Guest guest Posted September 24, 2001 Report Share Posted September 24, 2001 Moses: I agree that anyone making predictions now has to realize that it will have an asterisk beside it. A US attack is likely within days, so one doesn't really need astrology to say when it will happen. I suppose if one got it right within a day or two, then that would warrant more consideration. Of course, if an attack doesn't come for a few weeks yet then that would show that an astrologer was just groping in the dark. I posted a suggestion that something big was likely during the Saturn station this week since it coincided with that Mars transit to Bush's Mercury and there was some reason to think that an attack was likely. It's not really a prediction in the sense that I'm not really that confident of it (ie. I'm definitely groping here!) and I've already taken advantage of the real-world context (the papers say an attack is imminent). Maybe predicting the next terrorist strike would be something more impressive. Something else that strikes me from your post is that astrologers *do* gain from even wrong predictions. True, when they're proven wrong, then there is a loss of face and presumably a loss of credibility. However, until they are proven wrong -- as with Quong's nuclear bomb prediction -- these astrologers grab headlines and gain some notoriety for themselves. In times of great public fear, people turn to unusual sources for answers and solace. Astrologers gain during these times of tumult. Until the moment of the prediction comes (there is 3 months under the end of the year for the Quong prediction), his name becomes more well known. This may result in more client business now and perhaps more strangely, in more business afterwards, even if he is wrong. That's because I think lots of people will believe anything as long as they want to. It's sort of like the practice in newspapers where there's a front page story that confirms some bias ("union boss embezzles funds") that turns out to be false but the paper only prints the corrections or retraction in a tiny article on page 5. So what effect does that have? People's bias against union leaders are confirmed and most people never really hear that the guy was innocent. Anyway, it's much the same thing here. Given the crowded playing field of astrologers on the internet, it's at least as important to be known for something than to be right in predictions. Look at Noel Tyl who has an abysmal track record with mundane predictions and yet he is the most widely known and respected western astrologers in the US today. Make your name anyway you can, stay in the the forefront of people's consciousness and make sure you have a good explanation if and when you blow it. It's all marketing. With Quong, he has attacked percentages to his predictions, so he can always point to the fact that they were only the likelihood (85%) that a nuclear bomb would occur. He's covered either way. And everybody on this list and no doubt many other lists will have heard of him by virtue of his sensationalist prediction. The fear that Americans are feeling is directly contributing to receptivity to his prediction. Why do these doomsday predictions only come about *after* some horrible event? Because we're all primed for it. Notice that most predictions for a stock crash come after the market has already dropped. You just can't trust astrologers to offer a clear-headed view of things. I rememer Rick Houck telling me about an astrology conference held in Sep 2000 when Gore was ahead in the polls and when the 30 or so astrologers were surveyed about who they favoured, all but 2 (including Rick) said Gore. So much for detached analysis. As far as I can tell, most of us see making predictions as a way of boosting our egos and revenues. sucking a lemon, Chris Something else that One problem >is >that >the whole >world >knows >that >the >US >literally >is poised >and >ready >to >attack >Afganistan >any >minute >now. So >obviously >facts >like >these >dilute >the >boldness >of >predictions >related >to >war. >Someone >sent >something >else about >a >guy >who >predicted >nuclear >attacks >as >65% >likely in >Washington, >NY, >and >Atlanta, >and only a >bit >less >likely >in >Los Angeles >andSan >Francisco before >the >end of >the >year. I >wonder >what >he'll >do >with >these >predictions >when >they >(hopefully) >don't >come >true. >Probably >not post >them on his >website >or >mention >them >ever >again. >He'll >probably gear >up >for >another >negative >prediction, >and >then >trumpet one all >around >if >he is >ever >right. Thanks >for >your >cynical >voice, n makeNewWindow(url) { var newWindow = window.open(url); } > > vedicwisdom > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 26, 2001 Report Share Posted September 26, 2001 Dear Chris, You are right. Let's examine the grahas in this way. 1.When mars is in capricorn, it would be in mutal dristis with shani, so revange would take place.. 2. Dangers would also come when mars enters pisces, and other papas, enter dual signs thus afflicting kendras from guru and nodes. Best wishes, Zoran Christopher Kevill wrote: > Moses: > > I agree that anyone making predictions now has to realize that it will have > an asterisk beside it. A US attack is likely within days, so one doesn't > really need astrology to say when it will happen. I suppose if one got it > right within a day or two, then that would warrant more consideration. Of > course, if an attack doesn't come for a few weeks yet then that would show > that an astrologer was just groping in the dark. I posted a suggestion > that something big was likely during the Saturn station this week since it > coincided with that Mars transit to Bush's Mercury and there was some > reason to think that an attack was likely. It's not really a prediction in > the sense that I'm not really that confident of it (ie. I'm definitely > groping here!) and I've already taken advantage of the real-world context > (the papers say an attack is imminent). Maybe predicting the next > terrorist strike would be something more impressive. > > Something else that strikes me from your post is that astrologers *do* gain > from even wrong predictions. True, when they're proven wrong, then there > is a loss of face and presumably a loss of credibility. However, until > they are proven wrong -- as with Quong's nuclear bomb prediction -- these > astrologers grab headlines and gain some notoriety for themselves. In > times of great public fear, people turn to unusual sources for answers and > solace. Astrologers gain during these times of tumult. Until the moment > of the prediction comes (there is 3 months under the end of the year for > the Quong prediction), his name becomes more well known. This may result > in more client business now and perhaps more strangely, in more business > afterwards, even if he is wrong. That's because I think lots of people > will believe anything as long as they want to. It's sort of like the > practice in newspapers where there's a front page story that confirms some > bias ("union boss embezzles funds") that turns out to be false but the > paper only prints the corrections or retraction in a tiny article on page > 5. So what effect does that have? People's bias against union leaders are > confirmed and most people never really hear that the guy was innocent. > Anyway, it's much the same thing here. Given the crowded playing field of > astrologers on the internet, it's at least as important to be known for > something than to be right in predictions. Look at Noel Tyl who has an > abysmal track record with mundane predictions and yet he is the most widely > known and respected western astrologers in the US today. Make your name > anyway you can, stay in the the forefront of people's consciousness and > make sure you have a good explanation if and when you blow it. It's all > marketing. > > With Quong, he has attacked percentages to his predictions, so he can > always point to the fact that they were only the likelihood (85%) that a > nuclear bomb would occur. He's covered either way. And everybody on this > list and no doubt many other lists will have heard of him by virtue of his > sensationalist prediction. The fear that Americans are feeling is directly > contributing to receptivity to his prediction. Why do these doomsday > predictions only come about *after* some horrible event? Because we're all > primed for it. Notice that most predictions for a stock crash come after > the market has already dropped. > > You just can't trust astrologers to offer a clear-headed view of things. I > rememer Rick Houck telling me about an astrology conference held in Sep > 2000 when Gore was ahead in the polls and when the 30 or so astrologers > were surveyed about who they favoured, all but 2 (including Rick) said > Gore. So much for detached analysis. As far as I can tell, most of us see > making predictions as a way of boosting our egos and revenues. > > sucking a lemon, > > Chris > > Something else that > > One problem > >is > >that > >the whole > >world > >knows > >that > >the > >US > >literally > >is poised > >and > >ready > >to > >attack > >Afganistan > >any > >minute > >now. So > >obviously > >facts > >like > >these > >dilute > >the > >boldness > >of > >predictions > >related > >to > >war. > >Someone > >sent > >something > >else about > >a > >guy > >who > >predicted > >nuclear > >attacks > >as > >65% > >likely in > >Washington, > >NY, > >and > >Atlanta, > >and only a > >bit > >less > >likely > >in > >Los Angeles > >andSan > >Francisco before > >the > >end of > >the > >year. I > >wonder > >what > >he'll > >do > >with > >these > >predictions > >when > >they > >(hopefully) > >don't > >come > >true. > >Probably > >not post > >them on his > >website > >or > >mention > >them > >ever > >again. > >He'll > >probably gear > >up > >for > >another > >negative > >prediction, > >and > >then > >trumpet one all > >around > >if > >he is > >ever > >right. Thanks > >for > >your > >cynical > >voice, > n makeNewWindow(url) { var newWindow = window.open(url); } > > > > > vedicwisdom > > > > > > > > > > > gjlist- > > > > Your use of is subject to Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.