The 2012 phenomenon was a complicated pseudoscientific belief propagated in the western hemisphere that the world would come to an end on December 21st, 2012. Although the exact origins of this idea are unclear, it has its roots in pseudoarchaeology and, in particular, a bizarre combination of ancient astronauts rhetoric, Mayanism, and mystical numerology that we have seen time and time again throughout this class. The “theories” as to how the world was supposed to end differ widely across the pseudoarchaeological community – some believe that date corresponded to the Nibiru cataclysm, the collision of earth with the fictional Planet X invented by Zecharia Sitchin (Morrison, n.d.). Others believed the date corresponded to a unique gravitational alignment that would lead to the creation of a massive black hole at the center of the universe (Morrison, n.d.). Still others boasted wild theories about cataclysmic solar flares, magnetic pole reversals, alien invasions, or supernovas. All of these ‘theories’ were backed up by (easily rebuked) ‘scientific evidence, observations of weakening of the earth’s magnetic poles, mathematical manipulations, analysis of Sumerian texts, and, most prominently, beliefs regarding the Mayan calendar (Morrison, n.d.).

The Mayan calendar, likely invented by the Olmecs but popularized and in use in the pre-contact Mayan era, was divided into a number of important time chunks, all contributing to the “long count” calendar, where after 13 bʼakʼtun (roughly 5,125 years), the calendar would reset to a “zero” date (Phillips, 2012). The Mayans believed the gods created the world as we know it at day 0 of the calendar, so pseudoarchaeologists have interpreted this calendar reset as the date the Mayans believed the world would end and reset, creating a new world from scratch. However, this interpretation not only ignores the archaeological and ethnographic context behind Mayan religious beliefs and the significance of the calendar but fails to address the difficulties of translating Mayan concepts of time onto our current methods of chronicling the passage of time, our current calendar (Morrison, n.d.). 

Although the turnover of the calendar would have been an important date for the Mayans, there is no archaeological evidence, ethnographic evidence, or evidence otherwise to support the idea that Mayans thought the world would end when the calendar turned over (Phillips, 2012). In fact, archaeologists agree that this was probably an event that signified something closer to renewal than destruction. Dr. John Carlson, a scholar of pre-Columbian Mesoamerica and a professor at the University of Maryland who studies how ancient people understood astronomy, stated that “many Maya believed that their gods who created the world 5125 years ago would return [in 2012].” Far from destroying the world, Carlson explained, “…an enigmatic deity named Bolon Yokte’ K’uh, would conduct old rites of passage, to set space and time in order, and to regenerate the cosmos” (Phillips 2012). 

The propagation of the 2012 apocalypse phenomenon plays into many familiar pseudoarchaeological tactics, figures, and beliefs explored in this class. As a result, the 2012 phenomenon fits neatly into the landscape of pseudoarchaeology. We see the reemergence of Zecharia Sitchin and the Nibiru, as well as a reliance on “ancient knowledge” as a literal interpretation of events. Furthermore, we see similar “hidden knowledge” within the numerology of the Mayan calendar as we see in the pyrimidiots and other mystical numerologists. We also see rhetoric that weaponizes scientific truths (like the weakening of earth’s magnetic field, a legitimate finding) by taking them out of context and failing to actually logically consider what they mean. And finally, we see 2012 phenomenon ‘theorists’ doing the same thing all pseudoarchaeologists rely on to make their points – taking archaeology out of context. By taking the Mayan long count calendar out of its cultural context, it is possible to make these sorts of wild claims without having to deal with the larger archaeological record, which (in this case) directly contradicts their claims. When you avoid having to deal with nuance, with true understanding, things like the 2012 phenomenon become easy to justify. But as soon as you bring greater context and knowledge about how archaeology and, indeed, science works, the logic falls apart.

Sources

1. Morrison, D. (n.d.). Nibiru and Doomsday 2012: Questions and Answers. Retrieved December 3, 2019, from https://web.archive.org/web/20130811134015/http://astrobiology2.arc.nasa.gov/ask-an-astrobiologist/intro/nibiru-and-doomsday-2012-questions-and-answers.
2. Phillips, T. (2012, December 22). Why the World Didn’t End Yesterday. Retrieved December 3, 2019, from https://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2012/14dec_yesterday.