and am probably a little more familiar with his work than with Michael’s. However, I have also been to Michael’s site and read two of his books (‘Zen of the Stars’ and ‘Foreseen’). I also have another commonality with Michael, as I have been a keen student of astrology for the past 20 years or so. I have found his astrological forecasts very inspiring and can see that he is clearly a master of this fascinating symbolic system. Michael’s threads on this new forum have been amongst my favourites, particularly those on astrology and the Wingmakers. However, I am slightly troubled by what I am beginning to see as a polarisation between the views of David and Michael. I sense that quite a lot of folk here are either becoming ‘Wilcockian’ or ‘St. Clairian’ in their spiritual and philosophical perspectives of past, present and future. Maybe this, to some degree reflects, the up and coming opposition between Uranus and Saturn that Michael has been expounding upon. I would love to hear both Michael and David in dialogue with each other, as their views seem pretty irreconcilable in at least two areas. Firstly, in terms of their favoured political candidates in the up and coming US elections, and secondly, but more significantly, in terms of the imminence of humanity’s ascension into a higher density of being. I do not doubt the integrity of either of these men. Both believe that their intuitive and spiritual sources can be relied upon. However, these separate sources appear to be totally at odds with each other. Despite their commitment to certain sources, frameworks and philosophy’s, I have some significant doubts and questions on both counts. Let us deal first with the lesser problem of their polar opposite political forecasts on the up and coming US elections. Like so many others here I personally I have severe doubts about both presidential candidates, together with their running mates and backers. It seems to me, that like virtually every other world leader in recent history, they completely buy into the system that appears to be destroying both us and our planet. Having said that, if by some miracle any one of the candidates or their running mates can truly transcend and transform the current system, then bring them on! For Michael, McCain and Palin are favoured, particularly the latter. Michael’s arguments for Palin seem to be rooted in his understanding of her birth chart with a strong Aquarian stellium of planets. He feels she is a free spirit with a mind of her own. He believes that Obama is completely bought by the PTB and that this is reinforced by his running mate, Biden, and his chief backer, Brzezinski, both of whom are well and truly part of the corporate elite. I have not studied any of these political figures well enough to really know the truth about them. However, I find his confidence in the Fundamentalist Christian, Palin, who probably awaits an imminent rapture and judgement day, somewhat surprising. Unless, she undergoes a major transformation in her thinking, then I severely doubt she is going to be good for either America or the world. David, on the other hand is really pushing for Obama. His dreams seem to have given him a clear message that despite appearances, Obama as president will be good news for the USA and the world. I find this almost as hard to believe as Michael’s faith in Palin. David suggests that Obama is keeping his enemies (i.e. the likes of Biden and Brzezinski) close to him so that he can turn the tables on mainstream politics when the time is right. I am a fraid I need a lot of convincing on that one. I suppose he too could undergo a major transformation, but from where I am standing (which is admitedly on the otherside of the Atlantic, in the UK), this does not seem very likely. So I am not holding my breath for either Palin or Obama, though I would love to be wrong about either one or both of them. I would be less bothered by all this were Michael and David not so convinced about what they were saying. But they both seem so sure of themselves. They can’t both be right can they? Maybe they can? Maybe we will end up with a US leadership with them working together to transform the world? Not very likely me thinks! Anyway, that’s the more minor polarity of thinking between these two incredibly intuitive men. Now onto the bigger and more important stuff regarding our spiritual destiny as both a species and a planetary civilization. The bigger issue for me is really their very different visions on the future for humanity and planet Earth. David seems convinced, mainly from his ‘Law of One’ source (The ‘Ra’ material) that humanity is facing ascencion on or around the end of the Mayan Long Count calendar on 21st December 2012. Apparently, those of us that are 51% or more in ‘service to others’, as opposed to ‘service to self’ will ascend from a 3rd to 4th Density of being during that short time window. This is because the entire planet, according to David, will be ascending into 4th Density at that time. The rest of humanity, it seems, will either reincarnate on another 3rd Density planet elsewhere in the galaxy, or a relatively small number (mainly those within the current elite groups) will survive in undergound bases as 3rd Density beings. The latter will eventually evolve into the J-Rods (i.e. the Grey’s) who will one day come back to visit us from the distant future (see also the Dan Burish material). Generally, though it appears that it will be difficult, if not impossible for 3rd Density human beings to survive on the surface of the Earth. So, that is roughly David’s very soon to occur ascension scenario. Just a side note here. Following David’s scenario, I have often wondered what will happen to all the plants and animals on Earth when it moves from 3rd to 4th Density? Will they ascend from 2nd (rocks and minerals are 1st Density and Plants and animals are 2nd Density in David’s system, as far as I understand) to 4th Density? Or will they join the 3rd Density humans and be reincarnated on another planet? Alternatively, in what way will plants and animals on a 4th Density Earth differ from there 3rd Density counterparts. I have not found any clear explanation of what will happen to the Earth’s wildlife in David’s writings. Maybe I am just missing something her? Anyway, back to the difference between David and Michael’s spiritual framework. Michael takes a much slower and longer-term look at the future of humanity. He sees an ascension process that is gradual over the next couple of hundred years. For me, on a gut level, this seems the more realistic scenario. Of course I may well be wrong. Like anyone else I am biased to things continuing to some degree as they are, which at the moment is a slow, but speeding up, spiral downward. Out of the ashes of the current madness, I incline to the idea of us rising, like the Phoenix, into a new age for man, the planet and our relationship with higher beings. I guess I find it hard to see things changing as radically and quickly as David and the ‘Law of One’ material suggest. However, I do try to keep an open mind! I also like Michael’s use of astrology and the various planetary cycles to make sense of these changes. This, I believe, he combines with the information he regularly receives from his Nordic Being sources. So which scenario is the correct one? Both can not be true, surely? That is unless we are looking at two different timelines? I do not have the confidence that David has in the ‘Law of One’ material. I am suspicious of the motives and agenda of both channelled and contact entities at the best of times. David himself questions other channelled sources, but states that he has found the ‘Law of One’ material to be much more consistent with his own extensive research than any other. I have no doubt that he believes that to be true. I am equally suspicious of Michael’s Nordic Being sources. I am also equally sure that he believes what they tell him to be true. In both cases, how do we know these beings are telling us the truth? Intuition? Gut feeling? Some kind of higher rational knowing? This brings me onto yet another source of greater knowledge, that Michael refers to frequently. In fact he has a whole thread on this forum relating to that material. I am of course refering to the Wingmakers material. I first heard of this from Michael when it was mentioned in his last interview with Bill and Kerry. I immediately sought out the site, read much of the material there and even bought the CD. I was initially very impressed. I loved the Ancient Arrow Project story and the related interviews between Dr. Neruda and Sarah. Also the music and art is pretty incredible. However, I did later become a little concerned about the way the story and interviews changed over time, as several people on the Wingmakers thread on this forum have already noted. The apparent endorsement of a New World Order and Globalization slightly bothered me. However, I can see a difference between the ‘New World Order’ type of globalization that conspiracy theorists are so rightly concerned about, with its poulation reduction and rule by force and control, as opposed to the one world or one universe concept where we are all connected in a peaceful and co-operative way. I was also a little disapointed at Michael’s response to the website (http://www.wanttoknow.info/wingmaker...gmakerschanges) suggested by Lightbeing. I am guessing Michael was tired and probably more than a little overwhelmed by the quantity of response there has been to his ideas on this forum. He is only human, like the rest of us, after all. However, I think refering to the author as both ‘mentally ill’ and ‘anal’ was rather unfair and unreasonable. I read the same comments and letters at that website and felt that most of the authors questions to Mark Hempel and ‘James’ were reasonable. I do accept that he may have gone a little far in is his implied accusation that ‘James’ (the author of the Wingmaker material) is a liar. However, I thought his questions and doubt were perfectly reasonable. If I never questioned or doubted, I would not be on this forum today. I would still be stuck in the old school Methodist Christian mind set in which I was brought up. It is my questioning of, and doubt about particular belief systems, ideologies and philosophies that has allowed me to be where I am today. I was not entirely convinced by ‘James’ response either. However, that will not stop me exploring the Wingmaker material further. Heh, perhaps I am ‘mentally ill’ as well! I am a mental health nurse after all! Seriously though Michael, we do need to be careful of the labels we lay on others. Within mainsrtream Psychiatry, virtually everyone one on this forum would be labelled ‘mentally ill’ and suffering from a whole variety of delusions and auditory and visual hallucinations. Of course, I do not buy into mainstream Psychiatry, but we must be careful that we do not stigmatize others in the same way that our mainstream society does. Hope you don’t mind me picking you up on that one Michael? Another thing I noticed on the Wingmaker site was embedded in James’ Q & A Session 3. It is of rather minor concern in the greater picture of things I guess, but relevant to both Michael and myself, because it concerns astrology. Here is the quote: - Question 58 – Will the next material give reference to the "Harmonic Concordance" that is being talked about now? This relates to a special astrological geometric pattern, which will be formed on November 8, 2003, at 8:12 AM EST. The primary feature is a Grand Sextile and at the time of total lunar eclipse. Does astrology play any part in the WingMakers philosophy or cosmology? Answer 58 – The teachings of Lyricus do not involve astrology. The reason is simple: astrology is subjective to time and place, and because of this subjectivity it is impossible to embed fundamental truth that is sustainable and relevant across multiple places and times. This does not suggest that heavenly bodies do not impact on humans. They most certainly do, in more ways than astrology recognizes. The Harmonic Concordance – like all astronomical events that seem orderly (non-random) – is indicative of how the grander scale of the universe can imprint on the consciousness of a species and an individual. The universe is a powerful catalyst of the inborn instinct to ascend in consciousness, but our species has fallen to the gaze of a ten-foot experience called television, and seldom, if ever, searches the night sky. On re-reading this now, I must admit, it makes more sense to me and does not devalue astrology as a local phenomenon, as I initially seem to remember thinking. In fact James quite rightly implies that the local positions of the Sun, Moon and planets in our solar system are going to be of little relevance in the bigger space-time universe from which the Lyricus teachings are derived. However, Michael, I would be interested to hear your view on this. I am less concerned about the specific question on Harmonic Concordance (a dubious concept relating to the 1987 Harmonic Convergence created by Jose’ Arguelles and his Dreamspell version of the Mayan Calendar), and more interested in James’ reply about astrology in general. Also there are quite a lot of other questions and answers in this 3rd Q & A Session with James that might well lead quite a few who visit here to question the agenda of James and the Wingmaker material. I would reccomend that everybody reads this entire web page (http://www.wingmakers.com/answersfromjames.html) before completely accepting everything James tells us. I too need to read it again, as it is now sometime since I read this material. I do remember it left me feeling unsure about the goals and direction of the Wingmaker material. Michael, sorry to question something you regard as so very important, beautiful, true and inspiring. However, that is what we are here for, I believe; to find some answers about what is really going on and who we can really trust? Nothing is too good or inspired to be questioned and debated, from my point of view. Lets not have any ‘Sacred Cows’ here. My own doubts about the material, and those of others, may well be unfounded. I keep an open mind until something confirms things definitely one way or the other for me. I have similar reservations about some other alleged contact material that has been explored on this forum. This includes the Andromeda contacts experienced by Alex Collier and the Pleiadian/Plejaryian contacts of Billy Meier. Some of the material presented by both these contactees seems to me to be fairly dubious. Certainly none of Collier’s Andromeda predictions mentioned in his 1996/7 video appear to have manifested. As for Meier, he seems to believe that all other ET contactees are either liars or mentally ill. I do not doubt for a minute that both Collier and Meier really have experienced a significant contact with something or someone and that they believe what they have been told is the truth. I feel similarily about Michael’s Nordic contacts and David’s channellings. However, can any of these sources be truly trusted? Now I want to make a rather extended comment about the the Mayan Long Count Calendar and the apparently related galactic allignment, that many have mentioned on this forum. I would also apreciate Michael’s comments (and David’s, if he is around) on my own suggestions and studies here. I am in the process of writing an increasingly long article (I started my explorations in 2000/2001 – at this rate it will be a book by the time I have finished) on the precessional cycle and the so-called astrological ages. I have recently been reading loads of stuff, on and off the Internet, regarding this now increasingly discussed calendar date. There is so much out there now, that it is really hard to discern the ‘forest for the trees’ or the ‘wheat from the chaff’, and boy, there is a hell of a lot of ‘chaff’ circulating on the ether. It is enough to confuse anybody who has been exploring this subject material for some years, let alone those looking at it all for the first time. There are multiple errors that are repeated over and over by so-called researchers that have not checked their data and sources thoroughly, or in many cases at all. Even some of the best researchers seem to make some basic mistakes. So lets try and sort out fact from fiction and fantasy. I shall refer to various web pages here rather than attempt to define and explain this complex subject matter in too much detail, which would take a book or two! John Major Jenkins website (http://alignment2012.com/) is my primary source for this. His website and books (‘Maya Cosmogenesis 2012’ and ‘Galactic Alignment’) are the best referenced and most accurate sources that I am aware of. I strongly recommend a close study of Jenkins website as a definitive introduction to all the Maya Calendars (yes there are more than one). I also recommend Geoff Stray’s website (http://www.diagnosis2012.co.uk/) and book (‘Beyond 2012’) for perusal. He covers anything and everything (the Maya and beyond) relating to 2012, from the sublime to the ridiculous. Firstly, it is important to remember that the current ‘Age’ is either the 4th or 5th in a series, depending upon which Mesoamerican tradition (e.g. differing Mayan and Aztec groups) is being followed. Thus, the implication here is that the current Mayan Long Count Calendar is the 4th or 5th in a succession of Long Count Calendars that are each of the same length in years and days (i.e. 5125 years, 133 days). So the end of the current Long Count Calendar does not necessarily mean the end of the world, as some would have us believe. The end date thus represents the end of an old ‘Age’ (the current one) and the beginning of a ‘New’ age (the next one). When translated into our own Calendar (the ‘New Style Gregorian’ as opposed to ‘Old Style Julian’), the current Mayan Long Count Calendar commenced on 11th August 3114 BCE and is due to end on the 21st December 2012 CE (see http://alignment2012.com/fap3.html for a discussion on the history of the correlation issue). In fact, it appears that this calendar was created by a Pre-classic Mayan civilization from Izapa in south-west Mexico, probably somewhere around 100 BCE (for details about the monuments in Izapa that support this see http://www.alignment2012.com/Izapa.html). Various erroneous beginning and end dates have been given by various authors and writers over the years. For example, sometimes you may see a beginning date for August 3113 rather than 3114 BCE. This error appears to be rooted in writers not realizing that there was never a year zero between BCE and CE (AD) dates. Basically, the year 1 BCE was followed by the year 1 CE. By adding a year zero date you get the erroneous 3113 BCE date. Other writers have got this wrong in the other direction, coming up with a 2011 end date instead of 2012. However, I do not believe this is the explanation for Carl Calleman’s 2011 end date, which I will explore in a minute. Other smaller errors in terms of the actual beginning and end date (e.g. whether the end date is the 21st or 23rd December) can at least in part be explained by the two most dominant correlation theories (see again http://alignment2012.com/fap3.html). The now most commonly accepted beginning and end dates are 11th August 3114 BCE and 21st December 2012 CE respectively. The latter is the winter solstice date of that year in the northern hemisphere. The other correlation hypothesis suggests beginning and end dates of 13th August 3114 BCE and 23rd December 2012 CE (2 days after the solstice) respectively. The latter hypothesis is, of course, two days removed from the former. This may explain some of the differing dates quoted for the Mayan Calendar. However, again, it does not explain Carl Johan Calleman’s date of 28th October 2011 CE. As far as I can understand, Calleman’s end date has no basis within Mayan Calendrics. It appears to be a creation of Calleman himself, which others such as Ian Lungold and Barbara Hand Clow (a well known astrologer and proponent of the New Age) have taken to heart. I believe it is based on Calleman’s own explorations of the past to seek out key historical events that he can equate with his own version of the calendar. This erroneous end date is the primary reason why I find Calleman’s version of the calendar highly dubious. For reference and dialogue between Calleman and Major Jenkins, view the following web pages at Jenkins’ website: - http://alignment2012.com/Calleman-debate.html, http://alignment2012.com/Exchange-in-2000.html http://alignment2012.com/MayanCalendarBasics.htm http://alignment2012.com/eldersand2012-exchange.html, http://alignment2012.com/debate2001.html Jenkins states that “the idea of conceiving the 13 baktuns of the Long count Great Cycle in terms of seven days and six nights is Calleman’s own, and it serves Calleman as a template for modeling history. It is these same ‘seven days and six nights’ applied to his ‘Nine Underworlds of Creation’ that Calleman uses to correlate his calendar end date. According to Calleman we are currently in the 8th of these 9 underworlds, the ‘Galactic Underworld’, which is 12.8 years long. Each underworld is 20 times shorter in historical time than its predecessor, beginning with the ‘Cellular Underworld’ of 16.4 billion years and ending with the ‘Universal Underworld’ of 260 days (11th February – 28th October 2011, according to Calleman). All end on his proposed end date of 28th October 2011. Calleman is also very dismissive of astronomical and astrological correlations with the Long Count Calendar and does not buy into Jenkins’ idea that the 2012 end date corresponds roughly with the current galactic alignment between the December Solstice Point and Galactic Equator. Calleman argues that the Long Count Calendar is purely prophetic and has no astronomical or astrological relevance at all. He makes this very clear in his written debate with Jenkins (see above web page references). Calleman dismisses astrology as an entirely materialistic subject and seems to fail to grasp the spiritual symbolism that astrology can often reflect. In the debates he never seems to answer Jenkins questions and queries, but keeps coming back to a very fixed and negative response to Jenkins astronomical/astrological perspective, which is also very spiritual. It really is worth a read to get a sense of how frustrating this so called debate was for Jenkins. I am very surprised to see Calleman’s version of the Long Count calendar endorsed by renowned astrologer, Barbara Hand Clow. I truly wonder if she has ever read the above debate between Jenkins and Calleman. Michael, I was also surprised to see your own endorsement of Calleman’s work in this forum. I strongly suggest you read the debate material just mentioned. Calleman may well speak with much spiritual truth. However, I strongly feel is version of the Mayan calendar is in error. Though I find Calleman’s version of the long count calendar rather dubious, I do find the general concept of accelerating time toward a singularity or novelty point in the era around 2012 quite an interesting and attractive one. It certainly reflects my own subjective feeling of time speeding up as we approach that time. I am sure his system could actually be applied to the more commonly accepted 2012 end date. Maybe someone should give it a try as I am sure there is much within Calleman’s model which does have great value? Maybe it would work better if applied to the correct end date? This concept of accelerating time is not a new idea unique to Calleman, though his chosen end point and the speed and momentum of the acceleration do seem to be his own creation. Terrence and Dennis McKenna suggested something similar back in the 1970’s in their book “The Invisible Landscape: Mind, Hallucinations and the I Ching”. This was based upon the McKenna brothers shared hallucinogenic experience in the Amazon jungle in 1971. Their hypothesis is known as ‘Timewave Zero’ or ‘Novelty Theory’, which they base on the 64 Hexagrams of the King Wen version of the I Ching. I can not pretend that I understand the math behind this theory, as mathematics has never been an easy subject for me (however, see http://www.hermetic.ch/frt/math_twz.htm if you are really interested), as lots of graphs, statistics and numbers tend to befuddle my mind. The theory allegedly synchronizes the 64 Hexagram I Ching with the 384 day and 13 month lunar year (i.e. thirteen 29.53 solilunar cycles, as measured from one new moon to the next), the precessional cycle and 11.1 years, which is the average length of each sun spot cycle. However, the most important fact relating to the Mckenna brothers theory, to my mind, is that they independently came up with a 2012 end date to the timewave. This was well over a decade before the Mayan End Date became widely known, largely through the publication of “The Mayan Factor” by Jose Arguelles’ in 1987 (famous for his idea of ‘Harmonic Convergence’ in 1987). The McKenna brothers initially came up with a zero point of 17th November 2012. However, in a later edition of their book in the 1990’s, when they had discovered the Mayan End Date, they adjusted this to 21st December 2012 (actually 22nd December first and later still the 21st December, when it was clarified that that was the Mayan End Date). This adjustment might perhaps raise some suspicions about the McKenna model, though, as far as I know, they were open and up front about this change. The earlier zero date of 17th November 2012 was the end result of the fine tuning of the timewave to a chosen historical event that the McKenna brothers chose as of the greatest novelty within the 20th Century. They chose 6th August 1945, when the first atomic bomb was released upon a human population, in Hiroshima, Japan. This was certainly an exceptional, not to mention both tragic and murderous, event. Indeed, perhaps it was the most significant event in the 20th Century. However, it all feels far too subjective to me to base a theory on this singular, though important, historical date. If you are interested see http://www.hermetic.ch/frt/zerodate.html for a well grounded and sober critique of the McKenna ‘Novelty Theory’ by Peter Meyer. Whether this model of accelerating time is any more valid than Calleman’s or not, I really can not say. However, the use of hallucinogens by the McKenna brothers to receive their proposed pattern of accelerating time theory, is clearly Shamanic in orientation and may well reflect a similar process utilized by Shamans over 2000 years ago, when the Long Count Calendar is believed to have been first conceived by the pre-Classic Mayan people of Izapa, in current day Mexico, very close to the Guatemalan border. There are still other accelerating time models that seem to focus, very broadly, upon the era of around 2012. I will not go into depth about these now, but they include the ‘Auric Time Scale’, written up in a paper authored by Sergey Smelyakov and Yuri Karpenko. The former is a Ukrainian Professor of mathematics with an interest in astrology. Geoff Stray critique’s this model in his book, “Beyond 2012” and also at his website (http://www.diagnosis2012.co.uk/). However, if closely examined the end point of that model should in fact terminate around 2037, rather than 2012. A fourth expression of accelerating time is the ‘Logarithmic Time Scale’ proposed by astrologer A. T. Mann in the 1970’s and 1980’s. His ideas were rooted in the theories of Rodney Collin, who was a student of George Gurdjieff and P.D. Ouspensky. Initially Mann applied this idea to the individual life cycle (in his books “The Round Art” and “Life Time Astrology”), in relation to our subjective experience of life going faster and faster as we get older. He later adapted this to history (in his book “The Divine Plot”), his focal end point being the year 2000, as it was for so many before that year passed without any epochal life-transforming event. Maybe there is a lesson there for all of us, as we approach 2012? I have attempted, in the past, to apply this same model of logarithmic time to the 2012 end date. I have never completed those explorations, but did seem to get some interesting correlations. However, to my mind, the truth is that which ever model and/or speed of time acceleration one chooses, whether Calleman’s, McKenna’s, Smelyakov’s, Mann’s or any other, one will inevitably discover significant historical events and prehistoric epochs that will support a given model. However, there will also be other significant events and epochs that will not. Does this invalidate all or any of those models? I know not. Maybe by creating and applying our consciousness to such models we make them real and manifest, especially if a critical mass of people apply themselves to such a model. Maybe this explains why prediction and prophecy within and outside mainstream religion can often seem to work? So if enough of us believe something positive or negative will occur in 2012, then maybe such will happen? If so, it might be a good idea for us to focus on positive, rather than the negative, manifestations of our near future. There is, in fact, growing scientific support for the idea that mass positive or negative attention can effect the physical and manifest world in which we live, both on a personal and a collective level. So, now we have looked at the Mayan Long Count calendar and the 2012 end date, to complete this rather extensive post, I want to look at the related phenomenon of galactic alignment. Among much else, John Major Jenkins suggests that the 1998 galactic equator-solstice alignment is the same phenomenon to that which the civilizations of Mesoamerica alluded to when they calculated the end of the current age to occur in 2012. Jenkins explores much within Mesoamerican mythology, astronomy and calendrics to support his thesis. The 14-year difference between 1998 and 2012 is considered negligible within the greater expanses of time covered by these ages and alignments. So, is this a reasonable suggestion? The current alignment of the December Solstice Point and the Galactic Equator is an unquestionable fact. The bigger question for each of us, is whether or not such an alignment is either meaningful or important? To the materialistic society in which we live, which is based on a reductionist science that tells us there is no meaning in the world and everything happens by chance or luck, this alignment will have no relevance whatsoever. However, for those of us who believe we do live in a meaningful universe full of signs, symbols and synchronicities, such a rare alignment will indeed seem to be significant. This will be the case even if we feel unable to fathom exactly how and in what way it is relevant to our lives and the world in which we live. I am sure you have already realized that I reside in the latter camp of a meaningful universe. I suspect most who read and comment on this forum are also in that camp. So, assuming it is meaningful, lets just define exactly what this alignment is, from our perspective here on Earth. The December Solstice Point (DSP) is a fixed point in the sky along the Ecliptic. The latter is the great celestial circle around which our Sun appears to transit each year. Of course in truth it is the Earth that is orbiting the Sun. More roughly, from our view on Earth, the moon and the planets also appear to transit this same great celestial circle. The ecliptic thus represents the plane of our solar system. The DSP corresponds to the Sun’s location each December 21st or 22nd (the presence of leap years in our calendrical system varies the day). The Galactic Equator (GE) is another example, like the ecliptic, of a great celestial circle, this time derived from the location of the Milky Way as it appears in the sky from Earth. The Milky Way Galaxy, of which our own solar system is a tiny part, appears in our sky as a broadly linear phenomenon along which many stars and constellations appear to conglomerate. Its appearance, on a clear night, away from the artificial lights of civilization, can be likened to a ‘milky cloud’ of subdued light stretching across the sky. The GE is, in fact, an imaginary circle that marks the centre plane of the Milky Way. It crosses the ecliptic, at an angle of approximately 61°, at two opposing points along the zodiacal belt. The first of these, as viewed from Earth, lies in the direction of the Galactic Centre (GC) between the constellations of Scorpio and Sagittarius. It currently aligns with the December Solstice Point (DSP). The second crossing of these to great celestial circles lies in the opposite direction, toward the Galactic Ante-centre (GA) and is located between the constellations of Taurus and Gemini. It currently aligns with the June Solstice Point (JSP). It is the first crossing point that is most important here, largely because of the location of the GC, which lies along the GE just 5° (or thereabouts) below the ecliptic circle. As stated earlier, this alignment was exact in 1998. However, owing to the fact that the solar disc is almost exactly ½° wide, it will eclipse the DSP on the December Solstice of every year from 1980 until 2016, a period of 36 years (see http://alignment2012.com/truezone.htm). It is also worth remembering that the Sun also eclipses the JSP at the June Solstice over the same time period. Really this is just the other end of the same alignment. In both cases it can safely be said that the alignment is exact throughout the 36 year period, which of course includes Mayan Long Count end date of 21st December 2012 CE. I find it more than a little irritating that many writers on the Mayan End date imply that this alignment only occurs on the December Solstice of 2012. This is clearly not the case and gives a false impression of that particular December Solstice being more important than any other. If we want to find the most significant December Solstice for the period, then that of 1998, would be the most obvious choice. However, I feel this is all missing the point of the alignment as a whole, which is clearly evident from 1980 to 2016. So folks, if a transformation is going to occur, we should be in the midst of it right now. I think most of you reading this now would agree that we certainly are in the midst of some pretty mind blowing global changes at this time in history. The other quibble I have with many writers on the galactic alignment and 2012, is their claim that the December Solstice Sun is both conjunct and eclipsing the Galactic Centre (GC) on 21st December 2012. Firstly, the GC-DSP conjunction will not actually occur until around 2225 CE, over two centuries from now. Secondly, the solar disc will never eclipse the GC, as it is 5° below the ecliptic right between the sting of the Scorpion (Scorpio) and the arrow point of the Archer (Sagittarius). Remember, the ecliptic is the apparent path of the Sun, which is just ½° in diameter, so it could never reach a point 5° away from that great celestial circle. This GC-DSP alignment in over 200 years will be, I believe, as significant as the present one. Indeed, I think the whole period between these two alignments is going to be significant for both the human species and the entire planet upon which we live. It remains to be seen as to whether we can actually survive that period of time at all. Interestingly, Michael, that timescale of over 200 years, seems to tie in well with your own forecast for humanity. Anyway, back to the current GE-DSP alignment. It really is a unique alignment within the known history of humanity. The last time it occurred was one full precessional cycle back in our past, somewhere between 24,000 and 26,000 years ago. However, between then and now three comparable alignments have occurred at 6,000 to 6,500 year intervals. The last of these involved an alignment between the September Equinox Point (SEP) and the GC end of the GE somewhere between 4500 and 4000 BCE. This seems to tie in nicely with the rise of the Sumerian civilization in current day Iraq. It is interesting to note so much activity in that same region during the current alignment. Before this, somewhere between 11,000 and 10,000 BCE it was the JSP that was aligning with the GC end of the GE (i.e. the opposite to the present alignment). Many believe that it was around that time that the legendary civilizations of Atlantis and Lemuria came to an end as a result of some kind of cataclysm. The two alignments before that are well beyond our current historical record, so I shall say little of them here. The GC end of the GE aligned with the March Equinox Point (MEP) somewhere between 17,500 and 16,000 BCE. It’s last alignment with the DSP occurred between 24,000 and 22,000 BCE. One can speculate endlessly about those time periods, but I will not go there at this time. So, what of the current alignment period? Is it the end of the world as we know it? Is it the end of humanity as a species? Do we evolve into a new species? What is happening and what will have happened by end of 2016 when the current galactic alignment comes to an end? Indeed is that the end of the alignment? When astrologers work with fixed stars in astrology, they generally allow 1° of orb for a meaningful alignment. The Galactic Equator Points and the Galactic Centre (GC) traverse the sky, in relation to the solstices and equinoxes, at a very slow speed that approximately corresponds with the precessional rate. This is precisely the same for the fixed stars. A 1° orb for the current GE-Solstice alignment would give us an alignment period from 1926 to 2070 CE, thus most of both the 20th and 21st Centuries. The same orb for the GC alignment of 2225 CE, would begin and end in 2153 and 2297 CE respectively. That would actually leave only 83 years between the end of the GE and the beginning of the GC alignments. Such long periods of time for alignments are very difficult for us conceive of. No single historical event can mark such lengthy conjunctions, so we would have to look at the whole historical period for trends that will presumably come to a head around the time when the alignment is exact (i.e. the 1980 – 2016 era with the current alignment). Finally, relating to all the above, how relevant is all of this to the evolution of a more spiritual consciousness involving us, the Earth and all its other occupants (animals’ plants, etc.) plus any other beings (physical or ethereal) that exist in this part of our galaxy? It is the potential for a collective spiritual transformation that seems to me to be the most important opportunity for all of us during this 36 year window of time as represented by the current GE-DSP alignment. Only 8 years now remain until the end of 2016, when this short window of time could be closed to us for hundreds (maybe the GC alignment in 200 years or so will be another window of opportunity), if not thousands of years. Our window of opportunity might go beyond 2016, if my suggestion of a 1° orb for the alignment is allowed, but can we afford to take that chance and not act before then? If we succeed in some kind of transformation of consciousness, then we may be able to leap a head to another level of being. If we fail, then we may well go the way of Giant Sloth’s, Sabre-toothed cats, Dodo’s and Passenger Pigeons. That will do for now as I have probably bored you all to tears by now. Best Wishes Andrew (Truthseeker)