Posted by: Johan Normark | November 23, 2010

2012: Calleman’s ”2011 correlation”

With Aldana’s thorough discussion on the correlation issue in mind I thought that I should briefly mention another ”correlation” between the Long Count (LC) and the Christian calendar that is launched as the “true” one. This is Carl Johan Calleman’s claim that the LC ends on Friday the 28th of October 2011, more than a year before other people claim it “ends.” As should be clear to readers of this blog I am not of the opinion that the calendar was designed to end on a particular date (13 Baktun/Pik), but among the “2012ers” (and here I also include Calleman) this end date is believed to be a fact beyond doubt.

I have now read Calleman’s book “The Purposeful Universe: How Quantum Theory and Mayan Cosmology Explain the Origin and Evolution of Life”, published in 2009. I intend to cover parts of it on this blog later on since I have promised that I will deal with Monument 6 at Tortuguero and Aveni’s 2012 book first. This post is an exception since it deals with an alternative “correlation.” Calleman’s book is an attempt to merge science and religion (something quite common in the 2012 circus). His book ranges from the creation of the universe and galaxies down to the cellular and atomic levels in order to show that the universe was designed to create consciousness. Given the range of his holistic enterprise the coverage on several of the levels is quite sketchy apart from his old expertise in research on the cellular level. More on that later on but I can just say that I have quite a lot to say about his treatment of the fossil record. I agree with him that neodarwinism has several problems but our solutions are worlds apart.

Central to Calleman’s idea is the LC but not the ordinary LC in five levels but rather a longer one in nine levels that is unknown in the hieroglyphic record (there are longer recorded LCs but Calleman apparently ignores them). For him these nine levels represent “Underworlds”, each 20 times longer than the lower level. These are divided into thirteen sublevels or “Heavens”. These terms are his own although they are inspired by the old Thompsonian idea that the Underworld consisted of nine levels and the Heavens consisted of thirteen levels. In my view, Nielsen and Reunert have proven beyond doubt that this multilayered universe reflects Christian ideas rather than ancient Mesoamerican ideas. The ancient Maya probably referred to various regions rather than hierarchical layers. In any case, for Calleman all these levels are quantized and represent quantum leaps in time and evolution of consciousness. I will discuss this in another post.

The supposed end of the LC is 13 Baktun or 13.0.0.0.0 as is the common convention of recording this in modern literature. This means 13 baktuns, 0 katuns, 0 tuns, 0 winals, and 0 k’ins since the creation date. Along with this LC date are tzolkin and haab dates. These are 4 Ajaw 3 K’ank’in for the “end” date. Now, Calleman, for reasons discussed below, believes this was wrong. He is convinced that the end date should all record 13 in all levels and even the tzolkin date should be 13 (but as I will show, not the haab date). According to Calleman the calendar ends on 13.13.13.13.13.13.13.13.13 13 Ajaw (Ahau), not 13.0.0.0.0 4 Ajaw 3 K’ank’in. As far as I know there is only one recorded date where the LC ends on 13 in the k’in position. On page 52 of the Dresden codex we find the era date 13.13.13.13.13.13.13.13.13.13.13.13.13 (13 x 13) but there is no 13 Ajaw date associated with this date. This is not the one Calleman seems to refer to.

There are several major distortions of the Maya calendar going on in Calleman’s world. Calleman criticizes Jenkins for distorting the Maya calendar but Jenkins is actually far more accurate. In Calleman’s book (p 44) he places his nine period/rhythms within a pyramidal shape with the largest period/rhythm at the bottom of the pyramid. Not only does this reverse the order of LC positions on monuments where the highest period is placed at the top, it also gives a single column of dates rather than the double column in which the calendar inscriptions originally were recorded.

Calleman even invents his own period! Winals are no longer existent in Calleman’s calendar although they are quite common on Classic period Maya monuments. A winal is a period of 20 days (k’ins) and 18 winals equals one tun (360 days). The tun is for Calleman the crucial unit/constant in his home made system. Twenty tuns equal a katun and twenty katuns equals a baktun, etc. In Calleman’s system the tun must therefore be divided by twenty rather than by eighteen. Hence, the winal is replaced by the oxlahunkin, a period of 18 days. I just wonder what two days he has erased…

Further, even if the calendar would “end” on the k’in position 13, the tzolkin can never be Ajaw (Ahau), but rather B’en. Ajaw is always associated with 0 or period endings in the LC. Hence, Calleman must therefore argue that there is a completely different correlation between the tzolkin and the LC than is known from the epigraphic record (and remember that he has erased two days from a system that is dependent on there being 20 days). I also must emphasize that this 13 Ajaw that Calleman proposes also coincides with 8 Sak in the haab and G3 in the Lord of the Night cycle. Now should not Calleman set his “end” date to something like 13 Ajaw 13 Pop G9 if he wanted it to be accurate?

How does Calleman solve the problem that arises from the fact that Ajaw cannot end on 13 in the k’in position of the LC? It is easy, he just erases the final position of the real LC as well. The k’in/day position is gone! What does this actually mean (apart from the fact that the day is the actual unit/constant in the LC, not the tun)? It means that in order for Calleman to equate his 9 “Underworlds” with his estimate of the age of the universe he needs to erase one position of the LC! In fact, in order to reach 13 hablatuns (16.4 billion years BC) in the real LC (the one actually recorded on ancient monuments not fabricated by a contemporary Swedish pseudoscientist) you’ll need ten (10) levels. Nine levels only get you back to 820 million years BC. Since this does not fit his preconceived schema of nine Underworlds he sees no problem in manipulating the calendar.

If one uses the GMT correlation constant and enters 28th of October 2011 in a Maya calendar converter one ends up at 13 Ajaw. Apparently Calleman uses the GMT correlation like most other people. So how did Calleman come up with the 13 Ajaw end date? According to this web page the end date set at December 21, 2012 is the consequence of Formative period Izapans setting the beginning day at August 12, during a solar zenith. The logical “end” date from this perspective is in 2012 according to Calleman. However, he argues that this is not what the Maya initially had targeted. Calleman says that “the creation cycles described by the Maya, including the tzolkin, are fundamentally of a spiritual, non-astronomical, nature. Thus, any theory that implies that the Mayan Long Count would have been designed to reflect astronomical phenomena, be it the precession of the earth or a solar zenith, is a warning signal that its originator is off the mark. It should be obvious that if the Mayan calendar is a prophetic calendar describing cosmic energy cycles of a universal nature then the particular date at which the sun was in zenith in the particular location of Izapa is totally irrelevant for us who live today and must be considered as nothing but a result of a tradition too strong to be changed.”

Apparently Calleman is completely unaware of the astronomical data used to correlate the LC with the Christian calendar. His usage of GMT depends on astronomical correlations that he at the same time criticizes… He also relies on the skeptical notion that the LC was invented at Izapa and that it relates to a solar zenith. That is only an idea developed by archaeoastronomers relying on the GMT correlation which Aldana has shown to be highly problematic.

On this web page Calleman continues and says that “since the Long Count consists of exactly 7200 tzolkin rounds then the true end of creation must fall on a day that is 13 Ahau in the tzolkin count so that the tzolkin rounds even out. If we want to find out what is the real date of ending of the creation cycles we must therefore look for a day around the year 2012, which is 13 Ahau in the tzolkin count. The inscriptions in Palenque, written about a thousand years after the Long Count was devised in Izapa, seem to indicate that the date of relevance is October 28, 2011, which in fact is 13 Ahau in the tzolkin count.”

I do not know what Palenque data he is referring to but the tzolkin does not have a beginning or end. The “end date” of the twenty tzolkin days is only zero in the k’in position of the LC but it does not necessarily mean that the tzolkin itself had an end date. Calleman’s idea that the tzolkin rounds should even out at 13 Baktun is completely inconsistent with his own invented calendar. 13 Baktun equals 1,872,000 days. Divide this with 260 and you’ll get 7,200 tzolkin rounds. However, Calleman claims that 13 Baktun is wrong, the four lowest coefficients in his calendar (remember, no k’in and winal positions) are 13 (x 144,000), 13 (x 7,200), 13 (x 360), and 13 (x18). This equals 1,970,514 days. Divide this with 260 and you’ll get 7578.9 tzolkin rounds. Hence, in Calleman’s own system the tzolkin rounds do not even out which he suggests it should… But the tzolkin rounds do even out in the real system and that is why we have 4 Ajaw at both known 13 Baktun dates.  

In the third video of his interview with Mark van Stone he has included this information: “A prophecy related by Don Alejandro Oxlaj, spokesman of the contemporary Mayan Council of Elders in Guatemala, says that ‘The time of the 13 Baktun and 13 Ahau is the time of the Return of our Ancestors and the Return of the Men of Wisdom.’”

This is to Calleman evidence that the ancient LC, as inscribed on lowland monuments, was wrong and that contemporary highland Maya, who did not use the LC until recently (it has become part of the Maya revitalization process), knows better than the ancients. Hence, Calleman believes there is some sort of hidden continuity between his own calendar and Oxlaj’s. No such continuity exists for reasons mentioned in Aldana’s essay.

Calleman’s calendar is complete bogus and I will let you know what I think about his research that depends on his so called “periodic system of evolution” in the future.


Responses

  1. Interesting post, Johan. I’m kinda surprised this guy hasn’t been on Coast to Coast AM, but I looked and he’s only listed there as having been referenced by some for his own special calendar. I suppose “special” there should be in quotes.

    I just love how these folks make stuff up when it doesn’t quite suit their needs. It’s like, “Okay, so the Mayan calendar says this, but I’m going to make it say this, and it almost works out, so we’ll just fudge a number here, and voilà!”

  2. It appears that he has changed the length of his lowest level in his recent book compared to the preceding book. He does not really discuss that change in the book but it is clear in his figures and tables.

    If you ever write a book about the astronomical side of 2012, check out his treatment of the Big Bang and formations of galaxies, stars and planets. Basically, the Big Bang created a universe in the shape of the Tree of Life and that is why we find world trees in ancient mythology. This has given rise to lower quantum levels of smaller world trees, etc. It is all about rotation (of galaxies, solar system, earth, and DNA). More about this later on.

    As we all know, 2012ers love (sacred) numbers. Calleman particularly loves the golden ratio and the tun constant (360). Is this post not part of the divine design then? It happens to be blog post # 360…

    • Lovely to know. What actually caught my eye was the word “quantum.” I’m preparing a blog post at the moment about the fallacy of invoking quantum mechanics to make your stuff sound more sciencey.

      • The very idea of quantum mechanics may have changed Calleman’s decision to change the lower periods of his calendar. It is, of course, widely known that the Maya were masters of quantum mechanics… In my future posts on his book I will show that he continues to select data and that he uses the lack of evidence as a support of his model (such as the common lack of transitional forms between different species). That is not how science works…

  3. Calleman Also Has the Axis Of The World(tree) Running Through Copenhagen.Tata Oxlaj Seems To Have Joined His Choir.

  4. From what I have seen Oxlaj has been influenced by New Age ideas even before Calleman.

  5. There has been a lot of debate among scholars as to the exact correlation of the Mayan calendar with the European calendar. A number of researchers including my father Maya archaeologist Dr. Stephan F. de Borhegyi, (better known as Borhegyi), and most notably E. Wyllys Andrews (1960, 1965, 1965c, 1968, 1973) have presented convincing archaeological evidence favoring the correlation developed by Herbert Spinden. It is the Spinden correlation that sets all Maya dates 260 years earlier than the G.M.T. correlation. According to archaeologist Michael Coe, only two correlations, the Spinden / Morley correlation, and the GMT Thompson correlation, meet the requirements of both dirt archaeology and specific dates. Bishop Diego de Landa, who wrote his chronicles shortly after the Spanish Conquest, tells us of an event which fell on a certain day in the 52 year calendar round that he said coincided with July 16th, 1553 in the Julian Calendar. This calendar, developed by the Romans during the reign of Julius Caesar was used in Europe until it was revised in the year 1582 during the papacy of Gregory the X!!!, after which it was known as the Gregorian Calendar. This is the calendar now used in most countries in the world. Another date, recorded in the native chronicles known as the Chilam Balam, set the date of the Spanish foundation of the city of Merida in Yucatan in the Julian calendar date of January 1542. A number of correlations have been developed, but the one that has been generally accepted is the Goodman-Martinez-Thompson (GMT) correlation, associated primarily with archaeologist J. Eric S. Thompson. This correlation, which fits much of the chronological evidence from archaeological and historical sources, is the basis for the belief that the world will end in the year 2012. The correlation developed by archaeologist Herbert Spinden, and named after him, also fits much archaeological and historical data. The two correlations differ, however, by 260 years. In many ways the Spinden correlation, which uses archaeological evidence from both the Maya lowlands and the southern highland regions, fits the archaeological and historical requirements better than the GMT correlation. In February of 1951, my father, Stephan de Borhegyi was asked (by the C.I.W.) to collect samples of Sapodilla wood for radiocarbon testing, from the dated lintels, (beams) which span the doorways of the Late Classic Maya temples at Tikal. These tests in 1951, and further tests conducted in 1955 favored the Spinden correlation. But in 1960 new tests were performed, and because of new and improved techniques now favor the GMT correlation. So Maya scholars came to a consensus favoring the Thompson or GMT correlation over the Spinden correlation. To this day the debate on the subject has never ceased. Due to various discrepancies in the tests, radiocarbon dating has not resolved the matter as to which correlation is correct.
    For anyone interested, I do have in my possession, the unused portion of sapodilla wood from a dated lintel at Tikak (Group C. Str. 60) that my father saved, which I’m contemplating to someday have retested.
    Carl de Borhegyi
    For more visit mushroomstone.com

  6. Thanks for the information. I have partly discussed the radiocarbon dating issues in an earlier blog post: https://haecceities.wordpress.com/2010/12/09/2012-we-already-live-in-a-postapocalyptic-world-a-final-note-on-the-correlation-problem/

    Also, Aldana’s recent article on the inherent problems in Thompson’s and Lounsbury’s correlations make me believe that we are far from any solution to the correlation issue.

  7. Interesting! Eveybody jumps on the banbwagon and puts in their 2cents or is it a
    5min shot at glory? The point is, we, the human race are changing in our thoughts, words and deeds by becoming more concious or aware that we are not seperate!
    Coming from a small country as I do, I am well aware of it. Carl Calleman has given us a veiw that is different from all the ‘new age’ hype to that of a more
    realistic view of how the ancients may have seen the future and what is more, their thinking is not of the western mind. That hasn’t changed and thank goodness for that! We have to admit how quickly technology and sience are moving and the universe itself has been revealing more than ever before and especially in this time! There is a saying ‘Discussion is an exchange of knowledge; argument an exchangeof ignorance. Question; Are you Johan Normark are of the same mind when you wrote this or have you changed your thinking somewhat?????

  8. My mind is constantly changing but the fact that Calleman is a pseudoscientist remains the same. You say that “Calleman has given us a veiw that is different from all the ‘new age’ hype to that of a more realistic view of how the ancients may have seen the future and what is more, their thinking is not of the western mind. That hasn’t changed and thank goodness for that!”. Well, I do not know how much you have studied what the ancients’ themselves have to say but it is a far cry from Calleman’s mish mash of religion, new age and science. His interpretation is solely within a Western mind… Did you read this post? It is obvious for anyone who knows anything about the Long Count structure that Calleman has intentionally changed it to fit his own model. That is a true sign of pseudoscience.

  9. Pretty heady stuff for a layman who just wants the truth, I guess the truth is relative to a persons belief system albeit science or religion.
    Ive studied the bible for 15 years and definitely see more accuracy in the good book than I have seen elsewhere. The bible warns that Satan “can manifest as an angel of light……to tickle the ears of the unbelievers “. So mankind is susceptible to an abundance of alternative discussions or beliefs through the deceptive nature of the little man with a pitch fork.
    Why you may ask, to deny us a relationship with our creator and to have us thinking about anything but the truth.You see a house united will stand, a house divided will fall.
    I may be naive but I believe ultimately there can only ever be one truth concerning our existence. So the one that makes the most sense and encourages a loving self sacrificing spirit in the world is the one for me.
    Many of you may scoff at the thoughts that come from the bible, but listening to the alternatives expressed by many today, however interesting they are, and I freely admit, are thought provoking and interesting, sound far more ridiculous and tentative and have no real value for mankind.
    Whilst I mean no disrespect for any one or your views, there appears to be an ongoing and ever increasing number of explanations to the big three questions, Where did we come from?Why are we here? Where are we going? The bible, if used to prove itself, without infestation of human thought proves itself to be accurate, prophetically,historically and scientifically beyond doubt, however the one thing that stops people from believing the bible is by its very nature, it is in fact a living book, by which I mean you have to live by it to see its power manifested in a person and on society, it has value and power, something you could expect from a loving creator.
    Please don’t get the bible confused with religion, religion like science has become the domain of many who simply try and manipulate the writings, and people, with an adulterated concoction, a mish mash of ideas. Why, Pride is one reason, Power is another, and lets not forget, people like to have their ear tickled. You just need to check who’ s tickling your ear. My life partner is the only one I allow to tickle my ear.

  10. I disagree on pretty much everything you say.

    • no doubt,and predictable.

  11. Those 40 Days to December 8th, 2011 then complete a seven year anniversary, after starting December 8th, 2004 and so the ‘endtimes’ many ‘bible-students’ talk about as the fulfilment of the enscripted ‘prophecies’.

    The warpzone completes in the Easter Week of 2012 in the impregnation of the ‘New Gaia’; followed in Her Birth 9 month later at the December solstice 2012.

    Then exactly 360 days later, the Tony Bermanseder / Susan Lynne Schwenger Dragon date 16 dec 2013 at sundown, will complete the

    Mayan Grand calibration of precisely 9,360,360 Days or Mayan Kin on 13 Ahau 13 Mac or 13.1.1.0.0 so mirroring the October 28th, 2011 date in 13 Ahau 8 Zac or 12.19.18.15.0 and 1300-520=780=260+260+260 and so exactly 3 Tzolkien cycles later.

    The December 21st, 2012 date is also an Ahau date but root reduced in 13=1+3=4 to 4 Ahau 3 Kankin or 13.0.0.0.0.

    Tony Bermanseder & Susan Lynne Schwenger

    http://www.thuban.spruz.com/forums/?page=post&fid=F3D0C39E-7270-4160-80DE-61A397C1A988&lastp=1&id=0265D780-C9C1-46C1-80A1-A15795198653


Categories

%d bloggers like this: