--- In [email protected], "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In [email protected], doctor_gabby_savy 
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
> wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In [email protected], bhagwan_goose 
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" 
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > My point exactly. As you may have seen in my original post 
> back 
> > > to 
> > > > > > peter (to which you responded) if procession does not imply 
> the 
> > > sun
> > > > > > rising from different directions, for example from the west 
> > > 13,000
> > > > > > yrsr agos (half a precessional cycle), then why and how 
> does it
> > > > > > make SV invalid in the long run -- as Peter has argued.
> > > > > 
> > > > > I don't think your mental model is quite right,
> > > > 
> > > > Not the first time its been off. :)
> > > > 
> > > > > but I'm not sure exactly how it's off, so I don't
> > > > > know how to help you correct it. 
> > > > 
> > > > Do you therefore feel Peter's model is correct? If so, can you
> > > > explain why?
> > > 
> > > Wasn't following that closely, sorry.
> > >
> > 
> > Haha. OK. But since my post was a refutation of Peter's post, its 
> hard
> > to understand why you hold that my post is "off" if you don't
> > understand his post.
> 
> I didn't pay much attention to his post.  You said your
> mental image of precession wasn't clear; I tried to help
> with that.  

Yes. And I thank for that. But I am still seeking the visual model 
in my head that shows precession and its effects on the position of 
stars relative to earth (this is a major dif between jyotish and
western astrology -- the latter not taking precession into account)
and precession relative earth based directional orientations. Your
"spinning top" is part, but not the complete model I am seeking.

>But whatever precession has to do with proper
> Vastu, it has *nothing* to do with the sun rising in the 
> west.

And your view contradicts Peter's position. Thus, I was surprised that
while you don't get Peter's position  -- you view my position is off.
Yet my position refutes Peter's.

Anyway, see my adjacent post.

 






------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing
http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 


Reply via email to