On 05/27/2015 01:17 PM, salyavin808 wrote:
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <noozguru@...> wrote :
On 05/27/2015 12:52 PM, salyavin808 wrote:
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>, <noozguru@...>
<mailto:noozguru@...> wrote :
I have a friend who is a psychology professor who likes Nader's
ideas. I think Nader is mapping traditional planetary influences
to known areas of the brain that supposedly control those
influences. Of course the jury is out on astrology because
scientists are terrified that if it is thoroughly research it may
well have some value. I wouldn't worry much about opinions here
though. I often sit with people who think astrology is bunk and
with people (with science backgrounds) who think it has some
merit. Line on water.
Um, why would a scientist be terrified that astrology has some merit?
Because they fear being discredited.
If you prove that astrology is a good explanation of human
psychology or destiny you'll get a Nobel prize.
Not necessarily. Another field of interest for me over the years has
been archeology because there are new things discovered about ancient
cultures. Either Frontline or Nova did an episode years ago about how
the new ideas weren't accepted by the long time archaeologists because
they their strongly held theories and writings.
I think there have been many thorough tests into it and they
obviously drew a blank or it would be part of the mainstream.
That's how it works.
"I think" doesn't cut it. There haven't been thorough tests.
For one thing you have to know astrology to put together a proper
test. Most researchers don't know astrology or enough about it to
do a proper test. Then there needs to be funding.
Sorry, there have definitely been thorough studies of astrology.
And those are? There have been studies but they were certainly not
thorough.
But feel free to demonstrate its power here any time.
Power? How about "veracity?"
The main thing that's really stupid about King Tony's ideas about
astrology and the brain is that he only uses the planets visible
to the naked eye. If you get a bit objective about it you'll
realise that's as good a disproof as you'll need to treat the
rest of it with immense suspicion. If the guys research standards
are so low.....
For one thing the planets visible to the naked eye have centuries
of observation. The outer planets don't and may not have that
much influence. Some of these were discovered when perturbations
in Saturn's orbit were noted that couldn't be attributed just to
Jupiter.
Western astrologers speculate up what they think Uranus, Neptune
and Pluto do. We live in a sea orchestrated by planetary
influences which we humans are subservient to even if they are
subtle and not readily apparent. They are more like weather changes.
So the all-knowing ancients didn't include them in horoscopes
because they thought the effects were too small?
Some astrology 101 for you. Fast moving planets (the inner planets)
don't have strong effects because their transits are quick. Only slow
moving planets have strong effects. So mainly Jupiter, Saturn and the
lunar nodes can reflect problems in life. Fast moving planets not so
much. The latter (labeled Rahu and Ketu for the north and south lunar
nodes) of course are not visible but marked due to their correlation
with eclipses and disastrous effects that would occur around them (such
as earthquakes). Often if someone tells me they are going through a
rough time it is because of the transits of the lunar nodes in regard to
their horoscope.
Don't make me laugh. King Tony can't connect them to anything in
the brain because he'd have to invent new names for them which
would be an admission that the vedas are wrong. Or maybe he's so
brainwashed he didn't even think about it.....
All of his ideas stink to high heaven, his book of "discoveries"
is surreal in how much it's divorced from reality, but I actually
wish the universe was like that so I could go see an astrologer
and get some yagya's that work. But I can't, not without throwing
my money into bottomless pit of delusion. I've seen too many
people do that not to know that it's all bollocks.
Well that's just *your *opinion which you're entitled too. Like I say I
debate this with people like you all the time.
On 05/27/2015 11:39 AM, jr_esq@... <mailto:jr_esq@...>
[FairfieldLife] wrote:
MJ,
We're more interested in what you personally think of Nader's
ideas. If you disagree, specifically state why.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>, <mjackson74@...>
<mailto:mjackson74@...> wrote :
The very best part about this video are the comments - everyone,
please read them!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* "jr_esq@... [FairfieldLife]"
<mailto:jr_esq@...[FairfieldLife]>
<FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
*To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
*Sent:* Wednesday, May 27, 2015 1:31 AM
*Subject:* [FairfieldLife] Hacking Consciousness at Stanford
Here's an interesting lecture Dr. Tony Nader delivered at
Stanford University. He explained what happened before the Big
Bang and why it occurred.
Dr. Tony Nader - Hacking Consciousness at Stanford University,
Part 2 <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GqLs2knMngE>
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GqLs2knMngE>
Dr. Tony Nader - Hacking Consciousness at Stanford...
Dr. Tony Nader, MD, PhD (MIT, Harvard) reviews scientifically
hard and easy problems surrounding consciousness in biology and
cognitive science. He prop...
! View on www.youtube.com
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GqLs2knMngE>
Preview by Yahoo
