Curtis, Just about everyone in the movement has had their jyotish done -- probably more than once by more than one astrologer. And, I say, that's enough experimenting, let's draw some conclusions now from the data we have.
And, I'm willing to bet a serious chunk of dough that everyone has experienced the same general results as I have; namely, that jyotishi advice has zero predictive power, zero insight into the past of the person, and zero ability to tell a person what to do "next or right now." I paid (thousands of bucks spent) about a dozen of these "experts" to advise me repeatedly over a span of years -- not one of them hit any nail on the head. Stupid me for trying so hard and paying so much when my divorce, my parents' deaths, the number of my children, my business life, "moments at a crossroad of great import," none of the advice concerning these aspects of life ever amounted to "deep insight or how-could-they-know-that? moments." No astrologer ever told me something about my past that could only have been discovered by "some magic process." They always use phrases of great fuzziness like "you probably have more than one child," and if you say, "I'm childless," then they say, "Oh, I see now that you will use the children of the world as if your own." And on and on the con goes. I say it's time to call the emperor naked. If jyotish works, then where's all the millionaires in the movement, where's the 90% staying-married rate, where's the tragedies-avoided by timely advice, where's any insight of the least specificity like, say, "you had a great negativity on August 12th, 1968," or, hey, how about, "India is a golden country of exquisite harmony and peace." Like hovering, jyotish has had enough time to prove itself, and it's fallen on it's face every time. It's all crystal ball reading -- and by that I mean, some person with a robe on at a Renaissance Fair who says pleasant things to you inside a musty tent...yeah, that tawdry of a con. It's a "fool me in some way that I like and I'll pay you without a complaint" service. And that's it. In 5,000 years of tens of thousands of begging-bowl folks sitting on the sides of roads trying to figure out what can be offered the passers-by, it's no wonder that the "seers" of the world have figured out how to con the rubes with ego stroking. Funnily enough, scientifically speaking, the truth is that everything is infinitely referential, and ultimately, some giant computer on some planet somewhere can be so advanced and so intimate with the "vibes of manifestation," that any question can be answered. Ask the machine, "who is Curtis," and it instantly can surmise from the tiniest of tiny irregularities that, BAM, there, there's the entirety of Curtisness. I expect such a machine to be able to "read quarks" like you and I do these words. It is this concept that, amazingly to me, yields up a "god" that is omniscient and omnipresence, and that's a good start on godness, eh? If ya want a "heaven," there it is -- merely think of this machine being able to do some sort of Star Trek Hollideck thingy, and there you are in your fullest expression for anyone to interact with....a reincarnation of significant substantiality if we are relegating ourselves to physical manifestation only and ignoring the "witness" dynamic. This scenario doesn't answer the question: is the witness that experiences "Curtis now" the same witness that would experience "Computer generated Curtis." I'd say "yes," but the proof of that conclusion would be difficult to establish with mere words. So, given the above considerations, do you really think more testing of jyotish is worth anyone's time? Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" <curtisdeltabl...@...> wrote: > > I think this is a great idea and people's objections can be worked > into the test. If someone has a problem with Turq's credibility then > let's add some more people with medical and birth date examples. The > medical details can be emailed in advance to someone we all vote that > we trust, or better yet two people who get different names. I think > we need 4 people's charts. > > We just need someone who could be trusted not to skew the test. I am > too biased for such job but someone like Marek isn't. > > Of course the person doing the Joitish is doing the heavy lifting, but > I hope this would be interesting enough for them too. I mean even > without this being a scientifically valid test it is very interesting. > > I am biased against believing that humans know this kind of stuff. I > would love to have a few examples blow my mind in such a test. It > would certainly lead to me looking into it further. > > Even working out the protocol for such a test would be fun IMO. > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "John" <jr_esq@> wrote: > > > > > > Namaste, > > > > > > Your friend was born under the sign of Leo according to jyotish > > > rules, and the Moon is under the asterism or nakshatra of Revati. > > > > > > In the main chart or rashi kundali, The 7th house signifying the > > > prostrate gland is under heavy malefic influence with the Sun and > > > Mercury in it and aspected by Mars and Saturn (both are malefic). > > > > > > The subsidiary chart or navamsha kundali shows that the cancer > > > growth is located at the entrance to the prostate gland. This > > > area of the gland is under heavy malefic influence as well. > > > > > > The treatment may include surgery (due to the influence of Mars) > > > and radiation treatment (due to the influence of Rahu in the > > > navamsha chart). > > > > > > Recommendation > > > > > > 1. Take aggressive action to treat the cancer growth. > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > John R. > > > > John, > > > > While I understand that you believe in this > > Jyotish stuff, and actually believe that the > > information you post above is 1) valid, 2) > > useful, and 3) not based on having been told > > ahead of time what the medical problem was, > > I am less than convinced. > > > > So I propose another test. Here is the birth > > data for a friend who is having a medical > > issue. The nature of it will remain unstated, > > for obvious reasons, but suffice it to say > > that it is serious enough that it has required > > and still requires attention from doctors, and > > has the possibility of requiring surgery. > > > > Born: Suffern, New York, USA > > September 18, 1965 18:06 (6:06 p.m.) > > > > So what is my friend's medical issue, and > > what is the prognosis and best course of care, > > according to Jyotish? > > > > Waiting with 'bated breath... > > > > Turq > > >
