> > BTW, what were Nokia doing in 1865? Can't have been 
> > much of a mobile network in those days...
> >
> Wood pulp.  Guess they diversified.
Rubber, 1865 to 1967.

> >>>>> I'm pretty good with what you're saying here. While astrology is an 
> >>>>> interesting concept I don't think it is a science because I don't think 
> >>>>> anything is provable. And I certainly wouldn't base who I was going to 
> >>>>> marry or not marry based on some astrological chart. I wouldn't use an 
> >>>>> astrological chart to determine where I should move and when. I don't 
> >>>>> think I would use any astrological data to make ANY decisions nor would 
> >>>>> I spend the time to learn how to read people's charts. But it is 
> >>>>> interesting to see how some are really believers and actually take this 
> >>>>> stuff into consideration when making life-altering decisions. But I did 
> >>>>> really appreciate Ravi taking the effort and time to give me a reading.
> >>>> FWIW:
> >>>>
> >>>> If I'd believed my own (partly playful) predictions (I seem to "recall" 
> >>>> it was at the end of 2009 or 2010) concerning the 5th Saturn Return of 
> >>>> Nokia Corp (b. 1865), I might be some 50 thousand euros "richer" now...  
> >>>> ;-(
> >>>
> >>> There you go Card, the perfect test for astrology. Make some predictions 
> >>> based on company start dates and let's see how well
> >>> they do. I won't invest if you don't mind as I have to remain
> >>> objective. I predict they will perform the same as randomly
> >>> picked stock except in a crisis where they will do worse.
> >>> Prove me wrong!
> >>>
> >> Well, of course that's a coincidence, but it mightn't be hard
> >> to guess how pissed off I've been as I "knew" the situation
> >> based on a simple astrological transit some two years in
> >> advance, but didn't act as  I should've on the basis of that:
> >> sell my shares and wait for NOK to almost plummet to buy them back
> >> near the lowest price for years... LoL!
> > I'd love to make a killing like that, must be satisfying but I lack
> > the know-how to get started in a risky business like that.
> >

Reply via email to