Guest guest Posted January 1, 2009 Report Share Posted January 1, 2009 hinducivilization , " shankarabharadwaj " <shankarabharadwaj wrote: Pranam Sri A K Kaul ji, Yes I agree you are repeating and I am repeating. " > > When I say that there is no ambiguity about the fact that as far as > predictive gimmicks are concerned, they are anti-Vedic, what type of > bias do you find in that statement? " This statement itself, shows the bias - I wonder how you cant see that. " I have repeated it literally hundreds > of times that there is a direct conflict between Mesha, Vrisha etc. > rashi based predictive gimmicks and the real Vedic calendar! " 1. That is not a " conflict " . It is just that they are different. The way lunar month and solar month and consequently solar year are in irrational proportions and have to be reconciled, these can also be. And that corrective can only be on what is currently being followed and not the other way round. Reconciling two kinds of years is not impossile unless one's efforts are not in that direction. 2. I gave example how the " seasonal " aspect is actually in favor of the current calculation - the current celebrations are done according to the farmer's cycle and that is the primary purpose. Moreover as Sri Nambiar said, what makes something a festival? Why should one do something only on a specific day? What is auspicious and inauspicious? Does Ganesh Caturthi currently get celebrated as per Puranic injunctions, when the Ganesha Nakshatras raise along with sunrise? Does Indra-Vritra allegory still hold good as the marker of varsha ritu? 3. Coming to prediction as a subject, I said that anyone who understands the grand scheme of Hindu literature will not limit himself to samhita as the criterion. 4. I have also indicated that " whether astrology is there " , " what is the correct date and how to determine " are different questions. 5. Yes the modern astrologers are going by western zodiac and that is not being helpful. There are also people who do not. 6. Why are there 12 adityas, and 12 sankramanas? Why does the year start with mesha sankramana? What is Sankranti after all (leaving for the time being whether it is correct today or not)? I have indicated earlier how Purana clearly tells this through Prajapati the lord of year being beheaded by Siva and assuming the head of mesha, marking the beginning of new cycle. I have given many such examples of the socalled " rashis " that you cared only to dismiss. The allegories of vehicles and flags of several devatas indicate them. Some of these are imported directly from Vedic allegories. You cannot expect more from Purana because it is not an Astronomical text. It is as simple as that. And this is from the same " Puranas " which you are quoting about when to celebrate Pitri Amavasya. 7. From your own explanation, it is evident that neither Munjala nor any other astronomer took the confrontationist stand but only tried to be corrective and suggestive. If you seek correction, it is the same path you should also probably tread. 8. Again, the correction of calendar is a different thing from going against astrologers. And your criterion of " Vedic sanction " is in its spirit unVedic. " > The long and short of this discussion, as such, is that phalita > jyotishis, who call themselves " Vedic astrologers " these days, are > responsible for the mayhem in Hindu calendar and we have to put a > full stop to the same. " That is totally different from saying astrology does not exist, just because they follow the so called rashis. It is far fetched to say the least. Because the whole story of how the " recent " ones started " bad calculations " does not imply that rashis are that " recent " , nor does that imply phalita jyotisha is that " recent " . If this " recent " one is fraud, then the " old " one is not, and that still holds rashis. hinducivilization , " Avtar Krishen Kaul " <jyotirved@> wrote: > > Shri Shankara Bharadwaj Khandavalliji, > Namaskar! > Thanks for the mail. > < Here you are clearly getting biased, and your focus appears more in > attacking Astrology than dealing with the problem of correct > calendar, don't you think so? > > > When I say that there is no ambiguity about the fact that as far as > predictive gimmicks are concerned, they are anti-Vedic, what type of > bias do you find in that statement? It is a statement of facts and > unless someone proves that there are predictive gimmicks in the > Vedas, merely repeating " phalita jyotisha is a Vedanga " like a parrot > is not going to solve the problem! They are on the other hand > proving their own ignorance and/or ulterior motives by insisting > on " Vedic astrology " without any grounds/proofs. > Regarding your statement, " attacking astrology than dealing with the > problem of correct calendar " , I have repeated it literally hundreds > of times that there is a direct conflict between Mesha, Vrisha etc. > rashi based predictive gimmicks and the real Vedic calendar! I have > also repeated it hundreds of times that the Hindu community has to > choose either of the two---i.e. either " Vedic astrology " (read > predictive gimmicks) or celebrating festivals on correct days. The > fact of the matter is that Vedic calendar is based on Madhu, Madhava > etc. seasonal months, which are totally unrelated to any type of > Rashis and therefore any ayanamsha on the shoulders of precession! > We could say that because Western Rashis like Aries, Taurus etc. are > aligned to seasons, as such, even the Vedic calendar is based on > Western astrological signs. That is exactly what Rashtriya Panchanga > is doing even today. It calls Madhu as Vedic (Sayana) Mina and > Madhava as Vedic (Sayana) Mesha etc. That is absolutely wrong! > Firstly, because when there are no Mesha, Vrisha etc. Rashis in the > Vedas, there is absolutely no dichotomy of so called Sayana or so > called Nirayana. As such, how can the Rashtriya Panchanga align > Western astrological Pisces with Madhu and Aries with Madhava and so > on? > Secondly, if some how or the other without any rhyme or reason we > agree with the Rashtirya Panchanga that Vedic months are Western > astrological Rashis, it means that the so called nirayana whether > Lahiri or Ramana etc. Aries, Taurus etc. rashis are actually non- > Vedic and even anti-Vedic according to the Rashtriya Panchanga itself > since both i.e. nirayana and sayana cannot be Vedic simultaneously! > (Pl. see rashi5.doc in files section). > > Thirdly, Vedas do talk of Kritika, Rohini etc. nakshatras hundreds of > times---though there is absolutely no mention of Mesha (Aries) etc > rashis even once. By linking Western Aries etc. Rashis to the > Vedas/Vedic calendar, we get completely de-linked from nakshatras! > For example, the Junction Star of Ashvini nakshatra i.e. Beta Arietis > is around 34 degrees as per the so called Sayana reckoning which > means that it will fall in Sayana Taurus, whereas Hindu jyotishis > want Ashvini nakshatra to coincide with Mesharamba bindu i.e. Vernal > Equinox always! And Vernal Equinox is Sayana Aries and is known as > First point of Aries! Thus we cannot choose so called sayana rashis > either! > And the so called nirayana rashis cannot be linked to seasons at > all! Therefore, for Vedic calendar, rashis are completely ruled out. > > Ironically, on the other hand, phalita jyotisha has absolutely no > existence without Mesha, Vrisha etc., Sayana rashis for Western > astrologers and nirayana ones for Hindu astrologers! > Thus that is the dichotomy and that is the conflict between phalita > jyotisha---whether sayana or nirayana---and the real Vedic calendar! > And that is why I have taken up cudgels against the so called Vedic > astrology, whether the so called Sayana or so called nirayana! > > <Here if you say that Astrologers introduced this error, you must > concede that we have been following them all the while. If not, then > one should understand that accuracy in mathematical calculations > improves over time and the inaccuracy in calculation in the Vedic and > VJ times should be adjusted.> > Surya Sidhnata is the main culprit for this error! There is a direct > conflict between its calculations and its statements! When it > says " Bhanor Makar Sankranteh shanmasa Uttarayanam, Karkyades > tathaiva syat shanmasa dakshinayanam " i.e. the six months of > Uttarayana start from the date of Makara Sankranti, when the day is > the shortest and the six months of Dakshinayana start from Karkata > Sankranti, when the day is the longest " , it was/is obviously talking > of a seasonal year i.e. tropical year vis-a-vis Mesha etc. Sayana > rashis, as was being done by Greek astrologers in second century > BCE! However, the duration of a year as per its calculations is > neither seasonal (Tropical) nor sidereal but more by eight palas i.e. > 3.2 seconds than even the sidereal year! Though the same Surya > Sidhanta has also advised that the longitudes must be tallied with > the exact phenomena from time to time, but somehow, it conveyed the > impression that since it was revealed by Surya Bhagwan, its > calculations could never be wrong! > AND THAT IS WHAT HAS CONFUSED everybody right from Varahamihira to > Bhasakra-II! They went on making corrections in such a clumsy manner > that made the confusion got worst confounded! Instead of making > Makar Sankranti coincide with the Winter Solstice, as desired by the > Surya Sidhanta, they went on making Uttarayana tally with the Makar > Sankranti calculated as per the Surya Sidhanta calculations! THAT IS > AN IMPOSSIBLE TASK! And that is why we have hundreds of Ayanamshas! > > Munjala was the only Indian astronomer who could see as to what was > happening. As such, he advised to subtract one arc minute per year > from the longitudes of all the planets calculated as per the SS > calculations since Shaka 444. That way the calculated Makar > Sankranti tallied exactly with the Uttarayana (Winter Solstice!) and > Karkata Sankranti with Dakshinayana (Summer Solstice) and so on in > his time. As per Alberuni's India, Munjala was the most accomplished > Indian astronomer and Bhatotpala (actually Utapala Bhata) of Kashmir > was wise/intelligent enough to have followed the Munjala beeja > corrections! > K. S. Shukla has said in his translation of Munjala's Lagumanasa that > Munjala's system was followed throughout India for several centuries > right from Kashmir to Kayna Kumari, which means that Makar Sankranti > coincided with Uttarayana and so on for several centuries after > eleventh century. > > It was only after Bhaskara-II that things appear to have gone wrong > again! Though he has referred to Munjala's Ayanamsha in his Sidhanta > Shiromani, however, he has not advised any such corrections! > > Historical records show that even during Mughal rule, Vernal Equinox > was celebrated as Mesha Sankranti and Makara Sankranti as Uttarayana > and so on! Things appear started spinning on their heads with the > advent of Grahalaghava---sixteenth century---when Ganesha Daivajnya > advocated corrections absolutely contrary to that of Munjala! He > advised that we must subtract one arc minute per year from the actual > i.e. Sayana longitudes of planets starting from Shaka 444! And since > there were only phalita jyotishis and no real Hindu astronomers > around then, nobody could see as to what a mess he was creating by > making the visible phenomena subservient to calculated longitudes of > the Surya Sidhanta! AND THAT IS HOW THE THINGS GOT OUT OF CONTROL! > > That also shows that till about sixteenth century AD, astronomers > like Munjala had been followed which yielded correct longitudes of > the sun and moon vis-à-vis the actual phenomena! > It thus proves that though the seeds of wrong Hindu calendars had > been sown by the Surya Sidhanta in around 2nd century, however, the > things went completely out of control from sixteenth century AD--- > when Ganesha Daivajnya invented an ayanamsha to tally exactly with > the Surya Sdhanta calculations. > > What is most pathetic and tragic is that because of sinister elements > like late N. C. Lahiri in the Saha Calendar Reform Committee (1955), > that committee also recommended an Ayanamsha nearer to that of > Grahalaghava---to be subtracted from Sayana longitudes which N. C. > Lahiri named Chitra Ayanamsha euphemistically, when everybody knows > it as Lahiri Ayanamsha, since it has absolutely no connection with > Chitra (Spica) Star actually! > N. C. Lahiri, instead of calendar reform, was more worried about the > sales of his Lahiri's Indian Ephemeris and the Vishudha Sidhanta > Panjika---—both of which were using an ayanamsha which was nearer to > Grahalaghava in mid 40s of the previous century! > And N. C. Lahiri was assisted/helped by Hindu jyotishis (nobody > called predictive gimmicks as Vedic astrology till about late > seventies of the last century!) who were following Grahalaghava as > that was the easiest available Karna-grantha, for calculating their > panchangas! > The long and short of this discussion, as such, is that phalita > jyotishis, who call themselves " Vedic astrologers " these days, are > responsible for the mayhem in Hindu calendar and we have to put a > full stop to the same. > I have tried to explain the real problem of calendar reform vis-a- > vis " Vedic astrology " succinctly and in a layman's language. I am > sure all the members can understand as to what has gone wrong and > where and they will definitely strive to overcome the problem. And > the only way out is to dissociate ourselves from predictive gimmicks-- > -at least divest those gimmicks of any presumed and imaginary > scriptural sanctions----if we want to really follow the Vedic > calendar. > With regards, > A K Kaul > > > hinducivilization , ShankaraBharadwaj > Khandavalli <shankarabharadwaj@> wrote: > > > > Pranam Sri A K Kaul ji, > > > > " I can > > assure you that there is absolutely no ambiguity about the fact > that > > as far as predictive gimmicks are concerned, they are anti-Vedic! " > > > > Here you are clearly getting biased, and your focus appears more in > attacking Astrology than dealing with the problem of correct > calendar, don't you think so? I think this input is given by other > learned members too. > > > > > > " They are irrelevant because > > when all the Puranas and sidhantas tell us in one voice that Makar > > Sankranti is another name of Uttarayana, the shortest day of the > > year, and Karkata Sankranti is a synonym of Dakshinayana, the > longest > > day of the year and so on, why should you come to the support > > of " Vedic astrologers " when they advise us to celebrate Uttarayan- > cum- > > Makar Sankranti on January 14/15 instead of December 21/22 etc. " > > > > Because of the simple fact I stated: Your Sankranti is calculated > based on the length of the year and centuries of error in the > calculation, even of one single minute, would introduce this > difference. > > > > Here if you say that Astrologers introduced this error, you must > concede that we have been following them all the while. If not, then > one should understand that accuracy in mathematical calculations > improves over time and the inaccuracy in calculation in the Vedic and > VJ times should be adjusted. > > > > In either case, attacking Astrology is far from solving the > problem. > > > > " > > It appears you have neither read any of the Puranas nor any of the > > sidhantas yourself, since there is absolutely no ambiguity about > the > > fact that Vishuva i.e. Vernal Equinox is another name of Mesha > > Sankranti as per all the Puranas and Sidhantas! What has the error > > in calculation to do with the same? " > > > > It has, as I respond to the subsequent point: > > > > " > > The sidhantas also have said that their calculations must be > > subjected to beeja corrections in order to make the results tally > > exactly with the visible phenomena as was done by Munjala in around > > 11the century AD " > > > > Here I have a few points to mention: since this calculative > phenomenon, observational aspect to track the " visible phenomena " has > really come down. This is not an apologetic statement, I am only > stating what is obvious. > > > > The second point is that a considerable difference in the visible > phenomenon happens over long periods of time. And a corrective will > be needed. No one here pointed out that your calendar project is > incorrect - but it should be a corrective and not an attack on a > subject. > > > > " > > I think I have given you enough of cogent and plausible reasons to > > see as to how even scholars like you are being taken for a ride > > by " Vedic astrologers " who cannot even pronounce the word " Rig- > Veda " > > correctly! " > > > > Firstly, I do not consider myself a scholar. Secondly, as I > mentioned earlier, you are mixing many things here - as a result of > which something which can be synthetic is ending up as a conflict. > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > Avtar Krishen Kaul <jyotirved@> > > hinducivilization > > Friday, December 26, 2008 3:20:29 PM > > [hc] Re: " Vedic astrology! Eh? Nothing Vedic about it " --K > N Rao > > > > > > Shri Shankara Bharadwaj Khandavalliji, > > Namaskar! > > Thanks for the reply. > > < To me there is a lot of ambiguity and there are too many factors > > that can invert our conclusions on these. Multiplicity of schools, > > depth of time and evolving practices, loss of literature are only a > > few to mention. And it is simplistic to take on astrology as the > > devil.> > > > > Since I have gone through all the Vedas and the VJ and YJ etc., I > can > > assure you that there is absolutely no ambiguity about the fact > that > > as far as predictive gimmicks are concerned, they are anti-Vedic! > I > > can also equally assure you that there is no ambiguity about the > > absence of Mesha, Vrisha etc. rashis from the Vedas and the VJ and > YJ > > etc. Same is the case with Mangal, Shani etc. planets. > > > > Regarding " inverting our conclusions " , I had studied the Vedas to > > prove to the whole world as to how " Vedic astrology " was really > > Vedic, as that is what I had been reading in the Astrological > > Magazine and panchangas and all the jyotisha books by most capabale > > astrologers. That is also what was dinned into my ears continuously > > by my parents and grandparents etc. As such, I was literally > caught > > on the wrong foot when I found all that hogwash baseless! > > > > I was under the impression that people like Dr. Raman and K N Rao > and > > other " world famous " astrologers would immediately agree with me, > the > > moment I pointed out such fallacies to them, but unfortunately, > they > > had made it a prestige point to stand by whatever wrong statements > > they were making! That is why I say, " aakhir paapi pet ka saval > hai " . > > > > Regarding " loss of literature " , the unfortunate fact is that " Vedic > > astrologers " are claiming predictive gimmicks to be " Vedic > astrology " > > on the basis of whatever Vedic literature was/is available! If > they > > were really concerned about " lost literature " , they should > certainly > > have waited for the same to be found first befor crying from > > housetops that astrology is a Vedanga! > > > > It is not " simplistic to take astrology as devil " but it is really > > the devil since " Vedic astrology " is anti-Vedic as it is compelling > > us to celebrate all our festivals and muhuras on wrong days! > > > > <Since how long have Hindus been following Lahiri or Raman or any > > other Pancanga? What was the timing of Varahamihira? What kind of > > error would their calculation induce over that length time, that we > > celebrate our festivals almost a month later? What is the kind of > > accuracy in calculation we find in Vedic days and from VJ times, > and > > what kind of error would that induce over such length of time?> > > > > We are just avoiding the issue as to whether we are celebrating > > festivals on correct days or not by postulating all these > > hypothetical and irrelevant questions! They are irrelevant because > > when all the Puranas and sidhantas tell us in one voice that Makar > > Sankranti is another name of Uttarayana, the shortest day of the > > year, and Karkata Sankranti is a synonym of Dakshinayana, the > longest > > day of the year and so on, why should you come to the support > > of " Vedic astrologers " when they advise us to celebrate Uttarayan- > cum- > > Makar Sankranti on January 14/15 instead of December 21/22 etc. > Why > > should we try to look for scapegoats to assist them in their > > nefarious activities of derailing the entire Hindu community from > its > > dharma of celebrating festivals on correct days? > > It appears you have neither read any of the Puranas nor any of the > > sidhantas yourself, since there is absolutely no ambiguity about > the > > fact that Vishuva i.e. Vernal Equinox is another name of Mesha > > Sankranti as per all the Puranas and Sidhantas! What has the error > > in calculation to do with the same? On the other hand, these " Vedic > > astrologers " (frauds!) should have rectified such errors with the > > help of latest technologies and instead of believing Lahiri or > Raman > > etc. verified the facts for themselves. In fact, your very > > question " since how long have Hindus been following Lahiri or Raman > > or any other Pancanga? " flies in the face of these frauds as they > > instead of Vedic astrologers, they are actually Lahiri or Raman or > > Chandra Hari or Fagan astrologers and want us to believe their > > nonsense because it is their " paapi pet ka savaal " . > > > > <5000 years since MBH, an error of a single minute in the length > of > > year from then would put us about a fortnight behind by now. This > is > > with plain arithmetic, without considering any other factors and > > changes to the calculations over time.> > > > > The sidhantas also have said that their calculations must be > > subjected to beeja corrections in order to make the results tally > > exactly with the visible phenomena as was done by Munjala in around > > 11the century AD. As such, the ball squarely lies in the court > > of " Vedic astrologers " since instead of making Makar Sankranti > > correspond with the shortest day of the year, they are removing it > > away by one day every seventy-two years---by making " Lahiri Beeja > > corrections " ---a word most obnoxious in letter as well as spirit! > > Fie on these " Vedic astrologers " . > > > > I think I have given you enough of cogent and plausible reasons to > > see as to how even scholars like you are being taken for a ride > > by " Vedic astrologers " who cannot even pronounce the word " Rig- > Veda " > > correctly! > > With regards, > > A K Kaul > > > > hinducivilization, ShankaraBharadwaj > > Khandavalli <shankarabharadwaj@ ...> wrote: > > > > > > Pranam Sri A K Kaul ji, > > > > > > " > > > Your replies are actually more confusing than enlighening! " > > > > > > I am too small to enlighten someone as learned as you. I am only > > pointing things that seem obvious to me. > > > > > > " > > > Sometimes you say that astrology is " present " in the Vedas though > > we > > > cannot see the same. Then you say that " nirayana " Rashis may > not > > be > > > in the Vedas but they are in later astrologcial works! When > asked > > to > > > name even a single such indigenous pre-Surya Sidhanta astrolgical > > > wrok which talks of Mesha etc. rashis, you give an entirely > > different > > > twist to the entire discussion, so that we lose all the track of > > the > > > subject of discussion! " > > > > > > To me there is a lot of ambiguity and there are too many factors > > that can invert our conclusions on these. Multiplicity of schools, > > depth of time and evolving practices, loss of literature are only a > > few to mention. And it is simplistic to take on astrology as the > > devil. > > > > > > " > > > Now you say that because the Vedanga Jyotisha has given the wrong > > > duration of a year that is why we are celebrating our festivals > and > > > muhurtas on worng days, in spite of the fact that nobody is going > > by > > > the VJ these days, least of all NASA/JPL, whose data is being > used > > by > > > Rashtirya (read Lahiri) Panchanga after ayanamsha tonsure! " > > > > > > I have not said it is wrong. The reason I put the question is to > > hint at the factor of depth of time. > > > > > > > > > In the first place, VJ is not a text of Vedic times. The " Vedic > > calculation of year " perhaps saw a modification at VJ times, and > that > > in turn has seen changes later on. > > > > > > Since how long have Hindus been following Lahiri or Raman or any > > other Pancanga? What was the timing of Varahamihira? What kind of > > error would their calculation induce over that length time, that we > > celebrate our festivals almost a month later? What is the kind of > > accuracy in calculation we find in Vedic days and from VJ times, > and > > what kind of error would that induce over such length of time? And > if > > Astrologers' calculation is solely responsible for " error " , then it > > should also be conceded that their tradition is much older than you > > suggest. > > > > > > 5000 years since MBH, an error of a single minute in the length > of > > year from then would put us about a fortnight behind by now. This > is > > with plain arithmetic, without considering any other factors and > > changes to the calculations over time. > > > > > > So the whole problem of calculation of festivals on " right " days > is > > very incomplete without all those things taken into picture. I > think > > attacking these " recent " versions will only take you in a loop. > > > > > > " > > > Astrologers cannot answer my questions because they are not > > > scientists! And sceintists cannot answer them because they are > not > > > astrologers! What are you? A scientist or an astrologer or > > neither > > > or both? " > > > > > > I stand by the first. The second, I did not say but you are not > > wrong. Because astrology involves something more than these > > calculations. > > > > > > As for me, I am neither by practice, but have learned a > littttttle > > of both. I have seen a whole range of people who > are " astrologers " , > > who are not, who do predictions and what not. You might be > surprised > > to know that there are a lot of people who look at some chart (they > > do not even know the basics of how to draw a chart) and make right > > predictions. There are people who make such charts. There are also > > people who study Panca Siddhantika and make calculations, and do > > predictions. And there are people who studied the " science " and > > cannot predict. > > > > > > " > > > <So your questions are going to virtually none! > > > > > > > Still you are answering them! " > > > > > > Well I wish I know enough to answer. The person who has the > correct > > answer can seldom be found. Most opinions and calculations have > > limitations. But my intention in saying that is, to bring a > positive > > change the system is really too big and complex, with no single > > deciding authority where sufficient information and power is there. > > Anything has to start as a tradition, and that freedom is > fortunately > > there in our society. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > Avtar Krishen Kaul <jyotirved@ ..> > > > hinducivilization > > > Wednesday, December 17, 2008 8:59:50 PM > > > [hc] Re: " Vedic astrology! Eh? Nothing Vedic about it " -- > K > > N Rao > > > > > > > > > Shri Shankara Bharadwaj Khandavalliji, > > > Namaskar! > > > Your replies are actually more confusing than enlighening! > > > Sometimes you say that astrology is " present " in the Vedas though > > we > > > cannot see the same. Then you say that " nirayana " Rashis may > not > > be > > > in the Vedas but they are in later astrologcial works! When > asked > > to > > > name even a single such indigenous pre-Surya Sidhanta astrolgical > > > wrok which talks of Mesha etc. rashis, you give an entirely > > different > > > twist to the entire discussion, so that we lose all the track of > > the > > > subject of discussion! > > > > > > Now you say that because the Vedanga Jyotisha has given the wrong > > > duration of a year that is why we are celebrating our festivals > and > > > muhurtas on worng days, in spite of the fact that nobody is going > > by > > > the VJ these days, least of all NASA/JPL, whose data is being > used > > by > > > Rashtirya (read Lahiri) Panchanga after ayanamsha tonsure! > > > > > > Then you say, " I do not think any astrologer will have answers to > > > your questions, because he is not a scientist - he does not study > > why > > > things work and what is the basis for the entire subject. He is > the > > > consumer of the subject. " This is all talking in circles! > > > Astrologers cannot answer my questions because they are not > > > scientists! And sceintists cannot answer them because they are > not > > > astrologers! What are you? A scientist or an astrologer or > > neither > > > or both? > > > > > > Your following statement takes the cake > > > > > > <So your questions are going to virtually none! > > > > > > > Still you are answering them! > > > Regards, > > > A K Kaul > > > > > > --- End forwarded message --- 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.