Coincidence

I believe that it is but a coincidence that 65 baktuns are

approximately equal to the period of the precession of the equinoxes

and that it is coincidence that the coming date of 0.0.0.0.0 in the

Long Count falls on a southern solstice in the middle of the Milky
Way.

You might think that it would have to be a very great coincidence,
because if you choose the length of 65 baktuns at random then the
chances of it happening to be about equal to the period of the
precession of the equinoxes would be very small, and if you fix the
date 0.0.0.0.0 at random (without regard to solstices or the Milky
Way), then the chances of it happening to fall on a southern solstice
in the middle of the Milky Way are also very small.

However, the probability of getting three sixes when casting three
dies is also very small, but if someone does cast three sixes then
that is not evidence of design or foul play. After all, if you cast
the dies, then you must get some result, and if the dies are
honest, then any result is equally probable, with the same very small
probability, so getting three sixes is then just as likely as getting,
for example, a two, and then a four, and then a three. This shows
that the improbability of an occurrence is not by itself proof of
design or foul play.

The observation that 65 baktuns are roughly equal to the period of the
precession of the equinoxes is by itself not evidence that the Maya
knew the precession, and the observation that the real 0.0.0.0.0 falls
on a southern solstice when the Sun is in the middle of the Milky Way
is therefore by itself no proof that the Maya must have designed their
Long Count with the solstice and the Milky Way in mind.

Without unambiguous evidence from the Maya themselves we'll never be
certain why they designed their Long Count in exactly the way they
did.

You can read more about the calendars of the Maya on the Historical Calendars
Page and more about planetary conjunctions on the Planetary Conjunctions Page.