Meet the modern Timelords This was published today at The Eaminer.
I was texting on Facebook with a good friend the other night who had just finished communicating with Daniel Pinchbeck. Apparently Pinchbeck is not down with Carl Johan Calleman, who has openly questioned both Jose Arguelles' intention and count of The Mayan Calendar on a fairly new article on his site. According to Calleman, (I am paraphrasing here) Arguelles' is driven by the creation of his own mythology, where he places both himself and his partner Lloydine in significant, western, numerological positions, with Arguelles starting his own count, different from both Calleman and the other most prominent timelord, John Major Jenkins by inserting 11 and 22 into key positions on the calendar for themselves. Here is what Calleman has to say:
"Hence, I have earlier suggested that the Dreamspell “Mayan” calendar in fact is designed so as to give the birthdays of José and Lloydine exactly the “master numbers” 11 and 22 in the tzolkin (http://www.calleman.com/content/articles/hidden_agenda.htm). Large numbers of people, mostly under the illusion that they are using the true Mayan calendar, have then in fact unknowingly given their energy to the “masters” who designed it. Moreover, the kin numbers of everyone using this calendar are then defined by their relationships to the “masters” on whose kin numbers it was based. This scheme seems optimal for creating a cult of its inventors, something that the energies of the true cosmic Mayan calendar would never have allowed. I see no reason to doubt that such a scheme is the origin of their calendar since neither José nor Lloydine have cared to provide an alternative explanation and naturally it would be the easiest thing in the world to do so. It is possible that only José knows how the Dreamspell tzolkin actually was designed, but also the new biography (by Stephanie South) ignores the topic of why a new “Mayan” calendar was invented as a replacement for its true cosmic form."
Calleman also goes onto make a reference to Arguelles and the number, 33; To read more go to
The Examiner.
