Quite interesting - Mayan day/nights and earth periods

[unity100]

some piece of truth happening to be in a bunch of information, does not make that information valid or from a reliable source. the same kind of situation was there in the information moses received, but the source was mixed.

Dear unity100, in many ways, your scholarship of the LOO is exemplary and even unmatched from what I have personally seen. But if people need to benefit from that, then it is sort of necessary to be able to post without fear of derision or insinuations of ridicule. If straight off the bat we wish to downplay the assertions and questions of others, then it is difficult to move forward deeper into the territory. I personally benefited from Meerie's reference to Dolores. Spiritual truth is a strange entity, and it can reach out from the most unexpected quarter.

firstly, those who take objections, criticism, discussion as derision/insinuation/ridicule have no business discussing things in a discussion board, or group, or any place/situation that exchange of ideas are done.

second, there isnt a limit to when you may object/challenge a proposition. especially when any information supporting it, is not given.

in this case, proposition that mayas had ascended was put forth. upon querying, there was no information supporting that was given, but instead a 3rd source was referenced, without any summary, pointer or explanation, but in its place, assertion/reinforcement.

if the situation is at this point, it means that listening to other's point of view before discussing period has already passed -> you cant expect to assert a claim, and then reference a third party source that is of unproven reliability, especially when it requires consuming goodly amount of information from that source, even to see that the source is reliable or not - leave aside the actual information.

especially in a situation where you are discussing things in the light of a certain specific source you trust, and what is told in that source contradicts what is being told by that 3rd party.

so, we are past that point already. there are two options for anyone who is questioning now :

a) go and read immense material from a 3rd party source, to determine the source's reliability, and then proceed to determine the reliability of particular information in question - because the person who had had proposed the information have not given any pointers, arguments, evidence, cause, reason, rationalization.
b ) believe the reliability of the source and/or the information
c) challenge and question the given information, especially under the light that it contradicts the information that is given by a reliable source

in case you noticed, a) is basically impossible, because in that case anyone proposing any piece of information would cause others to spend a lot of time consuming 3rd party sources, without offering any determination or understanding of the reliability of the source beforehand.
b) is basically just belief.
c) is the course that one has to take in the light of a and b.