Bradley and the Ayanamsa (Part 1) [Long Post Warning]

[Guest guest]

>

> Bradley answers his own statement with a statistical comeback, in

part:

>

> *** " Using the synetic value for the 13 greatest earthquakes that

occurred

> in the world since 1900, Saturn is within two degrees of

conjunction or

> square the meridian of the epicenters seven times oftener

than " chance "

> would tend to allow. " ***

>

> Read this statement carefully: " ...seven times oftener than `chance

would

> tend to allow'... "

>

> Only seven times more often? Shouldn't **every** major earthquake

have a

> powerful signature for its locale, especially if loss of life is

extreme??

> IF the cyclic charts under study are valid....

>

> Also 13 is too small a number to use for good statistical analysis.

>

> Bradley is giving us a hint here of how he determined the planetary

> positions for rainfall. Using statistical analysis, the relevant

planets

> were in expected positions **more often than chance.**

Unfortunately we

> don't have the details of `expected positions' for Bradley's

research nor

> how he determined these positions.

------------------------

Therese,

 

I think you are under-cutting Bradley's statistical presentation or

trying to relegate it to the same

category as " lying with statistics " that we are seeing in political

presentations. If you look at

Gary Duncan's article in the Ayanamsa file, you'll see that they

(Duncan and Bradley) used

legitimate methods. This quotation from the Rainfall2 file shows just

how " significant " some of

the statistics are:

 

" The meridional distance of Jupiter at the CAPLUNAR INGRESS moments

preceding the 12 dates of heaviest rainfall at each of thousands of

rain-recording stations strewn across the nation--a total of 49,576

precipitation maxima--are calculated and plotted as running sums. Not

only does Jupiter prefer the upper-culminating region, but a striking

90 degree wave in its distribution exists! Any student of astrology

can recognize the pattern; the peaks are in the angular-cusp regions

basic in any horoscope. Jupiter plays out his classical Pluvius role

when near the Ascendant, Nadir and Descendant as well. When the

quadrants are superposed, with exacting probabilities taken account

of,

the violation of " normalcy " reaches the jarring figure of close to 15

standard deviations. Three SD's would do, and four would suffice to

establish the effect as a fact of nature, as an existing anomaly.

To

express 15 standard deviations as odds against it all being

coincidental would be a rather silly exercise in writing strings of

zeroes; in fact, the probability function hasn't even been calculated

for levels beyond the sixth or seventh SD. As one noted mathematician

stated openly at a professional seminar convened to discuss this very

matter. 'Ratios this size mean that it is not a statistical fact we

are dealing with, but a physical law.' "

 

I would say that using 45,576 instances is a sufficiently large

sample, wouldn't you?

 

 

Juan:

 

In conversations with Jim Eshelman (who carried on extensive

correspondence with Bradley and

with Gary Duncan) I recall his saying that Bradley used

the " Standard " Q2 progression rate with

the solar and lunar ingresses. Duncan's article does indicate that

Bradley was using geocentric

rather than geographic terrestrial latitudes, though, which could

introduce error with horizon

contacts. I also am assuming that bodily hits were used, though I'm

not certain of that.

 

In the course of a lunar month, or even a solar year, there won't be

_much_ difference between

the timings of angular quotidian hits using either mean Q1 or Q2

rates. But there is a difference

between using mean and apparent rates. I don't know if there is any

software that will calculate

apparent rates with accuracy. Most will do mean Q1 or Q2 with little

problem. This, of course,

makes comparison of rates more difficult. Ideally, I would like to be

able to settle on one rate as

the " correct " one.

 

As an illustration of the quotidian rates and their angles, here are

two recent earthquakes with

three different sets of angles.

 

CapSolar 2003 1/15/2003 8:46:32 UT progressed to:

 

Paso Robles, CA 35N37' 36 " 120W41' 24 " Quake 12/22/2003 11:15:56

AM PST

Mean Q1 LST 6:47: 27 MC 16 Gem 08 ASC 15 Vir 05

Mean Q2 LST 6:51: 12 MC 17 Gem 00 ASC 15 Vir 51

App. Q1 LST 6:37:48 MC 13 Gem 53 ASC 13 Vir 04

Transit Saturn 15 Gem 43 R Tr Saturn culminates 6:45:28

 

Bam, Iran 29N06 58E21 Quake 12/26/2003 5:26:52 AM IT (-3:30)

Mean Q1 LST 18:56:32 MC 18 Sag 14 ASC 25 Pis 18

Mean Q2 LST 19:00:19 MC 19 Sag 06 ASC 26 Pis 36

App. Q1 LST 18:47:30 MC 16 Sag 08 ASC 22 Pis 29

Transit Saturn 15 Gem 27R anti-culminates 18:44:20

 

I have used the populated areas where lives were lost rather than

epicenters for the quakes.

 

As you can see, even late in the period covered by the ingress, the

divergence is not great.

 

Sidereally yours,

Matthew