Yesterday the news spread around the 2012 world that there is another ancient Maya inscription that mentions December 21, 2012 on the so called Comalcalco bricks. For example, Rob Bast wrote an entry called Dec 21, 2012: Second Mayan reference. That is wrong for several reasons. The date in question is a Calendar Round (CR) date, not a Long Count (LC) date. It happens to be the same CR as the one that ends on 13 Baktun. However, the CR repeats every 52nd year so it can be a completely different date. So when Bast writes that it refers to December 21, 2012 he is making several assumptions, one of them being the correctness of the GMT correlation.
However, let us assume this date is the same as the one mentioned on Monument 6 at Tortuguero, what does that tell us? For 2012ers this seems to imply that a 100% rise (from one to two) in the amount of known inscriptions mentioning 13 Baktun is staggering news. Bast argues that this “begs the question, how many more are there, kept secret?”. It has never been kept secret (this is just one of those tiresome conspiracy theories prevailing among lazy 2012ers and pseudoscientists). I suggest Bast do the hard work of going through all inscriptions. He has to do that work for himself and if he had done it he would have known about the bricks a long time ago. If Bast actually had studied Maya history rather than looking for comets he would have known that Comalcalco was conquered by nearby Tortuguero in 649 (GMT), during the reign of Bahlam Ajaw, the man responsible for the infamous Monument 6 at Tortuguero. So instead of two separate inscriptions referring to a future prophecy we may have two inscirptions related to one ruler who emphasized the 13 Baktun date more than any other known ruler. If the bricks are from his reign or later they may actually be related to this king rather than a future doomsday.
Update (December 13, 2011). Stanley Guenter elaborates on the “Comalcalco brick gate” on his blog.