[FairfieldLife] Re: Prostate cancer. What to do
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter drpetersutp...@... wrote: Why all this resistance to surgery? Flax seeds? Give me a break. Once the horse has left the barn any nutritional approach is a tad late! Again, why all this resistance to standard medical procedures? I'm not suggesting conventional or non conventional but would like to share my brother's experience. His PSA was high for many years, 24, normal is around 2. He kept telling me for years that the majority of people with high PSA don't need surgery, that even with cancer, the progression is slow for most men and means nothing. One day he calls me and said that the doctor insisted on a biopsy and they found that the prostate was cancerous and was on the verge of metastasizing, cancer cells passing beyond the walls of the prostate into the blood stream. IOW, he caught it just in time. He found a guy in Southern California who had performed thousands of robotic procedures just as you described and had it done. His surgery was successful. His life was saved. Robotics according to him, is the way to go. It can decrease the side effect of loosing ability to control urination. This sometimes happens after prostate surgery. You're supposed to exercise this muscle after surgery. My brother is now in great shape and is happy he did it.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Prostate cancer. What to do
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. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, I am the eternal l.shad...@... wrote: He was born in St. Peter's Hospital, New Brunswick, Middlesex County, New Jersey, United States of America on February 14, 1948 at 6:20 PM., EST. My friend has an email in to Mark Toomey at the Raj where he had his consult in August. He's looking around for an oncologist who specializes in prostate cancer, not a surgeon. Surgeons get a result back from the biopsy that there's cancer and of course want to show off their spiffy new surgical robot. My friend has surfed the web and learned that often an oncologist will recommend against surgery because prostate cancer is so slow growing and often the form the cancer cells have taken don't indicate surgery. Of course my friend doesn't want to go into denial. If he needs surgery or radiation therapy or both he'll go for it. On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 2:33 PM, John jr_...@... wrote: Can you post his birth data, including time, date, city and country of birth? I'll check his birth horoscope and let you know what I find. JR --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, I am the eternal L.Shaddai@ wrote: I have a very close friend who has just been diagnosed with prostate cancer. 3 nodes of the biopsy have a Gleason Index of 7. Otherwise my friend is in excellent health and recently had an Ayurvedic consult at the Raj and was pretty much given a clean bill of health. My friend and I are debating what to do. My friend also lives in Austin, TX and has the best of medical insurance. He's got a consult scheduled with a world famous Urologist who has performed 1,200 Di Vinci robotic prostrate cancer surgeries. The odds are that my friend will retain full functioning except for that which the prostate provides because the robotic surgery is so targeted if he opts for surgery. I am urging my friend to not pursue alternate therapies including Ayurveda to handle the slowing growing cancer (PSA went from 4 to 12 in 7 years). IMO Ayurveda is a nice preventative but that's about it. It would be much better if this diagnosis were made in 2090, assuming humankind still exists then, but the options aren't so bad in 2009. Would anyone care to comment about what course of action my friend should take? Yeah, he's a long time citizen sidha and all that. To subscribe, send a message to: fairfieldlife-subscr...@yahoogroups.com Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links
[FairfieldLife] Re: Apple Quicktime Help
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter drpetersutp...@... wrote: Nabs, as I clicked to open your post, I said to myself, I bet he's going to tell me to get checked. Heck, I think I will! Very good, and a Happy New Year to you !
[FairfieldLife] Re: Prostate cancer. What to do
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_...@... 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
[FairfieldLife] Re: Prostate cancer. What to do
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... 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 Yes, John. Let's put your Ayurveda and Jyotish to the test. This is your big chance. How about it?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Prostate cancer. What to do
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rf...@... wrote: --- 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 Yes, John. Let's put your Ayurveda and Jyotish to the test. This is your big chance. How about it? Yes, do.rflex your trust in your fellow men is heartening ! For why on earth do you know that this person The Turq is refferring to is a real person ?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: spirituality spot found in brain
On Dec 29, 2008, at 8:52 PM, dhamiltony2k5 wrote: It's possible that most TMers are not in fact transcending in the full sense of that word and are merely experiencing thought-free states. transcendent and not samadhi? That is observed about the TM community by Spiritual teachers and folk who do come to visit. Comments often are that there is a development in some head or upper chakras but poor connection or integration of the whole subtle system. Comments about TM people may be bright in their heads but cut-off or under connected to throat, heart and with lower chakras. Is the nature of the TM community as it is seen. One very appreciative saint saying of the community also commented about it, there is a dry- ness while circling their hand in front of their heart area. Interesting, although (sadly) not surprising. Can you remember the particular teachers names?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Prostate cancer. What to do
On Dec 29, 2008, at 11:57 PM, Peter wrote: Why all this resistance to surgery? Flax seeds? Give me a break. Once the horse has left the barn any nutritional approach is a tad late! Again, why all this resistance to standard medical procedures? Raised on magical thinking.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Prostate cancer. What to do
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: --- 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 Yes, John. Let's put your Ayurveda and Jyotish to the test. This is your big chance. How about it? Yes, do.rflex your trust in your fellow men is heartening ! For why on earth do you know that this person The Turq is refferring to is a real person ? Looney Tunes.
[FairfieldLife] Re: spirituality spot found in brain
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradh...@... wrote: One very appreciative saint (?) saying of the community also commented about it, there is a dry- ness while circling their hand in front of their heart area. Interesting, although (sadly) not surprising. Can you remember the particular teachers names? Indeed, the TM'ers have a lot to aspire to. Contrary, ofcourse, to Buddhist's were ALL the chakras are in perfect attunement. [File:Burningmonk.jpg] http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/78/Burningmonk.jpg
[FairfieldLife] Re: Prostate cancer. What to do
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rf...@... wrote: Yes, John. Let's put your Ayurveda and Jyotish to the test. This is your big chance. How about it? Yes, do.rflex your trust in your fellow men is heartening ! For why on earth do you know that this person The Turq is refferring to is a real person ? Looney Tunes. Agreed. How long have you been on this forum, two weeks ? To trust The Turq to tell you anything with as much as a little core of truth is indeed looney.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Prostate cancer. What to do
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 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? Yes, do.rflex your trust in your fellow men is heartening ! For why on earth do you know that this person The Turq is refferring to is a real person ? Looney Tunes. Agreed. I was referring to you. I could elaborate but you're apparently incapable of self-reflection. How long have you been on this forum, two weeks ? IIRC, almost a year. To trust The Turq to tell you anything with as much as a little core of truth is indeed looney. I've been familiar with Barry Wright [Turquoise, Uncle Tantra] and what he writes for more than 10 years, Mr Nablusoss. What he asked for in his post to John is totally reasonable.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Prostate cancer. What to do
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: 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 Yes, John. Let's put your Ayurveda and Jyotish to the test. This is your big chance. How about it? Yes, do.rflex your trust in your fellow men is heartening ! For why on earth do you know that this person The Turq is refferring to is a real person ? It's a very real person, and a very real medical issue, and I am concerned about both. If John gets the condition correctly and has what seems to be useful information to pass along, I shall write to my friend and pass it along.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Prostate cancer. What to do
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rf...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@ wrote: snip To trust The Turq to tell you anything with as much as a little core of truth is indeed looney. I've been familiar with Barry Wright [Turquoise, Uncle Tantra] and what he writes for more than 10 years, Mr Nablusoss. What he asked for in his post to John is totally reasonable. Straw man; nobody said it wasn't. In the abstract, there's nothing wrong with it. But if you've learned *anything* about Barry from the 10 years you've been reading his posts, it's that he has absolutely no inhibitions about lying when he perceives it to be to his advantage to do so. (Goodness knows, he's lied about you plenty of times.) There's no reason to think he's telling the truth about having a friend with the birth data he supplied who has a particular medical condition. Since he wants to disprove Jyotish, it would be the easiest thing in the world for him to make up the friend and/or the data and/or the condition and then declare whatever John came up with to be wrong. There's no way for us to check the facts. If Barry wanted to disprove something *you* believed in, you'd be rightly skeptical about any test he came up with. The only reason you're so enthusiastic about this one is that you want to disprove Jyotish yourself.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Prostate cancer. What to do
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@ wrote: snip Yes, do.rflex your trust in your fellow men is heartening ! For why on earth do you know that this person The Turq is refferring to is a real person ? It's a very real person, and a very real medical issue, and I am concerned about both. If John gets the condition correctly and has what seems to be useful information to pass along, I shall write to my friend and pass it along. Why should anybody here trust you when you routinely lie like a rug?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Prostate cancer. What to do
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rf...@... wrote: How long have you been on this forum, two weeks ? IIRC, almost a year. To trust The Turq to tell you anything with as much as a little core of truth is indeed looney. I've been familiar with Barry Wright [Turquoise, Uncle Tantra] and what he writes for more than 10 years, Mr Nablusoss. What he asked for in his post to John is totally reasonable. Since you swallow every word, hook and sinkers The Turq writes I understand that you have not being paying attention. No person on this forum has been caught with his pants on his ancles as often as your hero. Not one. He has been caught as a liar again and again for years, and you have not noticed ? Are you blind ? He lies, that's what he does on a daily basis here on FFL, it's his hobby; he enjoy's it. Somehow it gives him some sort of satisfaction. This is his life and activity, hour upon hour, every day, 7 days a week on this forum, 50 posts every week all through the year ! I doubt he does anything else than posting here, perhaps he walks a dog or two and takes a drink at a bar. But working ? I think not, the internet is his passion and life. May I ask if you actually know the name of the person Turq is refferring to ? Did i hear you say no ? Of course you did because you have no idea if the person The Turq reffers to ever excisted. You have been lied to again.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Prostate cancer. What to do
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rf...@... 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Prostate cancer. What to do
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: If Barry wanted to disprove something *you* believed in, you'd be rightly skeptical about any test he came up with. The only reason you're so enthusiastic about this one is that you want to disprove Jyotish yourself. I was not aware of this, somehow I thought do.reflex was a proper fellow. To have Judy on this forum is often a relief.
[FairfieldLife] Making the Jyotish Test fair
John, My take on you is that you're honest enough to actually take a shot at this blind test. But there are some TM True Believers who are trying to get you to NOT perform the test, for their own TB reasons. Here is what I will do. As soon as I finish sending off this post, I will write an email to the three moderators of Fairfield Life, giving them the name of the person whose birth data I supplied to you, the nature of the medical issue they are facing, and what both medical doctors and alternative care providers say about it currently. Then, if you choose to do a chart for this person and pass along what Jyotish sees in their chart, at that point I will post to the public group what I am sending privately to the moder- ators. They can then verify if what I sent them is the same as what I post to the group. I can't do anything more than this to allay the fears that the TM TBs are trying to create in you. I'm really curious. In the past I have had Jyotish practitioners tell me things that were wildly inaccurate, and I have had those same Jyotish practitioners tell me one or two things that were uncannily accurate. So my position is that I JUST DON'T KNOW. Here's your chance to sway that not knowingness in one direction or the other. Please don't let a bunch of fearful TBs with their own agenda keep you from giving it a try. Turq/Barry --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... 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
[FairfieldLife] Re: Prostate cancer. What to do
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@ wrote: snip To trust The Turq to tell you anything with as much as a little core of truth is indeed looney. I've been familiar with Barry Wright [Turquoise, Uncle Tantra] and what he writes for more than 10 years, Mr Nablusoss. What he asked for in his post to John is totally reasonable. Straw man; nobody said it wasn't. In the abstract, there's nothing wrong with it. But if you've learned *anything* about Barry from the 10 years you've been reading his posts, it's that he has absolutely no inhibitions about lying when he perceives it to be to his advantage to do so. (Goodness knows, he's lied about you plenty of times.) There's no reason to think he's telling the truth about having a friend with the birth data he supplied who has a particular medical condition. Since he wants to disprove Jyotish, it would be the easiest thing in the world for him to make up the friend and/or the data and/or the condition and then declare whatever John came up with to be wrong. There's no way for us to check the facts. If Barry wanted to disprove something *you* believed in, you'd be rightly skeptical about any test he came up with. The only reason you're so enthusiastic about this one is that you want to disprove Jyotish yourself. Barry says: 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... The operative word is BATE. Get it? Barry isn't interested in what John has to say, he's only interested in John taking the BAIT so he can prove him WRONG and denounce Jyotish. So why not lie as well? L.Shaddai, There's plenty of magical thinking on FF Life and it has its place in the world of all things beautiful and spiritual but cancer is far too ugly and impatient for such refined consideration. Stick to the advice of an oncologist. I wish your friend well in his choice of treatment.
[FairfieldLife] Self-control and Religion
From the New York Times, 12.30.08. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/30/science/30tier.html Sacred values come prefabricated for religious believers, Dr. McCullough said. The belief that God has preferences for how you behave and the goals you set for yourself has to be the granddaddy of all psychological devices for encouraging people to follow through with their goals. That may help to explain why belief in God has been so persistent through the ages.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Making the Jyotish Test fair
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: John, My take on you is that you're honest enough to actually take a shot at this blind test. But there are some TM True Believers who are trying to get you to NOT perform the test, for their own TB reasons. Right on cue, a perfect demonstration of why Barry can't be trusted. Nobody has suggested that John not perform the test. I even said *explicitly* that it was a perfectly reasonable test. And I'd have zero objection to John following through. (Plus which, as Barry knows, I'm not a TM TB. He should also know from other posts that I'm not a believer in Jyotish.) The *problem* is that the person conducting the test is a known, thoroughly documented liar, so there's no basis to have any confidence in the results he announces either way. Here is what I will do. As soon as I finish sending off this post, I will write an email to the three moderators of Fairfield Life, giving them the name of the person whose birth data I supplied to you, the nature of the medical issue they are facing, and what both medical doctors and alternative care providers say about it currently. Then, if you choose to do a chart for this person and pass along what Jyotish sees in their chart, at that point I will post to the public group what I am sending privately to the moder- ators. They can then verify if what I sent them is the same as what I post to the group. Sounds good. We'll see how it works out. But Barry should note that he wouldn't have to go through this rigamarole and make public his friend's private medical data (has his friend given him permission to do so?) if it weren't for the fact that he has so completely destroyed his own credibility here.
[FairfieldLife] Global Warming Deniers Scrape Bottom of Barrel
http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2008/12/ denialists_scraping_the_bottom.php#more LINK
[FairfieldLife] Re: Making the Jyotish Test fair
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: But Barry should note that he wouldn't have to go through this rigamarole and make public his friend's private medical data (has his friend given him permission to do so?) if it weren't for the fact that he has so completely destroyed his own credibility here. Very good point. The Administrative Simplification provisions of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA, Title II) required the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to establish national standards for electronic health care transactions and national identifiers for providers, health plans, and employers. It also addressed the security and privacy of health data. As the industry adopts these standards for the efficiency and effectiveness of the nation's health care system will improve the use of electronic data interchange. I work with patients doing physical therapy rehab and it's a HUGE deal to disclose ANY information without permission. Expect a law suit if you do so.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Prostate cancer. What to do
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: How long have you been on this forum, two weeks ? IIRC, almost a year. To trust The Turq to tell you anything with as much as a little core of truth is indeed looney. I've been familiar with Barry Wright [Turquoise, Uncle Tantra] and what he writes for more than 10 years, Mr Nablusoss. What he asked for in his post to John is totally reasonable. Since you swallow every word, hook and sinkers The Turq writes I understand that you have not being paying attention. No person on this forum has been caught with his pants on his ancles as often as your hero. Not one. He has been caught as a liar again and again for years, and you have not noticed ? Are you blind ? He lies, that's what he does on a daily basis here on FFL, it's his hobby; he enjoy's it. Somehow it gives him some sort of satisfaction. This is his life and activity, hour upon hour, every day, 7 days a week on this forum, 50 posts every week all through the year ! I doubt he does anything else than posting here, perhaps he walks a dog or two and takes a drink at a bar. But working ? I think not, the internet is his passion and life. May I ask if you actually know the name of the person Turq is refferring to ? Did i hear you say no ? Of course you did because you have no idea if the person The Turq reffers to ever excisted. Whatever credibility Barry may or may not have, Mr Nablusoss, in my eyes -you- have less. In my view, you're little more than a clueless, nasty little man who's a sycophantic parrot for the TMO party line.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Making the Jyotish Test fair
The emails have been sent to the three moderators. But, in light of the prediction I made yesterday about how obsessed Judy is with me, and how the percentage of her posts that mention me in the coming year will *demonstrate* that obsession, I will comment on this quote of hers before the new year starts and I stop mentioning her, even obliquely. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: But Barry should note that he wouldn't have to go through this rigamarole and make public his friend's private medical data (has his friend given him permission to do so?) if it weren't for the fact that he has so completely destroyed his own credibility here. What Judy is really saying is that she *hopes* that SHE has been able to destroy my credibility. I suspect that anyone who has been following the action here on FFL since she first stalked me here will agree that that's *exactly* what she has been trying to do. It's also *exactly* what she tries to do with Vaj, with John Knapp, with Paul Mason, and eventually with almost everyone who publicly challenges TM, the TMO and Maharishi. In the past few months, as she went way, way, WAY over the top with her Hillary crap and claims of death threats, my suspicion is that the person who has zero credibility on this forum is her. And I further suspect that she knows this, and that this knowledge is what fuels her obsession with me, and will guarantee that in the coming year she will spend a minimum of 38% of her posts to this forum replying to mine or commenting on them in an attempt to destroy my credibility. It's a revenge thang. And one that would be pathetic in a Junior High School student. To see it in a 68-year-old woman who has been practicing TM faithfully for 30 years is mind-boggling, and makes me question her sanity. I don't think I'm the only person on this forum who does.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Prostate cancer. What to do
On Dec 30, 2008, at 8:52 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rf...@... 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. In the interest of fairness and accuracy, I have just consulted that oracle of truth and wisdom, The Magic Ouija Board, and it has verified that yes, without a doubt, Barry's person is real and he is NOT LYING. What more could anyone ask for? Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: Prostate cancer. What to do
--- 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.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Prostate cancer. What to do
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Hugo richardhughes...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: snip 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. Not the experiment; Barry.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Prostate cancer. What to do
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_re...@... 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
[FairfieldLife] Re: Making the Jyotish Test fair
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: The emails have been sent to the three moderators. But, in light of the prediction I made yesterday about how obsessed Judy is with me, and how the percentage of her posts that mention me in the coming year will *demonstrate* that obsession, I will comment on this quote of hers before the new year starts and I stop mentioning her, even obliquely. Anybody want to make a Jyotish prediction as to how long that will last? guffaw --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: But Barry should note that he wouldn't have to go through this rigamarole and make public his friend's private medical data (has his friend given him permission to do so?) if it weren't for the fact that he has so completely destroyed his own credibility here. What Judy is really saying is that she *hopes* that SHE has been able to destroy my credibility. What Barry is really saying is that I keep documenting his lies. The interesting thing is that as frequently as he attacks me, he almost never challenges it when I point out that he's lied. I suspect that anyone who has been following the action here on FFL since she first stalked me here A flat-out lie. Barry *invited* alt.m.t participants to join him on FFL. I've quoted the post here in which he did so (and would be happy to quote it again if anyone is skeptical). will agree that that's *exactly* what she has been trying to do. It's also *exactly* what she tries to do with Vaj, with John Knapp, with Paul Mason, With Vaj, John, and Paul, yes, indeed, because they're dishonest. I'm hardly the only one here to have recognized this. , and eventually with almost everyone who publicly challenges TM, the TMO and Maharishi. But this, of course, is another lie. Barry really doesn't seem to be able to stop himself from lying. Reality, unfortunately, isn't quite what he'd like it to be, and he simply cannot deal with that, so he has to compulsively create his own. In the past few months, as she went way, way, WAY over the top with her Hillary crap and claims of death threats, my suspicion is that the person who has zero credibility on this forum is her. Actually, the death threats thing was one of the very, VERY few times anyone here has ever challenged my credibility, and that was based on interpretation, not a question as to matters of fact. And I further suspect that she knows this, and that this knowledge is what fuels her obsession with me giggle , and will guarantee that in the coming year she will spend a minimum of 38% of her posts to this forum replying to mine or commenting on them in an attempt to destroy my credibility. As long as Barry continues to say things that aren't credible, yes, indeed, he can be sure I'll point them out. If he'd like for me to *stop*, all he has to do is stick to the truth.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Prostate cancer. What to do
In the interest of fairness and accuracy, I have just consulted that oracle of truth and wisdom, The Magic Ouija Board, and it has verified that yes, without a doubt, Barry's person is real and he is NOT LYING. What more could anyone ask for? Sal I would like to see a cross reference with divination by sheep intestines (the other popular technology for predicting the future) if you don't mind. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunsh...@... wrote: On Dec 30, 2008, at 8:52 AM, TurquoiseB 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. In the interest of fairness and accuracy, I have just consulted that oracle of truth and wisdom, The Magic Ouija Board, and it has verified that yes, without a doubt, Barry's person is real and he is NOT LYING. What more could anyone ask for? Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: Self-control and Religion
Marek Reavis wrote: From the New York Times, 12.30.08. . . . Sacred values come prefabricated for religious believers, Dr. McCullough said. The belief that God has preferences for how you behave and the goals you set for yourself has to be the granddaddy of all psychological devices for encouraging people to follow through with their goals. That may help to explain why belief in God has been so persistent through the ages. Marek, Wondering if you'd agree with my take on this. If I substitute the phrase DNA-hardwired axioms that have survival value for the term, God, then I'm okay with the conclusions above. Oh, it's not actual God-God, (not saying God exists,) but attempting to arrive at a meat-robot's least state of excitation could be interpreted as contacting God -- that is, a source of 'universal' goodness. Calmness is a state of untriggeredness, yes? The world can use all the untriggeredness it can get, right? That's not untriggerableness, so we don't have to be worried that apathy is being inculcated in the personality -- decades of TM doesn't seem to produce folks who only sit on their butts for instance. For this reason, I can be okay with anyone meditating-praying (via almost any method) and thinking of it as a mystical experience of intimacy with an outside agency of infinite potency. Why not have a warm fuzzy fantasy, eh? -- we're all buying into unsubstantiated projections all the time, like, McDonald's burgers are good food, so look at the ecological damage that that belief has done to the world. Maybe it hasn't risen to the level of damage that organized religion has foisted upon us, but it's a contender, sez moi. Folks dwelling on an inner soft buzz,when compared to those chowing down on burgers seem far less likely to harm the world after a buzz than a burger. Thinking Christians should follow the golden rule is NOT a dwelling upon calmness; thinking of parochial religious values doesn't necessarily involve attending to an inner buzz. Two different beasts altogether. Contacting this pure set of values within at least has a chance of fractionally re-calibrating our day to day value patterns. It seems to be a universal experience that quietening the nervous system puts one in a state that is less prone to the spontaneous manifestation of knee jerk negativity -- if two folks are snuggled in each other's arms and, say, half dozing with a reverie of some sort -- even this state is not resonant with most types of negativity since most negativity is found to entail a higher excitation of the nervous system, and leaving snuggy-wuggy-ville is not initially inviting. So, reverie et al at least dips the cloth into the dye of centeredness, and after that experience, one's a bit jiggier with calmness, and one's skewing away from that may become easier to catch and stop at the onset, because of such spiritual practice. Obviously these are generalities for which there are exceptions, but calmness itself can be a goal to which human psychology can become addicted -- in the good sense -- in that, leaving the state of calmness is known to be fraught with the various experiential perils. See? Meditate, snuggle, whatever, and you become jiggy with your calm self and are more likely to eschew activities that prongs your ass out on the street with an urgent agenda. But who has such sophistication or the time to dwell upon matters long enough to get clarity about such things? Cult joiners, yeah, but most folks just don't have the time or circumstance to culture themselves. For this reason, I see organized religions that have some sort of prayer activity being marketed to the general population as providing a spiritual skill with some virility. Yeah, money and power have saturated these organizations, and we know the evil thereof, but at least the masses have been given a technique to know calmness. It's a start, and who says that the masses are easily led to any trough -- might be a bigtime achievement just to have trained them enough to sit still for awhile, ya know? Take a walk through Walmart and just on intuition alone take a survey of those who you spontaneously surmise would be interested in the least in introspection. The religions of the world may have had folks from pre-scientific times and hammered their various cultures with intellectual priorities (ten commandments etc.,) but the inner calmness experienced during, say, a heartfelt inner repetition of the Lord's prayer, will have an calmness is good agenda that is modeled to the entire psychology -- not merely the philosophical parts. See? The words of the prayers can be interpreted as a weak brainwashing of sorts, but the calmness achieved by the rote technique may have deeper impact compared to the rather superficial instructional impact of the meaning of the words. Until science comes up with a machine that can reprogram electro-meat with exactitude, prayer of almost any sort is a good tool to use until
[FairfieldLife] Re: Prostate cancer. What to do
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltabl...@... wrote: In the interest of fairness and accuracy, I have just consulted that oracle of truth and wisdom, The Magic Ouija Board, and it has verified that yes, without a doubt, Barry's person is real and he is NOT LYING. What more could anyone ask for? I would like to see a cross reference with divination by sheep intestines (the other popular technology for predicting the future) if you don't mind. I tried to verify Sal's findings using my Magic 8 Ball, but unfortunately all I got was Reply hazy. Try again. Then again, that's a more honest prediction than the ones Lou Valentino makes. More accurate, too. :-) I honestly do think that this would be a fun, if non-conclusive test. The most fascinating thing about it, as I mentioned to the moder- ators in my email to them, is that this medical condition was actually predicted by a Jyotish practitioner a year before it appeared. Therefore, if one Jyotishi was able to see it in this person's chart, why wouldn't another one? Or maybe the first one just got lucky. That is *precisely* why this is an interesting test to me, and should be to those who wish to prove Jyotish credible. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunshine@ wrote: On Dec 30, 2008, at 8:52 AM, TurquoiseB 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. In the interest of fairness and accuracy, I have just consulted that oracle of truth and wisdom, The Magic Ouija Board, and it has verified that yes, without a doubt, Barry's person is real and he is NOT LYING. What more could anyone ask for? Sal
[FairfieldLife] Audio and video of MMY
From a friend: This is a phenomenal website if you want to listen to audio or see video tape of His Holiness Maharishi Mahesh Yogi and his master Swami Brahmanand Saraswati http://www.spiritualregeneration.org/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Making the Jyotish Test fair
TROLL ALERT. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: The emails have been sent to the three moderators. But, in light of the prediction I made yesterday about how obsessed Judy is with me, and how the percentage of her posts that mention me in the coming year will *demonstrate* that obsession, I will comment on this quote of hers before the new year starts and I stop mentioning her, even obliquely. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: But Barry should note that he wouldn't have to go through this rigamarole and make public his friend's private medical data (has his friend given him permission to do so?) if it weren't for the fact that he has so completely destroyed his own credibility here. What Judy is really saying is that she *hopes* that SHE has been able to destroy my credibility. I suspect that anyone who has been following the action here on FFL since she first stalked me here will agree that that's *exactly* what she has been trying to do. It's also *exactly* what she tries to do with Vaj, with John Knapp, with Paul Mason, and eventually with almost everyone who publicly challenges TM, the TMO and Maharishi. In the past few months, as she went way, way, WAY over the top with her Hillary crap and claims of death threats, my suspicion is that the person who has zero credibility on this forum is her. And I further suspect that she knows this, and that this knowledge is what fuels her obsession with me, and will guarantee that in the coming year she will spend a minimum of 38% of her posts to this forum replying to mine or commenting on them in an attempt to destroy my credibility. It's a revenge thang. And one that would be pathetic in a Junior High School student. To see it in a 68-year-old woman who has been practicing TM faithfully for 30 years is mind-boggling, and makes me question her sanity. I don't think I'm the only person on this forum who does.
[FairfieldLife] One last point about the Jyotish Test
To the three moderators of FFL: Please don't reveal what I sent to you in email *unless* someone steps up to the plate and does a Jyotish analysis of my friend's birth data. This little experiment is like poker. You don't get to see the other players' cards unless you put your chips in the pot.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Dictators that left power on advice of Maharishi Mahesh Yogi by telephone
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of nablusoss1008 Sent: Monday, December 29, 2008 2:20 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Dictators that left power on advice of Maharishi Mahesh Yogi by telephone Yes He did. When Marcos rejected Maharishis plans for the country He smiled and said; All have to carry their own cross. 2 weeks later Marcos was on a plane heading for Hawai. Same thing with the other fellows. Voluntary ? Of course not. Coherence created by Maharishi made them leave. Yeah, but you indicated that Maharishi spoke to them by phone and personally convinced them to leave, not merely that coherence drove them out. That's what I was trying to clarify.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Letters on TM from religious/spiritual leaders
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, BillyG. wg...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@ wrote: -Original Message- From: David Orme-Johnson [mailto:davi...@] Sent: Monday, December 29, 2008 2:06 PM To: David Orme-Johnson Subject: Letters on TM from religious/spiritual leaders Dear Colleagues, The fact that the TM program has been derived from an ancient tradition in India and revived by a man revered there with a spiritual title, of course should have no bearing on the validity of the use of the TM program. The TM program is not Hinduism, therefore, any more than Einstein's theory of relativity is Jewish, or Genetic theory, conceived of by Monk Gregor Mendel is considered to be Christian. The practice of the program involves no religious beliefs but is a mechanical and effortless technique for experiencing increasingly refined or restful levels of mental and physiological activity enjoyed by individuals of all religious (and non-religious) backgrounds. I think this observation is preposterous, as if TM existed in a vacuum! Well, tell that to my totally atheistic son, who learned when he was much younger and still rolls his eyes at my obsession with the Maharishi Effect, etc, and still does his program 2x a day. He's missed perhaps 2-3 times in the past decade and comments that he finds it uncomfortable to miss. Can you accept that everyone isn't as TB about the practice as you are? L.
[FairfieldLife] Re: My New Year's Resolution and Seeing Prediction For 2009
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: [...] He stupidly wasted a good chunk of political capital on his choice of Warren, which is too bad, because he's going to need every single last bit of it once he gets to the White House. With whom did he waste his political capital? Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Power of jyotish (Re: Prostate cancer. What to do)
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 witha 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
Re: [FairfieldLife] Power of jyotish (Re: Prostate cancer. What to do)
Duveyoung wrote: 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 witha 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 Jyotish is meant to be more a weather report anyway, nothing exact. It is close enough that each ascendant can give an idea of what the person's career path should be and what periods are going to be bad or good for them and in what way. It is more likely based on the planets being markers for naturally occurring cycles than they (outside of the sun and moon) have any direct effect.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Prostate cancer. What to do
--- 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. I volunteer. If anyone wants to see what they can spot about me they are welcome to have a go. I've never said anything about my career or health here so it will be fun to see what comes up. I've got to log off for the night but will check in tomorrow and if it looks like a go project I'll send my details to whoever. Just let me know. Lets shift a few paradigms! Or not as they case may be... --- 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
[FairfieldLife] Re: My New Year's Resolution and Seeing Prediction For 2009
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig lengli...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: [...] He stupidly wasted a good chunk of political capital on his choice of Warren, which is too bad, because he's going to need every single last bit of it once he gets to the White House. With whom did he waste his political capital? Why are you pretending you don't know the answer to that?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Letters on TM from religious/spiritual leaders
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig lengli...@... wrote: Well, tell that to my totally atheistic son, who learned when he was much younger and still rolls his eyes at my obsession with the Maharishi Effect, etc, and still does his program 2x a day. He's missed perhaps 2-3 times in the past decade and comments that he finds it uncomfortable to miss. That's an interesting case! Most people seem to need some kind of belief system to keep up a regular practice of any kind. Would you say that it is *purely* that he enjoys it? Or is his motivation that he feels that it is good for his health or something?
Re: [FairfieldLife] New paper on TM and ADHD
On Dec 30, 2008, at 12:41 PM, Peter wrote: They call this an exploratory study for a good reason. The method is a simple pre-post measure with the subjects as there own controls. The problem with this is that there is no independent control group to control for the impact of hidden variables across time on the subjects. So, a causal relationship has not been established between TM and the reduction of ADHD symptoms. Yeah, as per usual, NO or bad controls. What struck me, after decades of research, these people are STILL just doing pilot level studies! It's as if they just keep moving on to new pilot studies and then pushing the announcements via their considerable marketing wing to the press. I guess what matters is that they appear to be doing something consistently and that will somehow give them credibility. After all they have over (woo-hoo) 600 studies! I would predict that if they had used a simple control of closed eyes 20 x 2 with an instructions to effortlessly pursue a positive series of thoughts, and to return to that positive thought process non-judgmentally if they go astray, there'd be no significant difference at all between the controls and the TMers.
[FairfieldLife] Power of jyotish (Re: Prostate cancer. What to do)
So, given the above considerations, do you really think more testing of jyotish is worth anyone's time? Edg Hey Man, I do agree with most of what you said,(I couldn't follow the god argument) and have basically come to the same conclusions for my own beliefs. But I thought it would be a blast if John could nail a few and throw a wrench into my surety.It wouldn't be conclusive or change much, but I would enjoy that experience if he could pull it off. OTOH I would gain something if a person was unable to pull it off. It would throw a wrench into their surety that gave them internal permission to jazz up good common sense advice with a little joitish says so epistemological push-up bra. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung no_re...@... wrote: 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 witha 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 curtisdeltablues@ 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
[FairfieldLife] Re: New paper on TM and ADHD
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradh...@... wrote: But Vaj, three out of four dentists surveyed PREFER Crest! On Dec 30, 2008, at 12:41 PM, Peter wrote: They call this an exploratory study for a good reason. The method is a simple pre-post measure with the subjects as there own controls. The problem with this is that there is no independent control group to control for the impact of hidden variables across time on the subjects. So, a causal relationship has not been established between TM and the reduction of ADHD symptoms. Yeah, as per usual, NO or bad controls. What struck me, after decades of research, these people are STILL just doing pilot level studies! It's as if they just keep moving on to new pilot studies and then pushing the announcements via their considerable marketing wing to the press. I guess what matters is that they appear to be doing something consistently and that will somehow give them credibility. After all they have over (woo-hoo) 600 studies! I would predict that if they had used a simple control of closed eyes 20 x 2 with an instructions to effortlessly pursue a positive series of thoughts, and to return to that positive thought process non-judgmentally if they go astray, there'd be no significant difference at all between the controls and the TMers.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: New paper on TM and ADHD
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of curtisdeltablues Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2008 12:02 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: New paper on TM and ADHD --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , Vaj vajradh...@... wrote: But Vaj, three out of four dentists surveyed PREFER Crest! The fifth dentist caved: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JlzSsAAyUYQ
[FairfieldLife] Barky fiddles while Gaza burns
[Obama] Unfair to say? You betcha! But this is a gotcha moment the likes of which would have been visited upon George Bush by the Left had Bush -- even as president-elect -- been found in this position. Come on, Offal_World and Bongo Brazil, be consistent in your derogatory worldview and chide Barack for being insensitive by golfing at this time of crisis! You know you would have done that to Bush.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Prostate cancer. What to do
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, I am the eternal l.shad...@... wrote: I have a very close friend who has just been diagnosed with prostate cancer. 3 nodes of the biopsy have a Gleason Index of 7. Otherwise my friend is in excellent health and recently had an Ayurvedic consult at the Raj and was pretty much given a clean bill of health. My friend and I are debating what to do. My friend also lives in Austin, TX and has the best of medical insurance. He's got a consult scheduled with a world famous Urologist who has performed 1,200 Di Vinci robotic prostrate cancer surgeries. The odds are that my friend will retain full functioning except for that which the prostate provides because the robotic surgery is so targeted if he opts for surgery. I am urging my friend to not pursue alternate therapies including Ayurveda to handle the slowing growing cancer (PSA went from 4 to 12 in 7 years). IMO Ayurveda is a nice preventative but that's about it. It would be much better if this diagnosis were made in 2090, assuming humankind still exists then, but the options aren't so bad in 2009. Would anyone care to comment about what course of action my friend should take? Yeah, he's a long time citizen sidha and all that. I skimmed through these threads about your friend. I take it you are in Texas. If he hasn't been there already, I recommend MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston for evaluation. http://www.mdanderson.org/ Better than roaming from one expert to another. Given the limited facts your presented (age, Gleason score, PSA, but not tumor grading or PSA doubling rate) I likely would not do watchful waiting and I would not rely on Curcumin and the like! Prostate cancer treatment has so many options and each individual is different, so don't take anything for advice here. (Other than what I said about visiting a major cancer center, like MD Anderson). Best wishes to you and your friend.
[FairfieldLife] Re: New paper on TM and ADHD
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter drpetersutp...@... wrote: They call this an exploratory study for a good reason. The method is a simple pre-post measure with the subjects as there own controls. The problem with this is that there is no independent control group to control for the impact of hidden variables across time on the subjects. So, a causal relationship has not been established between TM and the reduction of ADHD symptoms. Â Dear Colleagues, Â This paper on just came out. It shows TM practice reduces stress and anxiety, and improves ADHD symptoms and executive function in 11-14 year old kids. Â All the best, Â David Of course your are right Pete, but Orme-Johnson's statement above is not. I wish he wasn't such a salesman.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Self-control and Religion
Edg, comments interleaved: ** --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung no_re...@... wrote: Marek Reavis wrote: From the New York Times, 12.30.08. . . . Sacred values come prefabricated for religious believers, Dr. McCullough said. The belief that God has preferences for how you behave and the goals you set for yourself has to be the granddaddy of all psychological devices for encouraging people to follow through with their goals. That may help to explain why belief in God has been so persistent through the ages. Marek, Wondering if you'd agree with my take on this. If I substitute the phrase DNA-hardwired axioms that have survival value for the term, God, then I'm okay with the conclusions above. ** If I substitute DNA-hardwired axioms that have survival value for God in the sentence I quoted (above) it makes no sense to me at all. Nevertheless, I think I get what you're saying, but even then it becomes something of a tautology -- things that have survived (like religion and/or the belief in god) have survival value -- yes, I agree, but it's hard not to agree. ** Oh, it's not actual God-God, (not saying God exists,) but attempting to arrive at a meat-robot's least state of excitation could be interpreted as contacting God -- that is, a source of 'universal' goodness. ** Contacting god wasn't the thrust of the article, but rather the ethical/moral structure of religion, if one earnestly practiced the religion, seemed to assist the individual in achieving greater success in their goals outside of their religious practice. A way of training the mind in self-control by providing guidelines to determine success and failure within that specific context which has ramifications outside of the venue of religion. ** Calmness is a state of untriggeredness, yes? The world can use all the untriggeredness it can get, right? That's not untriggerableness, so we don't have to be worried that apathy is being inculcated in the personality -- decades of TM doesn't seem to produce folks who only sit on their butts for instance. For this reason, I can be okay with anyone meditating-praying (via almost any method) and thinking of it as a mystical experience of intimacy with an outside agency of infinite potency. Why not have a warm fuzzy fantasy, eh? -- we're all buying into unsubstantiated projections all the time, like, McDonald's burgers are good food, so look at the ecological damage that that belief has done to the world. Maybe it hasn't risen to the level of damage that organized religion has foisted upon us, but it's a contender, sez moi. Folks dwelling on an inner soft buzz,when compared to those chowing down on burgers seem far less likely to harm the world after a buzz than a burger. Thinking Christians should follow the golden rule is NOT a dwelling upon calmness; thinking of parochial religious values doesn't necessarily involve attending to an inner buzz. Two different beasts altogether. Contacting this pure set of values within at least has a chance of fractionally re-calibrating our day to day value patterns. It seems to be a universal experience that quietening the nervous system puts one in a state that is less prone to the spontaneous manifestation of knee jerk negativity -- if two folks are snuggled in each other's arms and, say, half dozing with a reverie of some sort -- even this state is not resonant with most types of negativity since most negativity is found to entail a higher excitation of the nervous system, and leaving snuggy-wuggy-ville is not initially inviting. So, reverie et al at least dips the cloth into the dye of centeredness, and after that experience, one's a bit jiggier with calmness, and one's skewing away from that may become easier to catch and stop at the onset, because of such spiritual practice. Obviously these are generalities for which there are exceptions, but calmness itself can be a goal to which human psychology can become addicted -- in the good sense -- in that, leaving the state of calmness is known to be fraught with the various experiential perils. See? Meditate, snuggle, whatever, and you become jiggy with your calm self and are more likely to eschew activities that prongs your ass out on the street with an urgent agenda. ** Your basic premise, that practicing calmness repeatedly and chronically (by whatever means available), will have salutory effects on behavior, I totally agree with. ** But who has such sophistication or the time to dwell upon matters long enough to get clarity about such things? Cult joiners, yeah, but most folks just don't have the time or circumstance to culture themselves. For this reason, I see organized religions that have some sort of prayer activity being marketed to the general population as providing a spiritual skill with some virility. Yeah, money and power have saturated
RE: [FairfieldLife] Barky fiddles while Gaza burns
What do you expect him to do? He's about to step into the world's most demanding job, but he's not in it yet. I don't begrudge him a vacation. BTW, Bush is on vacation now too. Maybe he's the one you should be criticizing for doing that. He's the president, sort of, although he was never actually elected. Obama is conferring daily with Condoleezza Rice, and it's probably a two-way conversation.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Letters on TM from religious/spiritual leaders
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig lengli...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, BillyG. wgm4u@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@ wrote: -Original Message- From: David Orme-Johnson [mailto:davi...@] Sent: Monday, December 29, 2008 2:06 PM To: David Orme-Johnson Subject: Letters on TM from religious/spiritual leaders Dear Colleagues, The fact that the TM program has been derived from an ancient tradition in India and revived by a man revered there with a spiritual title, of course should have no bearing on the validity of the use of the TM program. The TM program is not Hinduism, therefore, any more than Einstein's theory of relativity is Jewish, or Genetic theory, conceived of by Monk Gregor Mendel is considered to be Christian. The practice of the program involves no religious beliefs but is a mechanical and effortless technique for experiencing increasingly refined or restful levels of mental and physiological activity enjoyed by individuals of all religious (and non-religious) backgrounds. I think this observation is preposterous, as if TM existed in a vacuum! Well, tell that to my totally atheistic son, who learned when he was much younger and still rolls his eyes at my obsession with the Maharishi Effect, etc, and still does his program 2x a day. He's missed perhaps 2-3 times in the past decade and comments that he finds it uncomfortable to miss. Can you accept that everyone isn't as TB about the practice as you are? L. There are all sorts of levels of belief, and I am sure that we all agree on that. And doesn't the true believer maintain no belief is required if you just do it? Anyway, at my level of belief--simple mediation is a relaxation technique--my theory is that it is uncomfortable for him to quit because he has made a strong habit out of meditating. If he did quit odds are in a month he wouldn't miss it. Not that I am saying he should quit. So, you have a son? Me too. Fun, huh. :)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Making the Jyotish Test fair
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog raunchy...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: But Barry should note that he wouldn't have to go through this rigamarole and make public his friend's private medical data (has his friend given him permission to do so?) if it weren't for the fact that he has so completely destroyed his own credibility here. Very good point. The Administrative Simplification provisions of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA, Title II) required the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to establish national standards for electronic health care transactions and national identifiers for providers, health plans, and employers. It also addressed the security and privacy of health data. As the industry adopts these standards for the efficiency and effectiveness of the nation's health care system will improve the use of electronic data interchange. I work with patients doing physical therapy rehab and it's a HUGE deal to disclose ANY information without permission. Expect a law suit if you do so. Hum. I think that Barry's disclosure, if he makes disclosures, isn't a HIPAA problem. He is not a medical provider nor doe he contract with medical providers, nor is he an employer or insurer. He is just a guy who knows stuff about another guy. Now whether the person would have an invasion of privacy claim, I don't know. We would have to ask one of the lawyers.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Making the Jyotish Test fair
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: a 68-year-old woman who has been practicing TM faithfully for 30 years is mind-boggling, and makes me question her sanity. I don't think I'm the only person on this forum who does. This is so funny. Once in a while The Turq will use the Judy-sanity-TM in the same sentence. It is bound to happen, happens regularily every so often, several times a year as it happens ! As for the Turq/Barry problem; increasingly people on FFL find it mind- boggeling that a fellow who left the TMO in disgrace, having been told to keep physically away from Maharishi by His Secretaries more than 30 years ago, still has not been able to let go or move on. Yet claiming to be a Buddhist ! There is a lack of sanity in your hatred towards Maharishi. Pardon my language. But it is rather obvious.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Barky fiddles while Gaza burns
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer r...@... wrote: What do you expect him to do? He's about to step into the world's most demanding job, but he's not in it yet. I don't begrudge him a vacation. BTW, Bush is on vacation now too. Maybe he's the one you should be criticizing for doing that. He's the president, sort of, although he was never actually elected. Obama is conferring daily with Condoleezza Rice, and it's probably a two-way conversation. Rick: Did you bother to read my comments accompanying the photograph? Obviously you didn't. Why don't you read my comments, retract the ones above, and then, if you still feel to, make some new comments.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Making the Jyotish Test fair
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity no_re...@... wrote: snip Hum. I think that Barry's disclosure, if he makes disclosures, isn't a HIPAA problem. No, it's not a HIPAA problem per se, but it sure as heck isn't good form to reveal information about a named person's medical condition without their permission, for many of the same reasons the HIPAA regulations were instituted in the first place.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Making the Jyotish Test fair
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: a 68-year-old woman who has been practicing TM faithfully for 30 years is mind-boggling, and makes me question her sanity. I don't think I'm the only person on this forum who does. This is so funny. Once in a while The Turq will use the Judy-sanity-TM in the same sentence. It is bound to happen, happens regularily every so often, several times a year as it happens ! And each year he carefully adds a year or two extra onto my age...I'll be 90 before you know it!
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Barky fiddles while Gaza burns
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of shempmcgurk Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2008 1:29 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Barky fiddles while Gaza burns --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , Rick Archer r...@... wrote: What do you expect him to do? He's about to step into the world's most demanding job, but he's not in it yet. I don't begrudge him a vacation. BTW, Bush is on vacation now too. Maybe he's the one you should be criticizing for doing that. He's the president, sort of, although he was never actually elected. Obama is conferring daily with Condoleezza Rice, and it's probably a two-way conversation. Rick: Did you bother to read my comments accompanying the photograph? Obviously you didn't. Why don't you read my comments, retract the ones above, and then, if you still feel to, make some new comments. You said: Unfair to say? You betcha! But this is a gotcha moment the likes of which would have been visited upon George Bush by the Left had Bush -- even as president-elect -- been found in this position. Come on, Offal_World and Bongo Brazil, be consistent in your derogatory worldview and chide Barack for being insensitive by golfing at this time of crisis! You know you would have done that to Bush. OK. You're just saying were the tables turned and Bush were President-elect, some FFL members would be unfairly criticizing him for taking a vacation.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Letters on TM from religious/spiritual leaders
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig lengli...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, BillyG. wgm4u@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@ wrote: -Original Message- From: David Orme-Johnson [mailto:davi...@] Sent: Monday, December 29, 2008 2:06 PM To: David Orme-Johnson Subject: Letters on TM from religious/spiritual leaders Dear Colleagues, The fact that the TM program has been derived from an ancient tradition in India and revived by a man revered there with a spiritual title, of course should have no bearing on the validity of the use of the TM program. The TM program is not Hinduism, therefore, any more than Einstein's theory of relativity is Jewish, or Genetic theory, conceived of by Monk Gregor Mendel is considered to be Christian. The practice of the program involves no religious beliefs but is a mechanical and effortless technique for experiencing increasingly refined or restful levels of mental and physiological activity enjoyed by individuals of all religious (and non-religious) backgrounds. I think this observation is preposterous, as if TM existed in a vacuum! Well, tell that to my totally atheistic son, who learned when he was much younger and still rolls his eyes at my obsession with the Maharishi Effect, etc, and still does his program 2x a day. He's missed perhaps 2-3 times in the past decade and comments that he finds it uncomfortable to miss. Can you accept that everyone isn't as TB about the practice as you are? L. I don't think your anecdotal story addresses the issue, it seems to have more relevance to his particular belief system. It doesn't even begin to address the issues surrounding Religion and TM(not Religion and your son)!
[FairfieldLife] Re: Making the Jyotish Test fair
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_re...@... wrote: As for the Turq/Barry problem; increasingly people on FFL find it mind-boggeling that a fellow who left the TMO in disgrace, having been told to keep physically away from Maharishi by His Secretaries more than 30 years ago... The TBs are getting desperate. Not a word of this is true, and Nabby knows it. Furthermore, JUDY knows it, and is not calling Nabby on his lie because she's doing the same thing he is with her insinuations that I'm somehow viol- ating my friend's privacy by posting my little test. At least Nabby had the balls to state his lie outright. Judy took the weasel route and cloaked hers by phrasing it the first time she said it as if she were merely asking a question and not plant- ing an insinuation. It's a technique of lying she learned from Limbaugh and Cheney and their ilk. Ask yourself this question, folks -- if I'm violating my friend's privacy, where did I get the birth data? We're both waiting to see whether JohnR will take up the challenge. As for Nabby's lie, I'm sure Jerry Jarvis would be able to tell you it's not true. I am always amazed at the lengths a TM True Believer will go to to demonize someone. And to try to hide the fact that the real reason they're doing it is *because* they're TBs.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Prostate cancer. What to do
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... 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 Barry, In my dealings with you, I found that you have already a predisposed opinion about TM and the vedic sciences which is not positive to say the least. We have also noticed that no matter what the facts are or what the rationales are, you continue to disbelieve in these sciences. So, it would not be reasonable for me to get into this experiment since I already know what you are thinking and that you are going to prove it wrong whatever I say. Jyotish is also for people who are sincerely looking for help. It is not for people who have a bias against it. Given this background, it would not be wise to get involved with this so called experiment-- which is really a set up for your own entertainment. Nonetheless, I will take a look at the chart and analyze it. If I see anything earth shaking, I will notify the group...or maybe not. JR
[FairfieldLife] Re: Barky fiddles while Gaza burns
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer r...@... wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of shempmcgurk Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2008 1:29 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Barky fiddles while Gaza burns --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , Rick Archer rick@ wrote: What do you expect him to do? He's about to step into the world's most demanding job, but he's not in it yet. I don't begrudge him a vacation. BTW, Bush is on vacation now too. Maybe he's the one you should be criticizing for doing that. He's the president, sort of, although he was never actually elected. Obama is conferring daily with Condoleezza Rice, and it's probably a two-way conversation. Rick: Did you bother to read my comments accompanying the photograph? Obviously you didn't. Why don't you read my comments, retract the ones above, and then, if you still feel to, make some new comments. You said: Unfair to say? You betcha! But this is a gotcha moment the likes of which would have been visited upon George Bush by the Left had Bush -- even as president- elect -- been found in this position. Come on, Offal_World and Bongo Brazil, be consistent in your derogatory worldview and chide Barack for being insensitive by golfing at this time of crisis! You know you would have done that to Bush. OK. You're just saying were the tables turned and Bush were President-elect, some FFL members would be unfairly criticizing him for taking a vacation. I don't think I would, actually. The Gaza situation isn't a crisis that immediately affects the security of the United States. It doesn't even require the president to be in the White House. There's not much Bush can do except keep tabs on what's going on and consult with foreign policy advisers, maybe call officials in Israel and Gaza, and he can do that just as well at Camp David. Aside from staying informed, there's even less the president-elect can do, or should do, for that matter. There'd be no need for him to sit home playing solitaire to avoid appearing insensitive.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Prostate cancer. What to do
On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 12:42 PM, ruthsimplicity no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, I am the eternal I skimmed through these threads about your friend. I take it you are in Texas. If he hasn't been there already, I recommend MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston for evaluation. http://www.mdanderson.org/ Better than roaming from one expert to another. Given the limited facts your presented (age, Gleason score, PSA, but not tumor grading or PSA doubling rate) I likely would not do watchful waiting and I would not rely on Curcumin and the like! Prostate cancer treatment has so many options and each individual is different, so don't take anything for advice here. (Other than what I said about visiting a major cancer center, like MD Anderson). Best wishes to you and your friend. After lots of reading and looking at my friend's doctor's website at http://www.prostatecenterofaustin.com/cancer.php , of a number of things, which I've conveyed to my friend: 1) To accept the curcumin and other things I ordered for him and start taking them while waiting for his doctor visit. To want to do anything more with the neutraceuticals is just magical thinking. I went to the various websites supplied by yifuxero. I read the testimonials there. I didn't read as many glowing reports as yifuxero did. Nothing really about cancer. Now I was able to Google some things about prostate cancer and curcumin. Curcumin does sound very promising and exciting. It may explain why Indian men don't often get prostate cancer but American men do, very frequently. It looks like curcumin should have been a part of my friend's diet, starting decades ago. But as Peter said, once the horse has left the stable, well it may be true that curcumin does slow down the growth of prostate cancer and that medical researchers are looking at how to come up with a drug based on curcumin. But neither it nor the other things recommended are magic bullets against cancer. Oncologists aren't that biased and dumb. I attract doctors around me, though none of my friends happen to be urologists or oncologists. Though weary, they really want what's best for the patient, assuming insurance will allow it. If a food like flax seed or a spice like curcumin did work, really work against cancer, oncologists would be all over it like white on rice. 2) To immediately cut out the megadoses of vitamins and minerals my friend has taken for decades. It looks like megadoses encourage the growth of advanced prostate cancer and a Gleason sore of 7 is well into the advancing stage. 2) That a Gleason score of 7 on 3 nodes (but still at stage T0, no visible or palpable sign of cancer) is defined as moderate aggressive. There is actually a risk to life at this stage, though the odds of complete recovery are very good if one opts for the robotic surgery. This is far past the time of hopeful watching with or without nutritional aids. It's time for action and the best action right now appears to be the robotic surgery. Very neat, very clean, very good at getting out the cancer but leaving as much as possible intact. Recovery won't be the neatest thing, having to have a catheter/bag for 8 days and having to do physical therapy to get control of the bladder sphincter back. But this surgery does a lot less damage than cryo, inserted radiation rods or external radiation beam. The $25,000 HiFu available outside of the US might have been an option in the hopeful watching period and there is no track record on for this treatment. 3) That my friend lucked out with getting one of the best urology clinics in Texas and getting a consult with a very thorough and trained urology surgeon. Looking over the website, I get a very good feeling that Dr. Fagin will be very easy for my friend to talk with and that he will be open minded to all options for treatment and has been down this road many times before. Dr. Fagin has started prescribing every other day Viagra (to priests as well?) during recovery because doing so has been shown to bring one's sexual ability back. I feel that going to MD Anderson in Houston or some famous cancer clinic elsewhere might be overkill, though of course I will suggest that my friend get a second opinion. Now as far as Ayurveda, well my friend went to see Mark Toomey at the Raj the same day I did. My friend had this cancer then and mentioned his high PSA to Mark. Mark did not detect it. So much for Ayurveda, which may have shortened the lives of many THMDs, THPs and members of the TMO, what with the heavy metals and the tendency of Ayurvedic preparations to fight the effects of radiation, cancer drugs and chemical altering of hormone levels (because many cancer cells thrive in estrogen or testosterone). A trip to Lourdes and tramping around the world sounds like a good idea if you've got something that can't be cured. But if it's about not wanting to go through the recovery of what is
[FairfieldLife] Re: Prostate cancer. What to do
bravo! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_...@... wrote: --- 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 Barry, In my dealings with you, I found that you have already a predisposed opinion about TM and the vedic sciences which is not positive to say the least. We have also noticed that no matter what the facts are or what the rationales are, you continue to disbelieve in these sciences. So, it would not be reasonable for me to get into this experiment since I already know what you are thinking and that you are going to prove it wrong whatever I say. Jyotish is also for people who are sincerely looking for help. It is not for people who have a bias against it. Given this background, it would not be wise to get involved with this so called experiment-- which is really a set up for your own entertainment. Nonetheless, I will take a look at the chart and analyze it. If I see anything earth shaking, I will notify the group...or maybe not. JR
[FairfieldLife] Re: Prostate cancer. What to do
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_...@... wrote: Barry, In my dealings with you, I found that you have already a predisposed opinion about TM and the vedic sciences which is not positive to say the least. That is a fair thing to say about my opinion of the so-called Vedic Sciences. I don't think I have a non-positive opinion about TM per se (the technique itself). I think it's a potentially valuable beginner's technique of meditation, and wish that it was still taught at a reasonable cost, and without all the TMO baggage. We have also noticed that no matter what the facts are or what the rationales are, you continue to disbelieve in these sciences. You have noticed that no matter what arguments you have presented so far, I remain unconvinced that practices such as Jyotish are valid, much less that they are sciences. So, it would not be reasonable for me to get into this experiment since I already know what you are thinking and that you are going to prove it wrong whatever I say. I am giving you the benefit of the doubt by assum- ing that you are replying to the posts in order, as you come across them, and have not read what I have done to ensure that I can't do what you are accusing me of above by claiming that you already know what I am thinking. The data is already in the hands of Rick, Alex, and Gull. They have my full permission to repost it if what I say in response to your posted analysis of this person's chart differs in any way. Jyotish is also for people who are sincerely looking for help. It is not for people who have a bias against it. My contention, and my reason for posting this little test, is that I believe Jyotish *depends* on people having a bias *for* it. My contention is that if that bias were not present, its customers would not view the predictions they receive as being as accurate as they think they are with that bias in place. You have the opportunity to disprove my contention. What you do with that opportunity is up to you. Given this background, it would not be wise to get involved with this so called experiment--which is really a set up for your own entertainment. It is definitely, no bullshit, 100% a setup for my own entertainment. It will be entertaining whether you take me up on the challenge or not. Nonetheless, I will take a look at the chart and analyze it. If I see anything earth shaking, I will notify the group...or maybe not. With all due respect, John, if you *fail* to notify the group of whatever you find, earth-shaking or not, you do not have the right to ever refer to Jyotish here in the future as a science. Science is about predictions that can be verified. The mechanism is in place to verify the accuracy of yours. It is not in my hands; it's in the hands of the FFL moderators. If your science requires that someone believe in it before it works, it's not much of a science, now is it? You will either see something interesting in the chart or you won't. You will post what you see or you won't. Your call. But I'm just sayin'...if you fail to post anything, that says a great deal more about the validity of Jyotish than if you post something and it's wrong.
The Raj/Ayurveda--Was [FairfieldLife] Re: Prostate cancer. What to do
On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 2:31 PM, enlightened_dawn11 no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote: bravo! This is the reply back from the Raj asking what to do about my friend's condition: Here is the response from the Vedic Health Experts: Are nodes benign or is it cancer? Why do they want to remove your prostate, why not just the nodes? Thanks, Vedic Health Team OK, let's have an understanding here. The urologist took about a dozen samples of the prostate, scattered about it to get a good sample. So far she mentioned only 3 nodes which were Gleason Score 7. Didn't bother to mention the other samples. So the Vedic Health Experts are asking if there's cancer (that was the title of the email I sent and also implied in Gleason Score). And they can't understand why the urologist can't seek out the bits of cancer and destroy it. Any questions about the Raj and the TMO's offering of Ayurveda?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Making the Jyotish Test fair
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@ wrote: As for the Turq/Barry problem; increasingly people on FFL find it mind-boggeling that a fellow who left the TMO in disgrace, having been told to keep physically away from Maharishi by His Secretaries more than 30 years ago... The TBs are getting desperate. Not a word of this is true, and Nabby knows it. it brings up a legitimate question though, one you could satisfy by divulging the details under which you left the TMO. Furthermore, JUDY knows it, and is not calling Nabby on his lie because she's doing the same thing he is with her insinuations that I'm somehow viol- ating my friend's privacy by posting my little test. so liars stick together? At least Nabby had the balls to state his lie outright. you haven't proven what Nabby says is not a lie. Judy took the weasel route and cloaked hers by phrasing it the first time she said it as if she were merely asking a question and not plant- ing an insinuation. you plant insinuations all the time. why is it now wrong if you see Judy doing it? It's a technique of lying she learned from Limbaugh and Cheney and their ilk. what, over tea? Ask yourself this question, folks -- if I'm violating my friend's privacy, where did I get the birth data? We're both waiting to see whether JohnR will take up the challenge. i have the advantage of writing this in the future from when you wrote the above paragraph, and so can tell you i thought JohnR wrote an excellent response to your challenge. As for Nabby's lie, I'm sure Jerry Jarvis would be able to tell you it's not true. more please. I am always amazed at the lengths a TM True Believer will go to to demonize someone. and i am always amazed when you say something like this, laden with imprecise labels, and emotionally charged statements - demonize someone? as in to cast them as a malevolent person, bent on doing harm? and what the hell is a TM True Believer- sounds like an Action Figure-- press this button on his back and watch him do a pranayam! can be posed in over 15 asanas! And to try to hide the fact that the real reason they're doing it is *because* they're TBs. complete with spy rings, secret handshakes and all.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Prostate cancer. What to do
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11 no_re...@... wrote: bravo! I don't think I really understand what your bravo statement refers to? Is it out of line to ask a person making claims to provide some evidence? The whole idea that Joitish is a science but is not for people with a bias against it is worthy of challenge IMO. The use of the term science is being used to influence credibility in the reader. It implies that the methods of science are being employed. And those methods are specifically designed to limit the influence of bias as a factor. Of course John is free to ignore such requests, but I don't understand why his response is bravo! worthy. Let's say he was representing a purely subjective psychic perspective. He had a vision of this guy's health complaint and stated an opinion. In my worldview that is not making a scientific claim, so it isn't really worth testing or challenging. We all use our subjective intuition from our experience. I lost a dear friend to this condition, so I am very biased in my opinion towards quick aggressive treatment. My opinion is really not worth much and I don't get to ride on the enhanced credibility of the term science if I make my opinion known. When the term science is used, it is for its spin effect of requesting more credibility than if he said I had a dream, or this is my personal opinion shaped by my limited experiences. What is wrong with using some of the methods of the involked science to determine if it is more than just a subjective guess? I think skepticism gets an unjustified bad name. Don't we care about that is true? All of us make personal choices about what we are going to apply skepticism to. No one here believes everything out there presented as true. We are all both skeptics and believers in our lives. I don't get what the bravo! was for in this case. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: --- 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 Barry, In my dealings with you, I found that you have already a predisposed opinion about TM and the vedic sciences which is not positive to say the least. We have also noticed that no matter what the facts are or what the rationales are, you continue to disbelieve in these sciences. So, it would not be reasonable for me to get into this experiment since I already know what you are thinking and that you are going to prove it wrong whatever I say. Jyotish is also for people who are sincerely looking for help. It is not for people who have a bias against it. Given this background, it would not be wise to get involved with this so called experiment-- which is really a set up for your own entertainment. Nonetheless, I will take a look at the chart and analyze it. If I see anything earth shaking, I will notify the group...or maybe not. JR
[FairfieldLife] Re: Making the Jyotish Test fair
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11 no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@ wrote: As for the Turq/Barry problem; increasingly people on FFL find it mind-boggeling that a fellow who left the TMO in disgrace, having been told to keep physically away from Maharishi by His Secretaries more than 30 years ago... The TBs are getting desperate. Not a word of this is true, and Nabby knows it. it brings up a legitimate question though, one you could satisfy by divulging the details under which you left the TMO. The irony of the person this question being asked by the person who can't tell us when and where she was taught TM and who her initiator was aside :-), I will cut you a break because you're a newb here and tell you. Please notice how easy it is to tell one's TM history when one actually has one. Basically, after having previously worked for the TMO by running the Western Regional Office and as a State Coordinator for Oregon and Washington, I took a gig at the TM National Center as their Personnel Director, while waiting for my 6-month TM-Siddhis course to start. When it did, I went, and then when I came back I didn't go back to working for the TMO. I just split, quietly. No fanfare, no hoopla...I just went back to the real world, and out of the TM world. On that last course, we never even got to *see* Maharishi because he never came to the course. Shemp was on that course, and can verify this. So Nabby's story is completely made up. And now you´re going to tell us *your* TM story, right? Right?
[FairfieldLife] Wonderful Idea
From the Guardian, 12.22.08 http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2008/dec/22/diy-adjustable-glasses- josh-silver or, http://snipurl.com/99xrk It was a chance conversation on March 23 1985 (in the afternoon, as I recall) that first started Josh Silver on his quest to make the world's poor see. A professor of physics at Oxford University, Silver was idly discussing optical lenses with a colleague, wondering whether they might be adjusted without the need for expensive specialist equipment, when the lightbulb of inspiration first flickered above his head. What if it were possible, he thought, to make a pair of glasses which, instead of requiring an optician, could be tuned by the wearer to correct his or her own vision? Might it be possible to bring affordable spectacles to millions who would never otherwise have them? More than two decades after posing that question, Silver now feels he has the answer. The British inventor has embarked on a quest that is breathtakingly ambitious, but which he insists is achievable - to offer glasses to a billion of the world's poorest people by 2020. Some 30,000 pairs of his spectacles have already been distributed in 15 countries, but to Silver that is very small beer. Within the next year the now-retired professor and his team plan to launch a trial in India which will, they hope, distribute 1 million pairs of glasses. The target, within a few years, is 100 million pairs annually. With the global need for basic sight-correction, by his own detailed research, estimated at more than half the world's population, Silver sees no reason to stop at a billion. If the scale of his ambition is dazzling, at the heart of his plan is an invention which is engagingly simple. Silver has devised a pair of glasses which rely on the principle that the fatter a lens the more powerful it becomes. Inside the device's tough plastic lenses are two clear circular sacs filled with fluid, each of which is connected to a small syringe attached to either arm of the spectacles. The wearer adjusts a dial on the syringe to add or reduce amount of fluid in the membrane, thus changing the power of the lens. When the wearer is happy with the strength of each lens the membrane is sealed by twisting a small screw, and the syringes removed. The principle is so simple, the team has discovered, that with very little guidance people are perfectly capable of creating glasses to their own prescription. Silver calls his flash of insight a tremendous glimpse of the obvious - namely that opticians weren't necessary to provide glasses. This is a crucial factor in the developing world where trained specialists are desperately in demand: in Britain there is one optometrist for every 4,500 people, in sub-Saharan Africa the ratio is 1:1,000,000. The implications of bringing glasses within the reach of poor communities are enormous, says the scientist. Literacy rates improve hugely, fishermen are able to mend their nets, women to weave clothing. During an early field trial, funded by the British government, in Ghana, Silver met a man called Henry Adjei-Mensah, whose sight had deteriorated with age, as all human sight does, and who had been forced to retire as a tailor because he could no longer see to thread the needle of his sewing machine. So he retires. He was about 35. He could have worked for at least another 20 years. We put these specs on him, and he smiled, and threaded his needle, and sped up with this sewing machine. He can work now. He can see. The reaction is universal, says Major Kevin White, formerly of the US military's humanitarian programme, who organised the distribution of thousands of pairs around the world after discovering Silver's glasses on Google. People put them on, and smile. They all say, 'Look, I can read those tiny little letters.' Making and distributing a billion pairs of spectacles is no small task, of course - even at a dollar each (the target cost), and without Silver taking any profit, the cost is eye-watering. This is what Silver calls the challenge of scaling up. For the Indian project he has joined forces with Mehmood Khan, a businessman whose family trust runs a humanitarian programme based in 500 villages in the northern state of Haryana, from where he originates. There will be no shortage of takers in the region, Khan says. One million in one year is straightaway peanuts for me. In the districts where we are working, one district alone will have half a million people [who need the technology]. Khan's day job is as Global Leader of Innovation for Unilever, and though his employer will have no direct connection with the scheme, having contact with 150m consumers a day, as he points out, means he is used to dealing with large numbers. But surely finding funding on this scale will be impossible? I share a vision with Josh, says Khan. A thing like this, once it works, you create awareness, you
[FairfieldLife] Re: Making the Jyotish Test fair
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@ wrote: As for the Turq/Barry problem; increasingly people on FFL find it mind-boggeling that a fellow who left the TMO in disgrace, having been told to keep physically away from Maharishi by His Secretaries more than 30 years ago... The TBs are getting desperate. Not a word of this is true, and Nabby knows it. Nabby has no way of knowing if it's true or not, just as Barry had no way of knowing if Nabby was, as Barry has claimed any number of times, not allowed to come within a mile of the domes. It's called tit for tat. Barry's getting just a wee tiny bit of his own back, and he's outraged, OUTRAGED, he tells us. Lying hypocrital dork. Furthermore, JUDY knows it, No, I have no way of knowing either, and BARRY knows it. and is not calling Nabby on his lie because she's doing the same thing he is with her insinuations that I'm somehow viol- ating my friend's privacy by posting my little test. At least Nabby had the balls to state his lie outright. Judy took the weasel route and cloaked hers by phrasing it the first time she said it as if she were merely asking a question and not plant- ing an insinuation. I *was* merely asking a question. You'll notice that Barry hasn't answered it. It's a technique of lying she learned from Limbaugh and Cheney and their ilk. belly laugh And it's the TBs who are desperate?? Limbaugh and Cheney could learn from Barry. Ask yourself this question, folks -- if I'm violating my friend's privacy, where did I get the birth data? Then ask yourself what Barry having his friend's birth data has to do with whether his friend has given him permission to announce his name and medical condition publicly. (Or even just his birth data, for that matter.) Jeez, nobody even has to *insinuate* anything for Barry to demonstrate to everyone exactly what he is. We're both waiting to see whether JohnR will take up the challenge. As for Nabby's lie, I'm sure Jerry Jarvis would be able to tell you it's not true. I am always amazed at the lengths a TM True Believer will go to to demonize someone. And to try to hide the fact that the real reason they're doing it is *because* they're TBs. Barry's chickens are coming home to roost for a change, and he's totally freaked, going bananas to try to shoot them down before they land and peck the daylights out of him. It doesn't happen often on this forum, but it's a sight to behold when it does. Pass the popcorn!
[FairfieldLife] Re: Making the Jyotish Test fair
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11 no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@ wrote: As for the Turq/Barry problem; increasingly people on FFL find it mind-boggeling that a fellow who left the TMO in disgrace, having been told to keep physically away from Maharishi by His Secretaries more than 30 years ago... The TBs are getting desperate. Not a word of this is true, and Nabby knows it. it brings up a legitimate question though, one you could satisfy by divulging the details under which you left the TMO. The irony of the person this question being asked by the person who can't tell us when and where she was taught TM and who her initiator was aside :-), I will cut you a break because you're a newb here and tell you. Please notice how easy it is to tell one's TM history when one actually has one. Basically, after having previously worked for the TMO by running the Western Regional Office and as a State Coordinator for Oregon and Washington, I took a gig at the TM National Center as their Personnel Director, while waiting for my 6-month TM-Siddhis course to start. When it did, I went, and then when I came back I didn't go back to working for the TMO. I just split, quietly. No fanfare, no hoopla...I just went back to the real world, and out of the TM world. On that last course, we never even got to *see* Maharishi because he never came to the course. Shemp was on that course, and can verify this. So Nabby's story is completely made up. And now you´re going to tell us *your* TM story, right? Right? if its all the same to you, i'll live with the irony.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Prostate cancer. What to do
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltabl...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11 no_reply@ wrote: bravo! I don't think I really understand what your bravo statement refers to? Is it out of line to ask a person making claims to provide some evidence? the deal with JohnR's response was that he was refusing to take B. up on his challenge because B. was already prejudiced with regards to the results, so there was no point in proving the integrity of Jyotish to him. it was a matter of B.'s perceived integrity here. and also the sensitivity of the practice that JohnR brought up. i personally don't have an interest in Jyotish, so whether or not it is valid is of no practical value to me. i said bravo! because i thought JohnR's response to B. was more on the mark than an attempt to prove the value of Jyotish to a critic for their entertainment. The whole idea that Joitish is a science but is not for people with a bias against it is worthy of challenge IMO. if it interests you, sure. it doesn't interest me. i put it on par with any astrological system- just one more toy in the toy chest. The use of the term science is being used to influence credibility in the reader. It implies that the methods of science are being employed. And those methods are specifically designed to limit the influence of bias as a factor. Of course John is free to ignore such requests, but I don't understand why his response is bravo! worthy. Let's say he was representing a purely subjective psychic perspective. He had a vision of this guy's health complaint and stated an opinion. In my worldview that is not making a scientific claim, so it isn't really worth testing or challenging. We all use our subjective intuition from our experience. I lost a dear friend to this condition, so I am very biased in my opinion towards quick aggressive treatment. My opinion is really not worth much and I don't get to ride on the enhanced credibility of the term science if I make my opinion known. When the term science is used, it is for its spin effect of requesting more credibility than if he said I had a dream, or this is my personal opinion shaped by my limited experiences. What is wrong with using some of the methods of the involked science to determine if it is more than just a subjective guess? I think skepticism gets an unjustified bad name. not with me-- skeptical first is a good common sense approach. Don't we care about that is true? All of us make personal choices about what we are going to apply skepticism to. No one here believes everything out there presented as true. We are all both skeptics and believers in our lives. I don't get what the bravo! was for in this case.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Making the Jyotish Test fair
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11 no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: snip Furthermore, JUDY knows it, and is not calling Nabby on his lie because she's doing the same thing he is with her insinuations that I'm somehow viol- ating my friend's privacy by posting my little test. so liars stick together? I beg your pardon? snip Judy took the weasel route and cloaked hers by phrasing it the first time she said it as if she were merely asking a question and not plant- ing an insinuation. you plant insinuations all the time. why is it now wrong if you see Judy doing it? I wasn't even insinuating. I was asking a perfectly legitimate question. Barry has declined to answer it. snip I am always amazed at the lengths a TM True Believer will go to to demonize someone. and i am always amazed when you say something like this, laden with imprecise labels True Believer has a pretty clear meaning on this forum. Barry knows it's a category that most definitely does not include me.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Prostate cancer. What to do
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, I am the eternal l.shad...@... wrote: On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 12:42 PM, ruthsimplicity no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, I am the eternal I skimmed through these threads about your friend. I take it you are in Texas. If he hasn't been there already, I recommend MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston for evaluation. http://www.mdanderson.org/ Better than roaming from one expert to another. Given the limited facts your presented (age, Gleason score, PSA, but not tumor grading or PSA doubling rate) I likely would not do watchful waiting and I would not rely on Curcumin and the like! Prostate cancer treatment has so many options and each individual is different, so don't take anything for advice here. (Other than what I said about visiting a major cancer center, like MD Anderson). Best wishes to you and your friend. After lots of reading and looking at my friend's doctor's website at http://www.prostatecenterofaustin.com/cancer.php , of a number of things, which I've conveyed to my friend: 1) To accept the curcumin and other things I ordered for him and start taking them while waiting for his doctor visit. To want to do anything more with the neutraceuticals is just magical thinking. I went to the various websites supplied by yifuxero. I read the testimonials there. I didn't read as many glowing reports as yifuxero did. Nothing really about cancer. Now I was able to Google some things about prostate cancer and curcumin. Curcumin does sound very promising and exciting. It may explain why Indian men don't often get prostate cancer but American men do, very frequently. It looks like curcumin should have been a part of my friend's diet, starting decades ago. But as Peter said, once the horse has left the stable, well it may be true that curcumin does slow down the growth of prostate cancer and that medical researchers are looking at how to come up with a drug based on curcumin. But neither it nor the other things recommended are magic bullets against cancer. Oncologists aren't that biased and dumb. I attract doctors around me, though none of my friends happen to be urologists or oncologists. Though weary, they really want what's best for the patient, assuming insurance will allow it. If a food like flax seed or a spice like curcumin did work, really work against cancer, oncologists would be all over it like white on rice. 2) To immediately cut out the megadoses of vitamins and minerals my friend has taken for decades. It looks like megadoses encourage the growth of advanced prostate cancer and a Gleason sore of 7 is well into the advancing stage. 2) That a Gleason score of 7 on 3 nodes (but still at stage T0, no visible or palpable sign of cancer) is defined as moderate aggressive. There is actually a risk to life at this stage, though the odds of complete recovery are very good if one opts for the robotic surgery. This is far past the time of hopeful watching with or without nutritional aids. It's time for action and the best action right now appears to be the robotic surgery. Very neat, very clean, very good at getting out the cancer but leaving as much as possible intact. Recovery won't be the neatest thing, having to have a catheter/bag for 8 days and having to do physical therapy to get control of the bladder sphincter back. But this surgery does a lot less damage than cryo, inserted radiation rods or external radiation beam. The $25,000 HiFu available outside of the US might have been an option in the hopeful watching period and there is no track record on for this treatment. 3) That my friend lucked out with getting one of the best urology clinics in Texas and getting a consult with a very thorough and trained urology surgeon. Looking over the website, I get a very good feeling that Dr. Fagin will be very easy for my friend to talk with and that he will be open minded to all options for treatment and has been down this road many times before. Dr. Fagin has started prescribing every other day Viagra (to priests as well?) during recovery because doing so has been shown to bring one's sexual ability back. I feel that going to MD Anderson in Houston or some famous cancer clinic elsewhere might be overkill, though of course I will suggest that my friend get a second opinion. Now as far as Ayurveda, well my friend went to see Mark Toomey at the Raj the same day I did. My friend had this cancer then and mentioned his high PSA to Mark. Mark did not detect it. So much for Ayurveda, which may have shortened the lives of many THMDs, THPs and members of the TMO, what with the heavy metals and the tendency of Ayurvedic preparations to fight the effects of radiation, cancer drugs and chemical altering of hormone levels (because many cancer cells thrive in estrogen or testosterone). A trip to Lourdes and
[FairfieldLife] Re: Prostate cancer. What to do
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: My contention, and my reason for posting this little test, is that I believe Jyotish *depends* on people having a bias *for* it. My contention is that if that bias were not present, its customers would not view the predictions they receive as being as accurate as they think they are with that bias in place. This reminds me of Chopra when he declined double blind research on one or another supplement because he said the effects in part depended on the education of the person getting the treatment.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Making the Jyotish Test fair
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: a 68-year-old woman who has been practicing TM faithfully for 30 years is mind-boggling, and makes me question her sanity. I don't think I'm the only person on this forum who does. This is so funny. Once in a while The Turq will use the Judy-sanity-TM in the same sentence. It is bound to happen, happens regularily every so often, several times a year as it happens ! And each year he carefully adds a year or two extra onto my age...I'll be 90 before you know it! HeHe ;-) This Turq-fellow is obviously struggeling with some serious personal, probably Buddhist demons.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Prostate cancer. What to do
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: My contention, and my reason for posting this little test, is that I believe Jyotish *depends* on people having a bias *for* it. My contention is that if that bias were not present, its customers would not view the predictions they receive as being as accurate as they think they are with that bias in place. This reminds me of Chopra when he declined double blind research on one or another supplement because he said the effects in part depended on the education of the person getting the treatment. The thing is, Ruth, my guess is that Chopra really *believed* this. I don't see him as a charlatan, or at least not a conscious one. Neither do I see JohnR as a charlatan. I see him as someone who truly, honestly believes that Jyotish is accurate and valid. But whether they believe it or not is not the question. The question is, Does it work? I have provided a mechanism by which we on this forum can test whether it works or not. Given my understanding of Jyotish, it should be possible to assess my friend's medical condition from the chart. Another Jyotish prac- titioner *predicted* this condition from the same chart long before it appeared. So can a second Jyotish practitioner do the same thing? Seems like a valid test to me.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Making the Jyotish Test fair
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@ wrote: As for the Turq/Barry problem; increasingly people on FFL find it mind-boggeling that a fellow who left the TMO in disgrace, having been told to keep physically away from Maharishi by His Secretaries more than 30 years ago... The TBs are getting desperate. Not a word of this is true, and Nabby knows it. Furthermore, JUDY knows it, and is not calling Nabby on his lie because she's doing the same thing he is with her insinuations that I'm somehow viol- ating my friend's privacy by posting my little test. At least Nabby had the balls to state his lie outright. Judy took the weasel route and cloaked hers by phrasing it the first time she said it as if she were merely asking a question and not plant- ing an insinuation. It's a technique of lying she learned from Limbaugh and Cheney and their ilk. Ask yourself this question, folks -- if I'm violating my friend's privacy, where did I get the birth data? Simple; you made it up. This friend of Barry does not excist. We're both waiting to see whether JohnR will take up the challenge. As for Nabby's lie, I'm sure Jerry Jarvis would be able to tell you it's not true. And Jerry Jarvis will stand up for you any time now ! You were kicked out of the Movement and told to stay physically away from Maharishi. That's the simple truth.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Biden and Cheney flinging put downs on terror, spying
On Dec 22, 2008, at 12:26 PM, do.rflex wrote: Biden fired back by saying he's been promised a seat at the table for everybig decision - and he won't abuse that trust like Cheney did. I think the recommendations, the advice that he has given to President Bush ... has been not healthy for our foreign policy, not healthy for our national security, and it has not been consistent with our Constitution, Biden said on ABC's This Week. Other than that, though, it's been great. Sal
Re: [FairfieldLife] Research to start on effects of TM on bipolar and post traumatic stress disorder
On Dec 22, 2008, at 12:39 PM, gullible fool wrote: It is? I've definitely been doing it wrong all these years then. Boo hoo, I want another mantra! You can have one of mine, Sal! Deal, gull. Sal
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Prostate cancer. What to do
On Dec 30, 2008, at 10:16 AM, curtisdeltablues wrote: In the interest of fairness and accuracy, I have just consulted that oracle of truth and wisdom, The Magic Ouija Board, and it has verified that yes, without a doubt, Barry's person is real and he is NOT LYING. What more could anyone ask for? Sal I would like to see a cross reference with divination by sheep intestines (the other popular technology for predicting the future) if you don't mind. Sorry, Curtis, only vegetarian refs allowed. I will, however, mash up a few potatoes with some garlic and chives and see what washes. Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: Making the Jyotish Test fair
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11 no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@ wrote: As for the Turq/Barry problem; increasingly people on FFL find it mind-boggeling that a fellow who left the TMO in disgrace, having been told to keep physically away from Maharishi by His Secretaries more than 30 years ago... The TBs are getting desperate. Not a word of this is true, and Nabby knows it. it brings up a legitimate question though, one you could satisfy by divulging the details under which you left the TMO. Furthermore, JUDY knows it, and is not calling Nabby on his lie because she's doing the same thing he is with her insinuations that I'm somehow viol- ating my friend's privacy by posting my little test. so liars stick together? At least Nabby had the balls to state his lie outright. you haven't proven what Nabby says is not a lie. Judy took the weasel route and cloaked hers by phrasing it the first time she said it as if she were merely asking a question and not plant- ing an insinuation. you plant insinuations all the time. why is it now wrong if you see Judy doing it? It's a technique of lying she learned from Limbaugh and Cheney and their ilk. what, over tea? Ask yourself this question, folks -- if I'm violating my friend's privacy, where did I get the birth data? We're both waiting to see whether JohnR will take up the challenge. i have the advantage of writing this in the future from when you wrote the above paragraph, and so can tell you i thought JohnR wrote an excellent response to your challenge. As for Nabby's lie, I'm sure Jerry Jarvis would be able to tell you it's not true. more please. I am always amazed at the lengths a TM True Believer will go to to demonize someone. and i am always amazed when you say something like this, laden with imprecise labels, and emotionally charged statements - demonize someone? as in to cast them as a malevolent person, bent on doing harm? and what the hell is a TM True Believer- sounds like an Action Figure-- press this button on his back and watch him do a pranayam! can be posed in over 15 asanas! And to try to hide the fact that the real reason they're doing it is *because* they're TBs. complete with spy rings, secret handshakes and all. Haha - very funny writing and a joy to read ! Please allow my greetings of a Happy New Year to you and your friends !
[FairfieldLife] 2009
www.dancingsantacard.com/default.aspx?santa=6440563 Pozdrav i sve najbolje, Nenad Kuzmanović
[FairfieldLife] Re: Letters on TM from religious/spiritual leaders
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, BillyG. wg...@... wrote: My sentiments as well, and yes, I'm sure it is/was tactical, though I think it will continue to dog them until they come clean and state emphatically that TM is not being taught as a Religion but has its foundation in Religion and that if you want the benefits of Religion you must practice Religion. They can't have their cake and eat it too, they want TM to be thought of as non-Religious yet providing all of the benefits of Religion. Unfortunately, such a course doesn't do justice to TM nor Religion. I would like it to be called a *Religious Science* which is more accurateIMO. Pretty good take Billy. My feeling is that MMY thought of TM as surpassing religion. Like religion was for first graders and TM for graduate students. The religion question is partly an east-west issue of the nature of religion. From what I am reading, the mixing of religion and science is common in fundamentalist Hinduism. I posted a link a week or two ago about how fundamentalist Hindus may view Hinduism as inclusive of everything and to illustrate inclusiveness they use the language of science to explain essentially religious concepts. The language of quantum physics has been used not just by the TMO but by Hindu fundamentalists as well. With this sort of world view neither their religion nor their science is ever wrong, and you are just unenlightened or uneducated if you do not buy their reasoning about how it all fits together. Haglin, Nader, et al seem to fall into this camp when talking about TM and science. There are meditators here that fall into the same camp. In contrast, fundamentalist Christians tend towards a more us versus them view of religion and science. If a scientific explanation differs from a religious belief, the science is wrong. Religion trumps science. As another aside, the guys drafted to write letters for Orme-Johnson's site should sound a little less like they had help from the TMO in writing the letters. I am a bit sick of the 600 studies have shown hoo hah.
[FairfieldLife] Deadline for the Jyotish Test
John, I appreciate your willingness to look at my friend's chart. That shows that your heart is in the right place, and that you really want to help if you can. But you only have until 7:00 pm my time on December 31st (that is 12:00 Noon Fairfield time) to do so. At that point I'll be leaving for my New Year's Eve festivities, and before I go out I'll post the answer to the test. My reason for doing this is not about you. So far, you've been OK in all of this. But before this year is over I want to say a few things about a few other people on this forum, and what *they* have done in response to me pro- posing this test. These things need to be said, and for personal reasons I'm going to say them this year. I'm sorry if this places a time burden on you, but that's just the way it is. Good luck anal- yzing the chart, and know that I will be the first to say so if you get it right.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Prostate cancer. What to do
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: My contention, and my reason for posting this little test, is that I believe Jyotish *depends* on people having a bias *for* it. My contention is that if that bias were not present, its customers would not view the predictions they receive as being as accurate as they think they are with that bias in place. This reminds me of Chopra when he declined double blind research on one or another supplement because he said the effects in part depended on the education of the person getting the treatment. The thing is, Ruth, my guess is that Chopra really *believed* this. I don't see him as a charlatan, or at least not a conscious one. Neither do I see JohnR as a charlatan. I see him as someone who truly, honestly believes that Jyotish is accurate and valid. But whether they believe it or not is not the question. The question is, Does it work? I have provided a mechanism by which we on this forum can test whether it works or not. Given my understanding of Jyotish, it should be possible to assess my friend's medical condition from the chart. Another Jyotish prac- titioner *predicted* this condition from the same chart long before it appeared. So can a second Jyotish practitioner do the same thing? Seems like a valid test to me. I agree that JohnR seems sincere. I'm not so sure about Chopra. Who I understand does still in fact hold a medical license but doesn't claim to practice. Go figure. Anyway, I am drifting. You claim to have seen people levitate. You are probably more open to a Joytish claim than most other people here. :)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Letters on TM from religious/spiritual leaders
On Dec 30, 2008, at 6:39 PM, ruthsimplicity wrote: The religion question is partly an east-west issue of the nature of religion. From what I am reading, the mixing of religion and science is common in fundamentalist Hinduism. I posted a link a week or two ago about how fundamentalist Hindus may view Hinduism as inclusive of everything and to illustrate inclusiveness they use the language of science to explain essentially religious concepts. The language of quantum physics has been used not just by the TMO but by Hindu fundamentalists as well. With this sort of world view neither their religion nor their science is ever wrong, and you are just unenlightened or uneducated if you do not buy their reasoning about how it all fits together. Haglin, Nader, et al seem to fall into this camp when talking about TM and science. There are meditators here that fall into the same camp. What's important to understand is that MMY's strain of Vedic science is purely--from an eastern Indian POV--a fundamentalist trend. Both he and Guru Dev were associated with Right-wing political parties all of which, up to this day, are associated with trying declare the Vedas as an internal and external science. The bizarre thing is, to the western POV, these concepts seem very left, greenish. But these are the Indian parallels to western creation science (and Christian and Jewish fundamentalism), make no mistake. The most striking example of this is the guy who was originally voted to be the Shankaracharya before Guru Dev, Swami Karpatri. Sw. Karpatri declined the Shank. largely because he had founded a political party intending to reestablish Hinduism as a state religion. That party and trend continues up to the present and includes a movement that is trying to claim the Vedas are science and insert them into mainstream Hindu life. Islamic extremism is further fueling these fires of ignorance just as 9/11 energized the USA and our fundies. Before MMY came to the forefront there was already a large movement to connect physics to the Vedas and mantra yoga, etc. So don't make the mistake of not seeing MMY as a right-wing fundamentalist Hindu, he clearly was and this is easily demonstrated if one is willing to take the time and look into it. I highly recommend looking into the works of Meera Nanada, a Hindu rationalist, on Vedic Science LINK
[FairfieldLife] Re: Deadline for the Jyotish Test
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: John, Do not believe a word of what the Turq is writing. Don't waste your time analysing a chart unless you know for sure that this person actually excists.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Power of jyotish (Re: Prostate cancer. What to do)
On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 11:58 AM, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltabl...@yahoo.com wrote: Hey Man, I do agree with most of what you said,(I couldn't follow the god argument) and have basically come to the same conclusions for my own beliefs. But I thought it would be a blast if John could nail a few and throw a wrench into my surety.It wouldn't be conclusive or change much, but I would enjoy that experience if he could pull it off. OTOH I would gain something if a person was unable to pull it off. It would throw a wrench into their surety that gave them internal permission to jazz up good common sense advice with a little joitish says so epistemological push-up bra. I would very much like to see a test for my own peace of mind. I've received too many (free) jyotish readings which go on and on with on the other hand. Yeah, I know, a good jyotishi is supposed to use experience and wisdom to balance alternate outcomes against one another and come out with a single statement. The problem is that I've only seen it done for the likes of JFK, Ghandi and Bill Gates AFTER THE FACT. Let us take the unerring accuracy of my buddy's jyotish reading. The reading actually says where in the prostate my friend's cancer resides yet the doctor hasn't even told my friend precisely where the cancer is. Based on what I've heard of what his urologist said, the cancer is all over, she just throw out some readings to convey to my friend the import of all of this, that he'd better not let another decade go by as he already has unless he wants to make it his last decade here. Yes, according to my friend he mostly likely has had prostate cancer for 10 years. He's had prostate infections and PSA tests done. The PSAs were high after treatment but because he was relatively young and PSAs weren't all that important a decade ago, he wasn't sent for a biopsy. The doctor just did the finger test and decided there wasn't anything serious there. Now my friend tells me that he's had a number of expensive jyotish consultations and there was no mention of prostate. There was the same sort of thing that I received from someone on FFL for him yesterday: you are very prone to being ill. You are shielded from getting ill. Same thing with Ayurveda. Mark Tooney can be dismissed. But my friend had a consult with Triguna within the last 10 years. Had a biopsy been done within the last 10 years my friend is certain the cancer whould have shown to be in early stages. But it would have shown. So I'd like to be able to think to embrace Jyotish or be able to settle my mind that Jyotish is a bunch of bunk, at most a Farmers Almanac for someone's life. If our Jyotishis would please cooperate, this could be quite helpful to the rest of us on FFL. I thinks it's a cop out that one is doing readings for disbelievers. That's what the scientific method is all about. Science is not what Maharishi, Mary Baker Eddy and the Joytishis think it is. Maharishi and Mary Baker Eddy thought that anything that was systematic was scientific. Not so. The Library of Congress and Dewey Decimal System classifications are systematic. They are not scientific. Nor is Maharishi's Vedic Science nor Mary Baker Eddy's Christian Science.
[FairfieldLife] Re: That white plastic tube they put up your butt
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcg...@... wrote: Here's my complaint: When I turned 50 several years ago my doctor prescribed that I have a colonoscopy done. Apparently, at that age, it's good to have it checked. Whatever. Boy, the trouble you have to go through: not only fast the night before but take this god-awful stuff that makes you poo-poo out every last drop of fecal matter so that those doing the exam have clear sailing when looking to see what's up in there. Well, thankfully, they knock you out with one of those wonderful drugs that make you feel that chemicals are oh-so-much-better than your last meditation so you don't feel that huge plastic thing they shove up your butt to do the exam. My complaint is that while they've got you under and your goddamn sphincter is expanded to accomodate the plastic doo-hickey you'd think they'd kill two birds with one stone! Check my goddamn prostate while you're up there, won't you buddy? If you don't I will, on my next visit to my GP, have to suffer through the doctor sticking his plastic-gloved middle finger up there WHILE I DON'T HAVE THE BENEFIT OF DRUGS and have to be humiliated bent over on his exam table. I've had to go through that twice before with doctors and, no, sorry, I can't just try and relax those particular muscles once every 15 years so you can feel around. Why it isn't standard practise to do the prostate exam at the same time as a colonoscopy I'll never know! Doctors are sadists who like to play God and watch lesser people scream. -- Bren telling Juno while she can't have her spinal tap just yet. From Juno Different job descriptions. Better luck double dipping and having an upper endoscopy when you have the colonoscopy. Have a woman doctor do the DRE, we have smaller hands so it is more comfortable. :)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Prostate cancer. What to do
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity no_re...@... wrote: I agree that JohnR seems sincere. I'm not so sure about Chopra. Who I understand does still in fact hold a medical license but doesn't claim to practice. Go figure. Anyway, I am drifting. You claim to have seen people levitate. You are probably more open to a Joytish claim than most other people here. :) Not really. I actually *did* see someone levitate, hundreds of times over a period of 14 years. So did liter- ally thousands of other people. WHAT we saw and why we saw it is up for debate. But the fact that we saw it is not. It has been written about by many people in many places. Having seen it was one of the most real exper- iences of my life. As far as I can tell, Jyotish has nothing real about it. To me it's a pseudo- science that depends on the projected belief of its adherents, their gullibility, and their desire to be told the things they want to hear that keeps it going. I could be wrong about this. If JohnR manages to see my friend's medical condition from his perusal of the chart, I will be the first to say so. That won't prove that Jyotish is valid, but it'll sure raise my eyebrows, and I'll say so. The having seen someone levitating thang, however, is another ball of wax. I'm not trying to convince anyone that I have, and understand fully that I can never do that, ever. It was my subjective experience, and the subjective experience of many other students, but subjective it will stay, forever. The possibility does not exist to prove it one way or another, because the dude who did the floatin' is dead. But the accuracy of Jyotish CAN be proved one way or another. I have proposed such a way. Whether JohnR takes me up on it is up to him. He's the one claiming that Jyotish is a science, and worth the money people pay for it. I'm selling nothing, and championing nothing that is for sale. All I'm saying is that I was lucky enough to have seen some neat stuff. :-)
[FairfieldLife] Post Count
Fairfield Life Post Counter === Start Date (UTC): Sat Dec 27 00:00:00 2008 End Date (UTC): Sat Jan 03 00:00:00 2009 473 messages as of (UTC) Wed Dec 31 00:11:58 2008 43 do.rflex do.rf...@yahoo.com 42 authfriend jst...@panix.com 36 TurquoiseB no_re...@yahoogroups.com 31 I am the eternal l.shad...@gmail.com 24 BillyG. wg...@yahoo.com 23 Vaj vajradh...@earthlink.net 21 shempmcgurk shempmcg...@netscape.net 16 nablusoss1008 no_re...@yahoogroups.com 16 Sal Sunshine salsunsh...@lisco.com 15 enlightened_dawn11 no_re...@yahoogroups.com 15 Rick Archer r...@searchsummit.com 14 Richard M compost...@yahoo.co.uk 13 sparaig lengli...@cox.net 13 Peter drpetersutp...@yahoo.com 12 raunchydog raunchy...@yahoo.com 12 Arhata Osho arhatafreespe...@yahoo.com 10 yifuxero yifux...@yahoo.com 10 dhamiltony2k5 dhamiltony...@yahoo.com 10 Bhairitu noozg...@sbcglobal.net 9 ruthsimplicity no_re...@yahoogroups.com 8 Robert babajii...@yahoo.com 7 Richard J. Williams willy...@yahoo.com 6 guyfawkes91 guyfawke...@yahoo.com 6 curtisdeltablues curtisdeltabl...@yahoo.com 6 bettyblue109 no_re...@yahoogroups.com 6 Hugo richardhughes...@hotmail.com 6 Duveyoung no_re...@yahoogroups.com 5 John jr_...@yahoo.com 4 Stu buttspli...@gmail.com 4 Marek Reavis reavisma...@sbcglobal.net 3 Peter L Sutphen drpetersutp...@yahoo.com 3 Alex Stanley j_alexander_stan...@yahoo.com 2 bob_brigante no_re...@yahoogroups.com 2 arhatafreespe...@yahoo.com 2 wle...@aol.com 2 Patrick Gillam jpgil...@yahoo.com 2 Nelson nelsonriddle2...@yahoo.com 1 sgrayatlarge no_re...@yahoogroups.com 1 off_world_beings no_re...@yahoogroups.com 1 metoostill metoost...@yahoo.com 1 gullible fool ffl...@yahoo.com 1 feste37 fest...@yahoo.com 1 dan hawkeye422...@yahoo.com 1 cardemaister no_re...@yahoogroups.com 1 amarnath anatol_z...@yahoo.com 1 Zoran Krneta krneta.zo...@gmail.com 1 Joe Smith msilver1...@yahoo.com 1 Dick Mays dickm...@lisco.com 1 =?ISO-8859-2?Q?Nenad_Kuzmanovi=E6?= jabuk...@gmail.com 1 min.pige min.p...@yahoo.com 1 Hagen J. Holtz hagen.j.ho...@t-online.de Posters: 51 Saturday Morning 00:00 UTC Rollover Times = Daylight Saving Time (Summer): US Friday evening: PDT 5 PM - MDT 6 PM - CDT 7 PM - EDT 8 PM Europe Saturday: BST 1 AM CEST 2 AM EEST 3 AM Standard Time (Winter): US Friday evening: PST 4 PM - MST 5 PM - CST 6 PM - EST 7 PM Europe Saturday: GMT 12 AM CET 1 AM EET 2 AM For more information on Time Zones: www.worldtimezone.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: Letters on TM from religious/spiritual leaders
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradh...@... wrote: On Dec 30, 2008, at 6:39 PM, ruthsimplicity wrote: The religion question is partly an east-west issue of the nature of religion. From what I am reading, the mixing of religion and science is common in fundamentalist Hinduism. I posted a link a week or two ago about how fundamentalist Hindus may view Hinduism as inclusive of everything and to illustrate inclusiveness they use the language of science to explain essentially religious concepts. The language of quantum physics has been used not just by the TMO but by Hindu fundamentalists as well. With this sort of world view neither their religion nor their science is ever wrong, and you are just unenlightened or uneducated if you do not buy their reasoning about how it all fits together. Haglin, Nader, et al seem to fall into this camp when talking about TM and science. There are meditators here that fall into the same camp. What's important to understand is that MMY's strain of Vedic science is purely--from an eastern Indian POV--a fundamentalist trend. Both he and Guru Dev were associated with Right-wing political parties all of which, up to this day, are associated with trying declare the Vedas as an internal and external science. The bizarre thing is, to the western POV, these concepts seem very left, greenish. But these are the Indian parallels to western creation science (and Christian and Jewish fundamentalism), make no mistake. The most striking example of this is the guy who was originally voted to be the Shankaracharya before Guru Dev, Swami Karpatri. Sw. Karpatri declined the Shank. largely because he had founded a political party intending to reestablish Hinduism as a state religion. That party and trend continues up to the present and includes a movement that is trying to claim the Vedas are science and insert them into mainstream Hindu life. Islamic extremism is further fueling these fires of ignorance just as 9/11 energized the USA and our fundies. Before MMY came to the forefront there was already a large movement to connect physics to the Vedas and mantra yoga, etc. So don't make the mistake of not seeing MMY as a right-wing fundamentalist Hindu, he clearly was and this is easily demonstrated if one is willing to take the time and look into it. I highly recommend looking into the works of Meera Nanada, a Hindu rationalist, on Vedic Science LINK I echo your recommendation to read Nanada. It was revealing to me to see that it wasn't just the TM'ers talking vedic science.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Letters on TM from religious/spiritual leaders
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradh...@... wrote: On Dec 30, 2008, at 6:39 PM, ruthsimplicity wrote: The religion question is partly an east-west issue of the nature of religion. From what I am reading, the mixing of religion and science is common in fundamentalist Hinduism. I posted a link a week or two ago about how fundamentalist Hindus may view Hinduism as inclusive of everything and to illustrate inclusiveness they use the language of science to explain essentially religious concepts. The language of quantum physics has been used not just by the TMO but by Hindu fundamentalists as well. With this sort of world view neither their religion nor their science is ever wrong, and you are just unenlightened or uneducated if you do not buy their reasoning about how it all fits together. Haglin, Nader, et al seem to fall into this camp when talking about TM and science. There are meditators here that fall into the same camp. What's important to understand is that MMY's strain of Vedic science is purely--from an eastern Indian POV--a fundamentalist trend. Both he and Guru Dev were associated with Right-wing political parties all of which, up to this day, are associated with trying declare the Vedas as an internal and external science. The bizarre thing is, to the western POV, these concepts seem very left, greenish. But these are the Indian parallels to western creation science (and Christian and Jewish fundamentalism), make no mistake. The most striking example of this is the guy who was originally voted to be the Shankaracharya before Guru Dev, Swami Karpatri. Sw. Karpatri declined the Shank. largely because he had founded a political party intending to reestablish Hinduism as a state religion. That party and trend continues up to the present and includes a movement that is trying to claim the Vedas are science and insert them into mainstream Hindu life. Islamic extremism is further fueling these fires of ignorance just as 9/11 energized the USA and our fundies. Before MMY came to the forefront there was already a large movement to connect physics to the Vedas and mantra yoga, etc. So don't make the mistake of not seeing MMY as a right-wing fundamentalist Hindu, he clearly was and this is easily demonstrated if one is willing to take the time and look into it. I highly recommend looking into the works of Meera Nanada, a Hindu rationalist, on Vedic Science LINK I strongly recommend reading Nanada. From the article Vaj linked: Here one finds an incredibly brazen claim: Because in Hinduism there are no distinctions between the spirit and matter, one can understand laws that regulate matter by studying the laws of the spirit. And the laws of spirit can be understood by turning inward, through yoga and meditation leading to mystical experiences. Within Hinduism, it is as rational and scientific to take the non-sensory 'seeing'--that is mystical and other meditative practices--as empirical evidence of the spiritual and natural realm. This purported scientificity of the spiritual realm, in turn, paves the way for declaring occult New Age practices like astrology, vastu, quantum healing, and even yagnas as scientific within the Vedic-Hindu universe. Rather than encourage a critical spirit toward inherited traditions, many of which are authoritarian and patriarchal, postmodernist intellectuals have waged a battle against science. As the case of Vedic science in the service of Hindu nationalism demonstrates, this misguided attack on the Enlightenment has only aided the growth of pseudoscience, superstitions and tribalism. A poster here once intimated that yagyas were not religious, but scientific. Uh huh.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Prostate cancer. What to do
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity no_reply@ wrote: I agree that JohnR seems sincere. I'm not so sure about Chopra. Who I understand does still in fact hold a medical license but doesn't claim to practice. Go figure. Anyway, I am drifting. You claim to have seen people levitate. You are probably more open to a Joytish claim than most other people here. :) Not really. I actually *did* see someone levitate, hundreds of times over a period of 14 years. So did liter- ally thousands of other people. WHAT we saw and why we saw it is up for debate. But the fact that we saw it is not. It has been written about by many people in many places. Having seen it was one of the most real exper- iences of my life. As far as I can tell, Jyotish has nothing real about it. To me it's a pseudo- science that depends on the projected belief of its adherents, their gullibility, and their desire to be told the things they want to hear that keeps it going. I could be wrong about this. If JohnR manages to see my friend's medical condition from his perusal of the chart, I will be the first to say so. That won't prove that Jyotish is valid, but it'll sure raise my eyebrows, and I'll say so. The having seen someone levitating thang, however, is another ball of wax. I'm not trying to convince anyone that I have, and understand fully that I can never do that, ever. It was my subjective experience, and the subjective experience of many other students, but subjective it will stay, forever. The possibility does not exist to prove it one way or another, because the dude who did the floatin' is dead. But the accuracy of Jyotish CAN be proved one way or another. I have proposed such a way. Whether JohnR takes me up on it is up to him. He's the one claiming that Jyotish is a science, and worth the money people pay for it. I'm selling nothing, and championing nothing that is for sale. All I'm saying is that I was lucky enough to have seen some neat stuff. :-) My only implication was that your mind may be more open than some think. I for one have closed the door on Jyotish.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Letters on TM from religious/spiritual leaders
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, BillyG. wgm4u@ wrote: snip They can't have their cake and eat it too, they want TM to be thought of as non-Religious yet providing all of the benefits of Religion. Pretty good take Billy. Not really. TM isn't thought of as providing all the benefits of religion. Rather, it enables religion to provide vastly expanded benefits, to live up to its potential. My feeling is that MMY thought of TM as surpassing religion. Like religion was for first graders and TM for graduate students. Not at all. The reverse, in fact. TM is the ground in which religion is rooted and nourished. Religion *without* TM is, well, groundless. You might say religion without TM is for first-graders. But religion becomes graduate study (and beyond) when it's undergirded by TM. TM without religion is better than religion without TM, but religion growing in the ground of TM is the fulfillment of both. TM is utterly simple and profound; religion is very complicated and requires the clarity TM provides to reveal its profundity. MMY was very much in favor of religious practice, but he thought it wasn't worth much in the absence of TM.
