Oh dear scientific salyavin, I am the only one who's doing the heavy lifting in favor of astrology here and I wasn't even too interested in the first place. I have clearly articulated the scope, parameters of how I use astrology and the goals I have. Considering the limitations of astrology and the reputation of astrology I have a very scientific approach that you should be proud of salyavin !!!
You surely missed the generous compliments Ann, raunchy, Share, Steve, Jim, LG, empty bill and others (non-active posters) offline have directed my way. Surely this is not some dumb, naive audience I'm dealing with here. You must suffer from some Oppositional defiance disorder? As Barry would say - what purpose does it solve? Whose suffering are you helping to resolve? John will come across as stupid with his predictions. No one can legislate reality, no one has an insight into reality. That's what happens studying with that idiot Sanjay. I said I don't know how astrology was cognized, I don't care how it works - it does, but your arguments are irrelevant. They assigned certain inner qualities on to planets and yes they use the actual mathematical calculations and astronomy. Apparently it has some validity, no one has ever been disappointed with my interpretations. As Richard would say - go figure, LoL! On Jun 12, 2013, at 2:38 PM, "salyavin808" <fintlewoodle...@mail.com> wrote: > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long <sharelong60@...> wrote: > > > > > > MJ: > > > > Why doesn't astrology consider outer planets? > > > > Judy has already explained that astrology is not trying to represent the > > solar system. > > Damn, I missed that post. Shame - I like a good laugh. > > > An example would help clarify - why is love associated with Heart? > > According to Wikipedia - "The heart is a hollow muscle that pumps blood > > throughout the blood vessels by repeated, rhythmic contractions". > > Scientists say that When you catch sight of your beloved and your heart > > starts racing, that's because of an adrenaline rush. > > > > Anyway it's accepted by everyone that love is associated to the heart, no > > one questions it. I know when my love was rejected I felt pain in my heart > > though it wasn't physical. The language of Urdu has many words for this > > "emotional heart" - for example "Dil" - Dil means heart - one that feels, > > and is not connected to the physical organ called heart. > > > > In a similar way the planets are not really planets of the solar system. > > Though apparently they are used for calculations. The planets in Jyotish > > are "Grahas" - animated beings, a certain intelligence attached to each > > planet. Such as Sun for soul, Moon for emotions, Mercury for intellect. > > > > Hope this helps. > > It helps underline what complete nonsense it all is. How can the > planets be used for calculations but not *be* the planets of astrology, what > sort of universe are we living in? Is it a > coincidence then that these alleged predictable influences > correspond with the movements of planets? > > Sounds to me like someone is trying to distance themselves > from the demolition of astrology that an understanding of > astronomy brings by inventing another unprovable theory that > permits planetary influences without having to endure the embarrassment that > the revised map of geocentrism brings to > any system that depends on fields. Namely that fields diminish > in strength by the reverse square of the distance. Ipso - > astrology cannot work. So, just invent something untestable > that uses the same markers but without having any inconvenient > physics to bring it crashing down. Brilliant! > > Anyone care to propose a mechanism to account for how it all > works even though it doesn't seem to be very good except for > John to tell us astoundingly accurate things after the event? > > Go on, this is fun. > >
