My initial thoughts after joining this forum

[Guest guest]

Dear Sanat and other friends,

On the inivitation of dear Sanat, I joined this forum to-day. My

initial reading of a few posts makes me to think that the

discussions in this forum are going to be very fruitful and

knowledgeble.

I have always sought ways to put Astrology on the scientific plane

because in the core of my heart, I believe Vedic Astrolgoy to be

nothing but science. I am a Statistician and therefore constantly

think of applying the laws of regression and statistical modelling

to the astrological data but limitation is the paucity of enough

scientifically collected data and lack of an appropriate software to

store the data.

My main opposition to the non-believers argument is that nobody

opposes Astrology after reading the same. All critics are those who

have not read Astrology and therefore their criticism that it is

bunkum and not a science is meaningless. (For elucidiation please

read my article at http://www.merinews.com/catFull.jsp?

articleID=123744 )

When we say that Astrology is not a science, we obviously relate it

to the modern science we know of for the last one thousand years. We

forget that astrology is at least five thousand years old and the

modern science is too primitive to measure its " scientific

character " . That is what I and many of you must be coming across

many times in the day when we see a pattern emerging at one time in

our predictions but it gets lost in some cases. Surely there is

something that is missing to hold on the argument to the exact

mathematical equation that defines the scinetific cult.

These are my initial thoughts and more shall come in subsequent

mails.

Pran Razdan

[Guest guest]

Resp. Razdan Ji,

Namaskar,

Welcome and thanks for joining the forum.

Thanks for your comments >>>>>> very fruitful and

knowledgeable <<<<<<about the forum

 

So let us start from your observation >>>>>>>> in the core of my

heart, I believe Vedic Astrolgoy to be nothing but science.<<<<<<<<.

In this connection I will just like to know as to in which Ved;

predicitive astrology has been taken.

 

>>>>>>>> nobody opposes Astrology after reading the same<<<<<< Yes,

you are right. But have you analyzed the reason for this. Reason for

such happening is because we all are human beings having some thought

and dreams. Hence when any one goes through predictive astrological

books having modern scientific data borrowed from NASA and not from

Indian scriptures then he immediately fall in the trap and like to

read prediction of his own/family members. Many subjective prediction

appears to be related to us. Hence a reader who has no intention to

dive in it simply believes it and can never came out of it. Second

category relates to those readers who continue to try any predictive

principles on the horoscope of friends and so on. What he find that

some subjective prediction may be right and some may be wrong. But he

is new in this field and he continue to think that wrong prediction

is his ignorance as he is novice and a good astrologer may be right.

Thus in hope of getting some correct prediction he continues his

journey like a deer in desert. In this process he continue to add so

called correct prediction in his mind for impressing his capability

to his friends. Thus he continues so where is the question that he

may deny it, and some percent of such persons establish themselves as

an expert astrologer and unknowingly or knowingly exploit innocent

public.

 

And in category of >>>>>> All critics are those who have not read

Astrology and therefore their criticism that it is bunkum and not a

science is meaningless.<<<<<<< those persons fall who observed a

false prediction from a so called expert astrologer hence he forms

such views.

 

But in my case I have neither lured by some correct prediction nor

dishearten by some wrong prediction. But I was also of the opinion

that correct application of principle may lead to correct prediction.

Hence I continue to study it and developed many software to find the

correct foolproof prediction. You may see Eskain horoscope in file

section which has fusion of almost all prediction rules but without

any correct prediction. This leads me to think as to how astrological

principles were formulated and whether there is some mistake in

original basic principles. (refer " astrology science or myth " in file

section). After lot of research my two original books has been

published and not a single astrologer has come forward to deny the

bare fact, rather readers have appreciated this book.

 

>>>>>>When we say that Astrology is not a science, we obviously

relate it

to the modern science we know of for the last one thousand years. We

forget that astrology is at least five thousand years old and the

modern science is too primitive to measure its " scientific

character " .<<<<<<<

I disagree with above views as science is not modern science but

science is a continuous process of learning and accumulation of

knowledge. So it is neither new nor old. When our ancestral learn to

lit fire it was also science and when we land on Mars it is also

science. Main problem is faith that predictive astrology based on

primitive knowledge is science (as is being propagated by astrologer

in their business interest) which can not be understood by modern

science. But it is not so.

 

You can also read SOA____ files and pick any point for deep analysis.

 

Thanks for your views. Hope you will continue to share your views.

 

Yours truly,

 

sanat

 

12-7-08

PS : Some members have joined the forum in last week. We the members

of the forum welcome all new members and hope they will share their

views on astrology for useful discussion. Members may also visit file

section.

We are not receiving any msg from Vinivj, Ghopal, Naik ji and so on,

hence we are missing them. We hope everyone will be quite OK.

 

 

 

 

 

, " pnrazdan " <pnrazdan

wrote:

>

> Dear Sanat and other friends,

> On the inivitation of dear Sanat, I joined this forum to-day. My

> initial reading of a few posts makes me to think that the

> discussions in this forum are going to be very fruitful and

> knowledgeble.

> I have always sought ways to put Astrology on the scientific plane

> because in the core of my heart, I believe Vedic Astrolgoy to be

> nothing but science. I am a Statistician and therefore constantly

> think of applying the laws of regression and statistical modelling

> to the astrological data but limitation is the paucity of enough

> scientifically collected data and lack of an appropriate software

to

> store the data.

> My main opposition to the non-believers argument is that nobody

> opposes Astrology after reading the same. All critics are those who

> have not read Astrology and therefore their criticism that it is

> bunkum and not a science is meaningless. (For elucidiation please

> read my article at http://www.merinews.com/catFull.jsp?

> articleID=123744 )

> When we say that Astrology is not a science, we obviously relate it

> to the modern science we know of for the last one thousand years.

We

> forget that astrology is at least five thousand years old and the

> modern science is too primitive to measure its " scientific

> character " . That is what I and many of you must be coming across

> many times in the day when we see a pattern emerging at one time in

> our predictions but it gets lost in some cases. Surely there is

> something that is missing to hold on the argument to the exact

> mathematical equation that defines the scinetific cult.

> These are my initial thoughts and more shall come in subsequent

> mails.

> Pran Razdan

>