There is a galactic alignment underway, and the apocalyptists are sensationalizing it. It is supposedly slated for a particular time and date in 2012 (though the Mayans reportedly only specified the 36-year era 1980-2016). As the local consulting astronomer to many, I'm getting tired of the questions already. This link is where I send those who ask about the alignment:astrolabe wrote:where do they get them and why do they send them to me?
http://alignment2012.com/whatisGA.htm
The alignment itself is astronomically interesting, and the link above has some good diagrams and succinct explanations. It presents the scientific facts well, though it doesn't come purely from the scientific camp as far as I can tell.
As the latest in a string of doomsday schedules (all prior ones having expired uneventfully), the 2012 alignment is presented in print and profusely on cable tv "science" channels in documentary format. Here are some problems I have with the presentation:
- The alignment is real enough, but there is no scientific reason it should result in cataclysm on Earth. Yet these "scientific documentaries" drum on cataclysm (everything from global warming to economic collapse) without evidence. They support it with astrology and Nostradamus.
- The alignment is a result of the precession of the Earth's equinoxes, not a result of a change in the tilt of the Earth's axis with respect to its solar orbit. Yet, through slippery phrasing, these "scientific documentaries" deliberately confuse a degree of precession with a degree of tilt to make potential disastrous climate changes part of their cataclysmic scenario.
- Climate changes (ice age cycles) resulting from periodic tilt changes and precession versus orbital major axis (which happen over tens of thousands of years) are real enough, as are the mass extinctions of 65 million and 250 million years ago. Yet, through slippery phrasing, these "scientific documentaries" deliberately confuse the two time scales to make the results of the tilt change (which isn't even directly involved in this alignment) sound more devastating.
- The alignment is with the galaxy's equator, not with the galaxy's center which currently lies 5.5 degrees south of the ecliptic, further down the galactic equator from where the ecliptic crosses. Yet, through slippery phrasing, these "scientific documentaries" deliberately confuse the two and try to make it sound more important by repeatedly referring to the "center".
- The point of the December solstice on the ecliptic will cross the galactic equator on a given time and date, but the date of the solstice and the date of the alignment are actually unrelated. Yet, through slippery phrasing, these "scientific documentaries" deliberately confuse the point of the solstice on the ecliptic (whether currently occupied by the sun or not) with the solstice itself (the sun at that point) to say the alignment will be on December 21. This date also brings "sunrise" into the alignment to attract the Stonehenge and Egyptology fans. It takes 36 years of precession along the ecliptic for the sun's entire disk to cross any point (including where it crosses the galactic equator) and an unknown time to traverse the "dark rift", so associating the Mayan calendar's original implication with any exact date seems unlikely.
So good luck to all you other local consulting astronomers as 2012 approaches.