You are on page 1of 9

It is not the end of the world

Can we truly predict our own destruction?
Drama is the number one word that I would utilize to sum up the attitude of the world when it comes to our current understanding of prophecies and predictions for the future. We are now living in a world obsessed with the notion of destruction and global annihilation. The main question to ask is ‘why’. Why are people so fascinated by the idea of their own downfall and destruction even though they are still living each day in their own survival? In this article I want to explore the concepts that are currently circumnavigating our information highway relating to past and future and to destruction and end times. I want to highlight some important factors to take into consideration when accessing information and how people can themselves determine what is to be viewed as fact, fiction, or simply as an individual choice of a way to see their own reality. The first concept I want to look at, the big one on a lot of people’s minds is that of the 2012 prophecies. Not only are we obsessed with the notion that the world is going to end in 2012, but a lot of people are pressing the issue, individually hoping that soon the world is going to come to an end and that a great part of our whole civilization is going to die in the event. Firstly I do not have to write anything without people already coming to their own conclusion on this topic, with asking the question of ‘why’. Why would people even want to be obsessed with the thought of our whole civilization dying off in great mass? Personally this does not figure into my own mind, why someone would even want to imagine such things to have the necessity to play out. There is an important factor to take into consideration when accessing information surrounding prophesies and notions pertaining to the end of the world, and that relates to the fact that a lot of these notions are laying within a bed of fantasies created out of insubstantial information and facts that only hold themselves up based on choice of belief. I know that this might sound like a severe criticism on my part, however in this article I am going to highlight some of the factors that need to be taken into consideration before a person decides to delve into accepting these end times prophecies as facts. My whole philosophy surrounds the concept that people need to take their life in their own hands through their own choices for belief. This means that in this article I am not expecting that people take the information that I also give them as substantial knowledge, but to instead factor in as possibility that can at least be considered by choice or discarded if not deemed fitting to someone’s own choice for belief. What I want to do in this article is to get people to think

about possibility and what it really means, and to show how important it is to factor in understanding of past in future when it comes to reasoning a pathway for our future. In this article I am not going to just highlight issues surrounding the idea of 2012, but also talk about catastrophic prophesies in general. I want to also discuss the concept of ‘fact’ in relation to study that we do in our times, highlighting some of the important things to take into consideration even when assessing and dating our past through science. The most important topic that I want to highlight is the concept of past and future to which I have already discussed in a previous article called, ‘Do past and future really exist?’ In this article I discussed the concept of time in relation to perception, to which I will highlight again some of the points within this article relating to predictions whether they are of the past or future. I know already that when a person reads a book, or watch programs or movies on television, that what they seeing as truth is something that they do not ever consider as only being possibility and not substantial information when it comes to topics relating to the past and future. People forget the intrinsic part in the picture, and that is this, the people that they are watching or reading through the media are only but people, no different really to the person who is sitting on the couch watching the information coming fast and strong into their brains. As much as we look up to other people for the information that they decide to research and experience, they are still human, only but another person experiencing this life and reality. The person on the couch has just as much potential to explore the information that a person is discussing on television, if they so choose to experience that for themselves. It does not make someone an expert for the fact that they know certain things, but merely for the fact that they choose to look at the information more than someone else does care to consider. What this means is that what we consider expertise, it is really just relating to focus of attention. It does not mean that these people are experts on this knowledge and that they know all that is relating to what they are studying, only that they are choosing to focus on information surrounding certain topics that they are interested in, more than others. In the same token, if someone chooses to be seen as an expert this does not ever at any moment mean that they are totally all knowing and that they have the right to say that things are facts when they are really just based on creative analysis of observations of our world. These observations are not just assessed by them but also by every other person in this world, whether they care to look at the information or not. Assessment of information is something totally separate to observation, and needs to be understood when considering what to take on as fact or fiction. The only real truth is in the ‘now’ moment of space, which is the moment where we take our observation of the world through our eyes and transfer what we see into our brains, creating a database of information that has been accumulated over many times of observation. When a person observes the ‘result’ of an event, relating to the fact that the event occurred sometime in the past, without having experienced the event, certain factors need to be taken into consideration. It does not take a brain scientist to reason the most important notion, the ‘fact’ that past no longer exists in the now moment of space. That is why we call it past. When we look at a house that is littered with bottles of alcohol and rubbish we assume then immediately that a party may have taken place the night before. We take information from observation of space and reason our own conclusions in order to predict what had actually occurred. What if someone had just dumped all the rubbish into the house as a joke to someone? Maybe all the bottles and rubbish belonged only to one person who had been binging in the house for the last two nights?

I use the word ‘predict’, when it comes to past and future, for events that were not experienced by the individual. When we voice our opinion on what may have occurred it is always based on prediction. The only way a person can come to facts themselves is on an individual basis, and only when they experience the event that took place. Even if they were to talk to another person about what had occurred and if they were to say that a party took place, they have to factor in the possibility of lies and misinterpretation of the observation of space during the event from the standpoint of the person at the time. It does not take years of studying to know that people only take in a certain amount of information into their memory or particular moments within an event that they experience. Memory only stretches so far, and when it was studied it was considered that people only take in around 5 percent of information from their experiences. What this means is that when a person experiences the past within their mind they are only interpreting 5 percent of the facts relating to the entire event when they then try to describe their experiences to another. This 5 percent not only relates to the ability for a person to store knowledge into their brain, but also to the fact that people cannot be in more places at once. If they were to be at a party, they will not see the events that take place at the other side of the room. The person will only absorb 5 percent of information from what they are visualising in the space that is around them at the time, and only from their angle when it comes to observation and direction of focus. This angle also relates to what a person ‘chooses’ individually through their own personality to focus on at the time. Things become more relevant to a person and more prominent when it is something that they have an interest in at the time. They might be standing talking to 4 people but might only consider the words and the facial expressions of one person within this group based on their own interest in the people that they are talking to at the time. These things need to be taken into consideration when assessing the value of information being taken from the past into the now moment of our perception based on experiences. Facts then relating to someone taking in information from their own experiences of an event only ever relate to 5 percent of the entire picture, and only within the space to which that person has the ability to experience the event in part. This means that if we were to read a book or take in information on the television from others, that when we listen or read the recall of their own experiences, they are building up their story on 5 percent of knowledge of the entire event. If then they are a person who takes information from books of others this percentage reduces considerably. This also goes for video recording of events, that even though a recording can be replayed over and over it is still only a viewing of space from one angle of the entire picture. If a book is written by a person telling about their own experiences, they are building up their story based on 5 percent of memory that they have of that event having taken place from their own angle of experience. When a person however takes the information from another person’s writing or experiences and re-interprets this information, the percentage then reduces to almost nil, for the fact that the person who is reading the experiences of others has no recall of the event that took place and cannot totally conclude that what they are reading is fact or fiction. People have just as much ability to fantasize as the have the ability to lie and misinterpret information that they see, whether or not true experiences are acknowledge, these experiences are no longer existing within the readers time frame to be able to be reassessed. What this really means is that nothing is truth unless it is individually experienced, and even then a person can misinterpret what they are seeing through their observation of space. These

factors are important to take into consideration at every level of reality when deducing knowledge of the world and experiences, that truth is individual and pertaining to belief structures that are individually chosen for. With these factors in mind let us now look at the concept of 2012 again and search into knowledge relating to the current beliefs in the notion of end times. Most people probably already know that a lot of the 2012 prophecies come from the study of the past of people said to be from Mayan ancestry and relates specifically to a calendar that was found made out of stone showing strange symbols and markings of what is presumed to be faces and objects placed around a circular formation. Some time in our past there was a guy who came to the culture that was living in this area close to the sites where they found these objects and he studied the hieroglyphs that were presented on the stones. The sites that were founded had been long hidden away from the eyes of all humans, until a day that they were discovered by people wandering through the jungle, and they so happened to come across these old discoveries. What is said is that there was a man who when sighting the stones, had analysed the markings based on his own research and knowledge of a language being utilized in the area nearby the archaeological site, and of course through his own deducing, and observation he made at the time an assumption of what he was seeing. Apparently most of these books were destroyed relating to the study of this tablet, not that we would really know if this were true or not, but only a few remained for study by many people today wanting to interpret what the Mayan calendar means. What is interesting about the whole entire picture of these experiences is that the original stone was also only an observation of space taken on by the Mayan people of this time. This means that the stone is an observation based on beliefs and choices, taken on by a man reinterpreting the images himself based on his own beliefs and choices, and then now today we take this information on again, based on our own beliefs and choices. Now this information is not factually based, it has become fantasy induced, basing itself purely on assumption rather than true understanding of reality from experiencing in the now moment. This cannot be denied for the fact that the information can not also be proven. The only thing that can now be taken into consideration is possibility. This is the only thing that has a place when determining information in the now moment and visualizing it on the past or future. When observing now the stone through the now moment of space, we can deduce many things, firstly that there are symbols on the stone that are of observed in the moment, and when taking into consideration the stone against the other objects found at the sight there are obvious links to the sun and stars in relation to time and thus we commit to the thought that the stone represents a calendar. This is however how we interpret this stone based on our own observation of space and the artefacts that we are observing. These stones could very much be based purely on observation alone relating to the stars and the sun. There are many assumptions that can be deduced from the markings. However the most intriguing of all the notions coming from the Mayan calendar is the one where people deduce about the 2012 end times. People are saying that the Mayan Calendar will soon end. My first question is how is it possible that a circular object can ever have the ability to end or run out? People then conclude that when all markings are taken in as days they will run out of cycle eventually. Well of course if you count down from 100 you will eventually get to zero, however does zero mean that we are at the end or beginning? When I reach zero I can also count back to 100.

My second question is ‘why’, why do people want to prophesize such things for our future? This is the biggest question on my mind and the one I still find totally intriguing. Do people want this to occur? Do they want to watch all people around them die and experience their own life ending? Or is it linking to something far deeper within the human psyche and relating to the situation that we are now finding ourselves in within our world? It is one thing to fantasize about possibility; it is another for a person to fantasize about their own destruction. In my opinion this is based a lot on self destructive reasoning that comes from fear and situational circumstances. There is no truth in any claims of end times, only really a lot of people hoping for their own destruction or fearing the possibility that life will one day end. Yes, this is true that life will end for each and every one of us at some stage in our future. This is a fact that we can observe within time itself in the now moment, especially when we see the condition of the human body and when we visualize others on their journey through life. People die everyday all around us. This is a fact that people die, it is even occurring now in the world as I write these words, however it is not a fact to say that a person is going to die at a particular time in the future. No one has the ability to reason the exact time of their death, and for a good reason, otherwise they would be always focusing towards their own destruction. When we live life, we are living, not dying, so therefore considering death while living is really relating to something totally different than in just accepting facts that are observed around us. If someone ‘accepts’ facts when it comes to death they would not need to focus on the fact that death will one day occur. Accepting means understanding that it is an intrinsic experience of life, something that all of us will one day experience in relation to time when it comes to our memory and understanding of who we are. Focusing on death is something totally separate from accepting truth and possibility and comes from a person who either wants to end their life, or fears the end of their life. If someone has the desire to end their life it is probably a good thing to consider some things before they choose to fantasize about the means in which this will occur. It is one thing to fantasize something and it is another to experience it in the now moment. When we think about possibility, the thoughts come as visuals in our mind played with emotions created from our memory of particular feelings (please refer to my article ‘Emotions are learnt paradigms’). Emotions that we create in our mind are far different than feelings that we feel during an event taking place. The feelings are far more impacting on the body than the original thoughts of the possibility of an experience. Although we may glorify war and destruction in our mind and play computer games shooting people, when it comes to reality things are experienced far differently than we could ever expect through our romanticized view of power over death. We have no power over death, and when it comes to being placed in a situation where a person is risking their life, this comes into better clarity just through experience alone. It would then not be logical or wise to fantasize at all the destruction of ones self in order to try and eliminate a fear of death through trying to get power over it. It would never achieve its aim, instead only showing us in the end our true vulnerability. This vulnerability is based on fact, and that is that we are just a little human living on a big world and that we have the potential to die in any moment. Who really wants to continually focus on this anyway? It is like living a life that only wants to experience death rather than to experience what is in the moment through living. What would then be the use of living?

What needs to be taken into consideration is that a lot of our fears, and desires for death, come out of our circumstances and discomforts in our life. I read recently an article online by someone who took all the horrible situations in life globally and put them all into one article. This is someone focusing on destructive circumstances defining what they are writing at the time. The person who wrote the article obviously at the time saw the world as horrible in itself. Whereas I read another article relating to the beauty of flowers and gardening and the writing talked about how to enjoy each and every flower that blossomed in the garden. Both articles are describing two totally different areas of the same world, in an entirely different manner. If I were to ask you to choose out of both articles, the one focusing on the beauty of the world or the one that focuses on all the destruction in the world, which would you choose for? It is likely that a person will choose based on what they are feeling at the time, determined on their circumstances in life. If they are at the time sad and withdrawn about life they are more likely to want to choose to view things that are of a destructive nature and see it as the only possibility in life. This is the interesting thing about life, what we choose to participate in is what we then experience. If through our depression we choose to then focus on destruction we then are allowing these events to hold precedence. What this means is that for every person also experiencing the event itself of a destructive nature is choosing for it at the time based on their own circumstances. They are a part of these destructive circumstances because they choose to focus on it rather than to focus on things that are based on living and experiencing the beauty of life. If at the time a person is at a party where there is the potential that a fight might take place. The only way the fight will take place is if people choose to focus on it. Otherwise if people instead choose to focus on joking and laughter they will not then be inclined to fight. It is purely based on logics and now momentary observation and choice. This means that what we choose to focus on individually is what we will then see on our path of experience. However this does only relate to us individually in what ever circumstance that we come across. A person could very well have enjoyed a party where a fight had taken place away from them and not had anything to do with it or care for it. Both things can exist in the same area of space to where we exist, but what is chosen for comes purely down to what each individual decides to focus on through momentary situation and decisions. No one pushes us to choose these things in the moment. Instead we make spontaneous decisions based on our own beliefs, circumstances and choices. (Please refer to my article, ‘The Mind and Choice’.) What this means that in order for someone to want to focus on destruction of the world they are choosing for this based on what they either hope or fear to experience. When understanding the nature of what it is to be human, the focus we have on fears of change are easily understood when observing how a person experiences new things that are introduced to them in the now moment. This boils down to a person’s ability to adapt to change to which I write more about in my article, ‘Adjusting to Change’. Change is an inevitable part of our lives and the whole of reality. We will in every moment become something else and change in our perception and also in our position in life. Change is defined within time, through the moving of space in our perceptions. Time is however

relative as we are learning now today. It is what I call Polymorphic in nature (meaning ever changing), and relates purely to memory and the choice to see each moment in space linking to another in a linear fashion. What is really experienced however is the now moment in space, the moment where we are actualizing our experiences physically and outwardly. That is the only real truth that we have is our observational space in the moment of our experience. Memories of experiences are then conditionally chosen for and placed as a recording in our brains in order to be utilized within the moment of time, as a tool to enhance our experience. This tool allows us the ability to ‘learn’. When we then have new information coming to us that shows us the potential and possibility for destructive circumstances, we thus have the ability to learn how to deal with what we are observationally seeing. This leaning to adjust to what we are seeing is linking to our ability to adjust to change. Potential and possibility however do not mean that these events will take place. It only means that these events have a potential to exist. What is not reasoned is that everything has the potential to exist, especially if we focus on it. The only difference is that we have finally ‘discovered’ it within our now moment as being possible, and we are choosing to focus on it as if it is something new to us, making it something of curiosity and interest. What if the entire world would end? People wonder at the thought of such possibility. Well one thing is for sure, that if it does end you will not be here to see it, so it really defeats the purpose of wondering after all. What can be acknowledged is that a lot of our curiosity and fears come from our past learning experiences, things we have stored in our brains, that wonderful 5 percent of information that we draw into our brain from our own observation of the world. This does not at all make us experts in what has the possibility to occur, but merely curious observers of potential and possibility. Through our own development as a society and culture over time we are bringing into our knowledge arena information that comes from far more complex paradigms than we saw to exist in the past. We are learning to adapt to change through our curiosity for new discoveries and our need to find more things to experience. We are now in an amazing time when it comes to science and technology in our world, researching into areas that we never had the ability before based on our technological abilities. Through development physically we are bringing to us more means in which to observe our space, which makes for a much more intensive experience filled with new and exciting possibilities. It is extremely important to have the ability to enhance an experience in order to continue our basis and purpose for living. This does not mean however that all science and technology is beneficial to development or at all factual in its reasoning. It also evolves in its approach through learning and experiencing and adapting to change. Even when observing how we date things through our science through core samples, the study of this is changing with every new technology. If you think about core sampling logically it really is only observationally understood and not at all levels able to be reasoned unless we are observing past that is closer to our own time line. We link each line of sediment to a year or season in our past however we know logically that when we view the possibility of time playing out even in the space that we understand within our own experiences, that conditions are continually changing all around us. Taking into consideration also erosion, showing us that the depth of a core sample cannot have basis in time. Also taking into consideration the rising and lowering of land based on geometric conditions cannot ever be fully measured in

our own time frame for the fact that it can only ever be measured in thousands of years, at a much slower pace than we are as human existing within now. What we then get when we study the earth is a lot of interesting data without any real true answers to what actually happened. A lot of theorizing is then created in order to postulate what might have occurred. The important thing to consider is not if the events actually did occur, but that it is a possibility. In science this is not an issue, for the fact that they admit that they are postulating on ideas and that they are still ‘studying’ life and possibility, however when it comes to some other systems of belief that focus on determined ideas as being factual in nature, especially when relating to past and future, this is where logic and reasoning becomes second place. This is purely then based on belief and choice of what a person wants to experience individually. The only thing that we can deduce is that life is lived in the moment and that as we experience it we are discovering new things physically as we progress. I personally do not see a future that is paved in destruction, mostly because this is not my own personal focus. Even though there will be change that is occurring around us, (Please refer to my articles, ‘Earth changes, our bodies and our mind’ and ‘Changes within our world’), and also catastrophic occurrences that might come to us around the world, change is inevitable, no matter what it is and how it is seen. The future I am sure will also include many wonderful advancements in our own physical experiences. What I see for us way past 2012 is a future that builds upon itself through observation of space, based on advancement in science and technology being our main focus. We will move into the technology era into an era of space travel and an exploration of space to a deeper degree than we ever thought possible. Socially we will start to understand the importance of our material experience as well as our emotional understanding of the space to where we exist and how it is formed, through the understanding of the mind. Knowing how creation is formed will give us the intrinsic key in order to build upon our awareness of our reality. Through observation we will find who we are both inwardly and outwardly, and we will learn to understand the true depth of creation in order to define a future based in reasoning rather than purely based on emotions and fears. There is also a future paved in possibility, one where we can adapt to change and evolve into something new and exciting, if we so choose to focus on it. By Stacey T Pollock 8th July 2009

About the Author:
Stacey T Pollock is an author who writes about the mind and her personal perception of life and the physical world. She has written books to do with creation theory and the mind and matter, coming from the standpoint of a person who studies all viewpoints of life around her. Her philosophy in life is that we can obtain an understanding that links all philosophies together that can allow for creativity and choice on how we wish to experience life. 'Life is a perception of the mind; all the answers are within us' Visit Stacey T Pollock’s website at:

Other articles:
Technology and the future - Hadron Collider
What are the effects to consider through the utilization of free energy devices?

Consumerism, financial systems and the future
We are building towards a sustainable future that defines itself on one whole.

The Mind and Choice
Can we truly be mind controlled or are we just giving into influences?

Looking Towards The Future Through Our Developing Awareness
What does the future hold for us when it comes to the potential of technology and the opening up of our awareness?

Robots And The Future
Is it possible to create a humanoid robot that has a soul and emotions?

Changes Within Our World
What is happening to the earth and our bodies?