Bradley and the Ayanamsa (Part 1)

[Guest guest]

BRADLEY AND THE AYANAMSA (Part 1)

 

I hope I'm not he only one who checked out some of the articles recommended

by Matthew Quellas. Here's one very interesting quote from Donald Bradley

under " Anyanamsa. " (http://www.magee.demon.co.uk/ayanamsa.txt)

 

" The point we are getting at here is that a randomly invented, wholly

groundless ayanamsa will yield highly ‘significant' ingress charts for a

majority of events. Yes, we said majority and meant it... " (Bradley

apparently always used ‘we,' though in reality he meant only himself.)

 

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.

 

I decided to test Bradley's statement about the random ayanamsa with two

events that have been discussed on this list: the heavy rains and snows

here in the mountains and the flooding in Prague in 1992 which Pingo talked

about. I'll talk about this in a second post.

 

Therese