("Slartibartfast" stepping in for Hermes :)
)o+
--
http://www.exactphilosophy.net/
Something different...
--
In article <48286ad4@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
"Ray Murphy" <raymur@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> "Hermes" <hermes@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:hermes-FE4EB5.09351112052008@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Ray Murphy wrote:
> > : RM: Continuing on, for the others who have an interest in the
> > Virgo-
> > : Taurus basketballers:-
> > :
> > : VIR + TAU basketballers
> > : 285 -- 217 -- SUN
> > : 247 -- 225 -- MOO
> > : 252 -- 200 -- MER
> > : 317 -- 209 -- VEN
> > : 326 -- 211 -- MAR
> > : ------------------------
> > : 1427 - 1062
> > : ------------------------
> >
> > Now *that* looks more like a real indication...
> >
> > What took you so long? :)
>
> RM: I started a thread a week ago so others could suggest suitable
> tests that would allow us to legitimately bypass an inordinate number
> of degrees of freedom which keep retarding astrological research.
>
> The thread -- "Basketballers observation was a signpost" (plus the
> introductory text for it) were meant to provide small clues which
> could have brought forward comment like:
>
> __"If SUN in VIR is (in reality) more prominent than SUN in TAU for
> basketball, then astrological reasoning would suggest that the Moons
> of both signs should also point in the same direction" __
>
> Such an obvious suggestion may well have received acceptance and
> also a consensus that we would *not* be testing 12 zodiac signs but 2,
> and if the scores (Observed -v- Expected) yielded a Chi square answer
> that looked promising, we would use 1 Degree of freedom to find the
> probability score and not 11.
>
> As can be seen by the scores, there *wouldn't* have been an
> interesting Chi square result, but it would have shown us that Virgo
> may still be worth following because it was higher than Taurus for
> a second time.
>
> Naturally that line of thought could have been extended to include
> MER, VEN, MAR and Rising sign, but not outer planets, and all of
> it could have been done in relation to Expected scores between
> 2 signs and not 12.
>
> Who knows ~what~ may have been suggested in response to my
> "Signpost" thread, but any suggestions that involved using lots of
> Degrees of freedom wouldn't have been pursued by me because
> I finally discovered that they are mostly a complete waste of time
> with the amounts of data that are normally available.
Can't that I say that I agree or disagree with what you said
above. Is not precise and specific enough (at least to me)
what is being expressed or meant.
What I can say with regards to the new counts for Mercury,
Moon, Venus and Mars is this:
* 285 -- 217 -- SUN
That alone was expected (selection process one of 100, with
a probability per category of 2 in 100 - yes, really :).
* 247 -- 225 -- MOO
Looks equal within expected random fluctuations.
* 252 -- 200 -- MER
Looks already better, but since Mercury remains close to
the sun, is not unexpected following the sun counts.
* 317 -- 209 -- VEN
Now that one is big, a factor of 1.5. Even though also
Venus remains relatively close to the sun, that alone does
apparently not allow to explain the count.
* 326 -- 211 -- MAR
That one is big, too, also a factor of 1.5. Mars's motion
is pretty chaotic seen from earth, not bound to the sun.
All in all, could well be worth some further scientific
investigation. Could still turn out that the results are
artifacts or errors in the method of obtaining the data,
in principle, but, of course, not necessarily.
> > I have been doing my own kind of meta-research all along:
> >
> > *********************************************
> > * To me it looks like really the roles of northern lunar *
> > * node and southern lunar node are switched depending on *
> > * whether you are on the northern or southern hemisphere.*
> > *********************************************
> >
> > (The northern lunar node is ascending seen from the northern
> > hemisphere, but descending seen from the southern hemisphere,
> > and vice versa for the southern lunar node.)
> >
> > Thus always swimming against a larger northern hemisphere
> > current (larger population north of the equator) if you are
> > living in Australia (or somewhere else south of the equator),
> > I guess... Or am I still dreaming?
>
> RM: I look at it differently. As a "flogger of dead horses" from
> way back, I have much experience in identifying them now, and
> 11 degrees of freedom is a classic "dead horse" in astrological
> research. Also, as a SUN in SAG and a MER in SCO, I'm always
> looking for the bottom line and the bones of things. Of course it
> sounds excruciatingly boring to others at times and makes one
> look very naive, semi-literate or mentally retarded if one simplifies
> things too much in a world full of happy birthday parties, theatre
> and illusions.
>
> One of the "bottom lines" in astrology is that we are NOT saying
> "X-factor is stronger than 11 other factors" but we ARE saying that
> X-factor manifests more strongly than Y-factor or W-factor.
> For example we may not be able to predict much of a difference
> between the manifestations of MAR con ASC, or MAR con SAT,
> or MAR con URA, but we can surely see the difference between
> those factors and things like VEN con JUP, MOO con NEP etc.
>
> So up until now we have been testing astrology for what we are
> NOT saying. It's been the same for all of the skeptics - they have
> been ridiculing astrology and saying we have failed tests which
> were (in reality) NOT astrology at all.
My s.node is at about 20 Scorpio, conjunct Neptune. So I guess
in a way I know that kind of world and its laws quite well from
my "past lives". But then again I also do not feel in "this life"
like it being worth to fight to win, and mainly, if not only to
win. Other things seem more im****tant to me "this time around".
I know that this is a relative thing, your milage may vary
(your r.Mercury at about 20 Scorpio) and also for Apollia I am
certainly not saying that she should necessarily go one way or
the other (Lilith around 20 Scorpio, Chiron at about 20 Taurus).
And then there is t.Sedna around 20 Taurus. And for someone I
once fell in love with Jupiter there (and Neptune also around
20 Scorpio, like for me, but no s.node there).
My path appears quite clearly to lead out of "rather rule in
hell than serve in heaven" (subscript in Liz Greene's book
"The Astrology of Fate" below the section about Scorpio).
Maybe also because my part of fortune is at 29 Scorpio, i.e.
I am rather out of Scorpio than still in it...
: Odysseus could not really take the islands he visited on his
: journey with him back to Ithaca. But he made them part of
: himself in a way. Reminds me much of my fate...
-- http://www.exactphilosophy.net/"easter-egg"
I would prefer not to get any replies to this post in usenet.
Good luck everybody here,
Slartibartfast
|
