--- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > Just to rub it in a little, the above from Barry and > > Vaj is absolutely hilarious given (a) that we're > > talking about the Netherlands, as Lawson pointed out; > > Already dealt with. :-)
Uh, no. > > and (b) that what Barry refers to as the "obviously > > artificial structure" imposed by S-V on nature is in > > fact S-V's primary orienting principle, that buildings > > should face the sun (you know, that great big bright > > obviously artificial round yellow thing humans hung > > up in the sky awhile back). > > Just to help Judy a little with her physics, the > sun rises in the East only a few days each year. Due east, right. > Based on the following description from the > Astronomy Answers website, if what Judy says above > were true, the buildings in Vlodrop would have to be > built on movable foundations to face the great big > bright yellow thing consistently: If what Barry *interprets* me to have said were true, so would all the other structures built by humans to face the sun going back to prehistoric times. The point, of course, is that they're oriented due East, where the sun rises on the equinoxes. It's obviously not some artificial, arbitrary orientation but one based very precisely on the sun's position relative to a specific location on earth. Further, proper Vastu orientation is determined by true magnetic north, the orientation of the planet's magnetic field, also not an artificial, arbitrary pattern imposed by humans. Vastu, in other words, is an exclusively natural orientation. It's just on a much larger scale than the attempt to follow mundane local contours of the land. Its reference is the solar system, not the geographic features of the immediate area. <snip> > And, just for a final laugh on the subject, please > check out the PDF that contains one of the TM move- > ment's greatest moments, the planned "reconstruction" > of New York and Paris to "correct" them: Note that nowhere have I been defending Vastu, especially not as the way to build cities. My point all along has been that Barry and Vaj's criticisms of the layout of MMY's compound have been grounded in massive ignorance. They're criticisms *just for the sake of criticism*. It's one thing to express a preference for buildings that take advantage of local features of the land (although in this particular case, as I've noted elsewhere, the local features with which MMY's compound is at odds are themselves artificial) over Vastu orientation. It's quite another to claim that preference is based on dislike of artificiality, since Vastu principles are as natural as it gets. Further, of course, subsidiary Vastu principles require buildings to conform not only to the eastern orientation (i.e., alignment with the sun) but to local features such as hills and bodies of water as well, so Barry and Vaj really don't have a leg to stand on.
