Guest guest Posted November 3, 2004 Report Share Posted November 3, 2004 Congratulations to all who predicted a win for Bush !!!! Regards, Sameer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 3, 2004 Report Share Posted November 3, 2004 Predicting a Bush win was a no-brainer. I predicted a Bush win without looking at any of the correct or incorrect charts floating around. Ya, if someone had predicted a Kerry win and Kerry had indeed won, then it would be a cause to congrajulate as well as learn the technique used by the successful astrologer. Well, here is my new prediction NOT based on Jyotish--Hillary Clinton will run for president in 2008 and will have a grand victory over her republican opponent. Mukund vedic astrology, "sameer_sawhney" <icecoolsam@v...> wrote: > > Congratulations to all who predicted a win for Bush !!!! > > > > Regards, > Sameer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 3, 2004 Report Share Posted November 3, 2004 As I wrote here about a month earlier, while this prediction may pump up the egos of those who correctly predicted, overall I think it is a loss for SJC especially since: (a) The Gurus could come to no consensus before the elections. Some said Bush, some said Kerry. So who do we say had a better understanding of the Jyotish techniques - only the ones who predicted Bush? Isnt the goal to clearly display the correct application of Jyotish techniques? Do we have that now? Are Sanjay Rath's techniques wrong or incorrectly applied? (b) Some may say that the only reason there were differences between the Gurus was because the chosen birthtimes were different. But even that argument holds no water since there were Kerry predictions made on the basis of mundane astrology. Those times were said to be very accurate and agreed upon. So were those techniques wrong or incorrectly applied? © Essentially, the Bush-win outcome was the more likely of only two realistic outcomes. So, statistically speaking, a prediction for Bush is not significant enough to build confidence in the prediction technique anyway. It is like predicting in a rainy city that it will rain today. That said, I must say that only one person's prediction stands out - specifically "nameisego"'s prediction. Because he predicted the re- emergence of Osama before the win, and it can easily be argued that it was the emergence of Osama that immediately refocussed the Americans on security issues, where Bush is the clear leader. That prediction is statistically significant, i.e. not easily dismissable as being a chance occurrence or a fluke. But "nameisego" wasnt even using SJC techniques was he? Sundeep > > Congratulations to all who predicted a win for Bush !!!! > 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.