--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <no_re...@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex" <do.rflex@> wrote: > > > > Yes, John. Let's put your Ayurveda and Jyotish to the test. > > This is your big chance. How about it? > > Isn't it fascinating to see exactly WHO is > already pre-apologizing and finding reasons > to NOT put Jyotish to a blind test? > > There is no trick here. The birth data is > accurate, the person is a real person, and > the medical condition is a real condition. > > JohnR will either run a chart and report his > findings or he won't. What the pre-apologists > say about it doesn't affect what he says one > way or another. Seems to me they're trying > desperately to get him not to try, because > they're afraid he won't do very well, and > that'll cast an unfavorable light on some- > thing that Maharishi not only believed in, > but sold for large sums of money. > > In other words, so far the only people who > have objected to this "blind test" are TBs > who are objecting for patently TB reasons. > If they really believed in the "scientific > validation" of the things they believed in, > they wouldn't be making a fuss now, would > they? They'd be as interested in the results > as I am. > > Instead, they're trying to make sure that > Jyotish is never put to the test.
Agreed. I was surprised to read so many attempts to belittle your experiment. This sort of thing is the only way to test jyotish. I've offered to post my details here before now for a chance to see what anyone comes up with. I wouldn't lie either. It might be the most revelatory thread we've had on here.
