I guess you have to be a 2012er to “sense some fear” in what Hoopes says. What he does is to give a greater context of the history beyond the past decades. Of course people like Bast, Joseph, and Geryl care little about what the Spaniards believed 450 years ago. That is actually some of their greatest mistakes. It is at this time when great changes occurred in Maya beliefs, when Christian ideas affected them through reducción. For example, Calleman’s ideas of 9 and 13 vertical levels goes back to the early missionaries and later manifested by Eric Thompson. We have 9 horizontal regions in the Underworld, etc. Hence, Calleman’s model is based on a Colonial period model… There are plenty of examples which you can find on my blog. When later New Agers and pseudoscientists “find” so many similarities between Near Eastern religions and the Maya in various Colonial period sources and project them into the Prehispanic period they are ignorant of the messy history of the concepts they deal with.
Bast says that he has “looked into ancient history and modern science, and I think it is safe to say that ponderings of Columbus weren’t of any influence”. That is because you do not have to know this history in order to still use it. Bast and others are uncritical regarding ancient sources and do not believe contemporary anthropologists (they are part of the conspiracy). That is more or less the mindset of these people.
He ends the critique by stating that “if you really want to debunk 2012, you need to provide an alternate explanation for the Mayans using Dec 21 2012 as their end date, and you need to negate the very real possibilities of the Sun, or a comet, harming us.” Well, that is just wrong. There is no end date, the whole focus on 13 Baktun/Pik is wrong (no matter what correlation we use and I do think the GMT is problematic). There was no end or beginning of a new cycle at this date. That is simply mixing Christian/Western beliefs with ancient Maya, exactly what Hoopes says. In short, Bast missed the whole point of the argument.