why prediction of usa is not done ?failure of great astrologer spk rising

September 10, 2006

-

hello sir,

what happened nadal lost ? ur greatness why did u fail?why donot make

some great techiqnues for advancing mundane astrology it is easy

critisise any one.

bye

ramalingam

-- In , SPK <aquaris_rising wrote:

>

> Which USA open you are talking about ? What sport ?

> Please sepcify.

>

> If you are talking about tennis, look at the seeding

> and you know what the organizers beleive.

>

> 1. Federer

> 2. Nadal

>

> Roddick may sneak into semis.

>

> Did anyone predict Oval test outcome as a forfeiture ?

> This happened for the first time in 129 years of

> Cricket history. If astrology could see these things,

> this was an instance where a completely unusual and

> unexpected happened. Did anyone see it ...NO NO NO.

> Did you predict that the tri sereis will not

> happen..NO.If you are really interested in advancing

> this tool and research try and make some positive

> contributions..not some generalities.Let those who

> actually do the predicting post on the groups. Why are

> you posting on behalf of someone else.

>

> Satish

>

> --- ramalingam2_sekar <ramalingam2_sekar

> wrote:

>

> > hello list members,

> > why donot the people who continously put down other

> > people predict

> > on usa open .some one made mocking comment it is so

> > easy?

> > any one can do it? it is only choice of two? any

> > country war will

> > happen. why are making any predictions? theory of

> > randomness and

> > probabilty can be used.

> > bye

> > ramalingam

> >

> > -- In , SPK

> > <aquaris_rising@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Hello Sundeep,

> > >

> > > Excellent post. I have been making similar point

> > for

> > > sometime now. Your post makes an excellent

> > observation

> > > of probability of being randomly correct.

> > >

> > > Its like someone saying that Australia will do

> > well in

> > > next cricket world cup. I mean they have been in

> > > finals in the past 3 world cups, so someone touts

> > that

> > > as a prediction, I feel that does not need any

> > > astrological knowledge what so ever. If one puts

> > > country chart and tithi pravesha and 20 divisional

> > > charts to back their prediction, I would consider

> > it a

> > > waste of time as same can be arrived at with an

> > ounce

> > > of commonsense.

> > >

> > > Anyone who can read and can use a program to cast

> > a

> > > horoscope can tell what lagna is in all the

> > divisions,

> > > what arudha is for a chart, yada yada yada. It is

> > > ameaningless banter. Predict when there are more

> > than

> > > two possibilities ( low probability of an event)

> > and

> > > do it consistently.

> > >

> > > Unfortunately I do not see anyone who can do such

> > a

> > > thing, even the most celebrated ones can not do

> > this.

> > > Thats why astrology is not taken seriously by most

> > > rational people.

> > >

> > > Satish

> > >

> > > --- vedicastrostudent <vedicastrostudent@>

> > > wrote:

> > >

> > > > Dear Bharatji,

> > > > Not only that, I feel what most people dont

> > > > understand is that in

> > > > order to understand the true value of a

> > prediction,

> > > > you must

> > > > additionally attach to it the probability of

> > > > randomly being correct.

> > > > For example, in two-outcome situations with

> > > > approximately equally

> > > > matched opponents e.g. a match between two teams

> > or

> > > > an election

> > > > between two candidates or a bill being

> > > > passed/rejected by lawmakers,

> > > > the probability of randomly being correct in a

> > > > prediction, without

> > > > using any principles whatsoever, is 0.5.

> > > > Consequently, any prediction

> > > > of such situations does not carry much weight to

> > > > begin with. In order

> > > > for a prediction to carry a lot of weight, the

> > > > probability of

> > > > randomly being correct should be very low.

> > > >

> > > > For example, if an astrologer were to correctly

> > > > predict the month and

> > > > year of birth of the first child of a person

> > when

> > > > the person was not

> > > > even thinking of being married, it would be an

> > > > extremely impressive

> > > > prediction, because the probability of randomly

> > > > being correct would

> > > > be very low. A random prediction would have to

> > > > select from at least

> > > > 10 childbearing years in each of which there

> > would

> > > > be 12

> > > > possibilities. So there would be at least a 100

> > > > possibilities making

> > > > the probability of a random hit being 0.01.

> > > >

> > > > Such predictions have to be highlighted (I mean

> > > > those in which random

> > > > chance of correctness is very low). Otherwise,

> > if

> > > > two-outcome

> > > > situations are what are to be focussed on, then

> > a

> > > > string of two

> > > > outcome situations must be shown e.g. a list of

> > > > twenty matches, in

> > > > each of which the prediction came true. The

> > > > probability of RANDOMLY

> > > > being correct in ALL 20, would be 0.5*0.5*0.5..

> > > > twenty times, which

> > > > is very low.

> > > >

> > > > It is also not ok to post simply the matches in

> > > > which a prediction

> > > > was correct. All matches for which predictions

> > were

> > > > made must be

> > > > posted, even those that were wrong, so that an

> > > > observant reader can

> > > > contrast the random chance of success with the

> > > > astrologer's

> > > > prediction quality.

> > > >

> > > > I say all this not to put down astrologers, only

> > to

> > > > awaken them to

> > > > mathematical realities. If they respected

> > certain

> > > > mathematical

> > > > realities, and presented their predictions

> > within

> > > > the context of

> > > > these realities, the average person would

> > quickly

> > > > accept their

> > > > results. Moreover, it would serve as a litmus

> > test

> > > > for good

> > > > astrologers.

> > > >

> > > > Thanks

> > > >

> > > > Sundeep

> > > >

> > > > , "Bharat

> > Hindu

> > > > Astrology"

> > > > <hinduastrology@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Namaskaar Sri Ramalingam

> > > > >

> > > > > Wouldn't it be better if you inform of such

> > posts,

> > > > when they are

> > > > written and

> > > > > not when they come true?

> > > > >

> > > > > Thanks and Regards

> > > > > Bharat

> > > >

> > >

> > > Tired of spam? Mail has the best spam

> > protection around

> > >

> >

>

September 11, 2006

Hello,

Well Well weel.

Going by standards of publicity seeking astrologers 2

of 3 predictions on US open came true.

Federer did WIN

Roddick did make it to semi finals. He had lost in

first round last year and early rounds at Wimbledon.

Nadal did lose. 2 of 3 I will take any day.

Ofcourse I did not need astrology to predict any of

this.

You in your heed to defend your guru ( may you are

real Mr. Gopal) you are missing the whole point here.

Unusual mundane events are beyond tyhe scope of

astrology as practised in public forum toady.

Did anyone

Predict Tsunami ?

Forfeiture of a Test

The answer is NO. Now that we know Tsunami happens I

am sure some astrolgers will cover their bases and put

on their web page an annual prediction " There will be

waves in ocean, some will be large" If Tsunami does

happen again they will be sending on all jyotish

groups how they predicted it.

As I said before if you have tested and researched

principles that you can share here please do so. If

you are trying to glorify yourself or your guru to

gain publicity..well thats your choice.

Satish

--- ramalingam2_sekar <ramalingam2_sekar >

wrote:

> -

> hello sir,

> what happened nadal lost ? ur greatness why did u

> fail?why donot make

> some great techiqnues for advancing mundane

> astrology it is easy

> critisise any one.

> bye

> ramalingam

> -- In , SPK

> <aquaris_rising wrote:

> >

> > Which USA open you are talking about ? What sport

> ?

> > Please sepcify.

> >

> > If you are talking about tennis, look at the

> seeding

> > and you know what the organizers beleive.

> >

> > 1. Federer

> > 2. Nadal

> >

> > Roddick may sneak into semis.

> >

> > Did anyone predict Oval test outcome as a

> forfeiture ?

> > This happened for the first time in 129 years of

> > Cricket history. If astrology could see these

> things,

> > this was an instance where a completely unusual

> and

> > unexpected happened. Did anyone see it ...NO NO

> NO.

> > Did you predict that the tri sereis will not

> > happen..NO.If you are really interested in

> advancing

> > this tool and research try and make some positive

> > contributions..not some generalities.Let those who

> > actually do the predicting post on the groups. Why

> are

> > you posting on behalf of someone else.

> >

> > Satish

> >

> > --- ramalingam2_sekar <ramalingam2_sekar

> > wrote:

> >

> > > hello list members,

> > > why donot the people who continously put down

> other

> > > people predict

> > > on usa open .some one made mocking comment it is

> so

> > > easy?

> > > any one can do it? it is only choice of two? any

> > > country war will

> > > happen. why are making any predictions? theory

> of

> > > randomness and

> > > probabilty can be used.

> > > bye

> > > ramalingam

> > >

> > > -- In , SPK

> > > <aquaris_rising@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Hello Sundeep,

> > > >

> > > > Excellent post. I have been making similar

> point

> > > for

> > > > sometime now. Your post makes an excellent

> > > observation

> > > > of probability of being randomly correct.

> > > >

> > > > Its like someone saying that Australia will do

> > > well in

> > > > next cricket world cup. I mean they have been

> in

> > > > finals in the past 3 world cups, so someone

> touts

> > > that

> > > > as a prediction, I feel that does not need any

> > > > astrological knowledge what so ever. If one

> puts

> > > > country chart and tithi pravesha and 20

> divisional

> > > > charts to back their prediction, I would

> consider

> > > it a

> > > > waste of time as same can be arrived at with

> an

> > > ounce

> > > > of commonsense.

> > > >

> > > > Anyone who can read and can use a program to

> cast

> > > a

> > > > horoscope can tell what lagna is in all the

> > > divisions,

> > > > what arudha is for a chart, yada yada yada. It

> is

> > > > ameaningless banter. Predict when there are

> more

> > > than

> > > > two possibilities ( low probability of an

> event)

> > > and

> > > > do it consistently.

> > > >

> > > > Unfortunately I do not see anyone who can do

> such

> > > a

> > > > thing, even the most celebrated ones can not

> do

> > > this.

> > > > Thats why astrology is not taken seriously by

> most

> > > > rational people.

> > > >

> > > > Satish

> > > >

> > > > --- vedicastrostudent <vedicastrostudent@>

> > > > wrote:

> > > >

> > > > > Dear Bharatji,

> > > > > Not only that, I feel what most people dont

> > > > > understand is that in

> > > > > order to understand the true value of a

> > > prediction,

> > > > > you must

> > > > > additionally attach to it the probability of

> > > > > randomly being correct.

> > > > > For example, in two-outcome situations with

> > > > > approximately equally

> > > > > matched opponents e.g. a match between two

> teams

> > > or

> > > > > an election

> > > > > between two candidates or a bill being

> > > > > passed/rejected by lawmakers,

> > > > > the probability of randomly being correct in

> a

> > > > > prediction, without

> > > > > using any principles whatsoever, is 0.5.

> > > > > Consequently, any prediction

> > > > > of such situations does not carry much

> weight to

> > > > > begin with. In order

> > > > > for a prediction to carry a lot of weight,

> the

> > > > > probability of

> > > > > randomly being correct should be very low.

> > > > >

> > > > > For example, if an astrologer were to

> correctly

> > > > > predict the month and

> > > > > year of birth of the first child of a person

> > > when

> > > > > the person was not

> > > > > even thinking of being married, it would be

> an

> > > > > extremely impressive

> > > > > prediction, because the probability of

> randomly

> > > > > being correct would

> > > > > be very low. A random prediction would have

> to

> > > > > select from at least

> > > > > 10 childbearing years in each of which there

> > > would

> > > > > be 12

> > > > > possibilities. So there would be at least a

> 100

> > > > > possibilities making

> > > > > the probability of a random hit being 0.01.

> > > > >

> > > > > Such predictions have to be highlighted (I

> mean

> > > > > those in which random

> > > > > chance of correctness is very low).

> Otherwise,

> > > if

> > > > > two-outcome

> > > > > situations are what are to be focussed on,

> then

> > > a

> > > > > string of two

> > > > > outcome situations must be shown e.g. a list

> of

> > > > > twenty matches, in

> > > > > each of which the prediction came true. The

> > > > > probability of RANDOMLY

> > > > > being correct in ALL 20, would be

> 0.5*0.5*0.5..

> > > > > twenty times, which

> > > > > is very low.

> > > > >

>

=== message truncated ===

September 12, 2006

hello sir,

congrats u have strong intution which is working in ur favour.

let us see how long this continues?good bhukthi must be . this strong

intution run will stop one day and the will realise make such egostic

pompous statement does not hold water.

u have double standard one for urself and another for others.

when u fail then 2 out of 3 etc.when others suceed u put down them

down. why donot have humility to say that u also can not be 100%

accurate. when u can not do that ? why expect others and pass lousy

comments. what about srilanka matches.Forfeiture of a Test.

failed is it not ?u had said srilanka will do well in fact match did

not take place?

predictions is a predictions that is all . it can be for a known

event or unknown.

what u mean by publiicty seeking. no one should tell his predictions

has come right every one should keep quiet. then

ur holiness will tell others is it.this is professional world every

one has right to tell if the predictions is sucessful provided it is

sincere.

secondly mind ur words when u make statements such as

You in your heed to defend your guru ( may you are

> real Mr. Gopal) you are missing the whole point here.

what u mean real gopal?my teacher does not require all that proxies.

i hope ur parents taught what is manners and decent behaviour.making

atrocious statements . if he writes clearly is indicated. for

srilanka war predictions u had passed some lousy comments for which

reply was written by my teacher which is posted in this list.

my teacher has told tsunami will not come again in india when many

scientist were expecting second attack. of course as usual it was

expected will be ur reply. when it happen in indonesia why not in

india?

u have made some statement saying war in srilanka would happen only

names and people need to be changed.why it did not happen in any

another country? it could happen in burma ?in pakistan ?in europe.

why donot predict next war? may be when this war in srilanka will

stop?

why donot show

the way by make some extraordinary predictions of an some event which

is one in million possible? may be ur next nostradamus?if is diffcult

to light a candle easy to curse darkness.may be at the level is not

there why donot lead the way.

this is first time u have asked on principles instead of generally

running down.

otherwise generally egositic arrogant pompous statements which will

be run down every good work is what u have been perfecting?

bye

ramalingam

, SPK <aquaris_rising wrote:

>

> Hello,

>

> Well Well weel.

>

> Going by standards of publicity seeking astrologers 2

> of 3 predictions on US open came true.

>

> Federer did WIN

>

> Roddick did make it to semi finals. He had lost in

> first round last year and early rounds at Wimbledon.

>

> Nadal did lose. 2 of 3 I will take any day.

>

> Ofcourse I did not need astrology to predict any of

> this.

>

> You in your heed to defend your guru ( may you are

> real Mr. Gopal) you are missing the whole point here.

>

> Unusual mundane events are beyond tyhe scope of

> astrology as practised in public forum toady.

>

> Did anyone

>

> Predict Tsunami ?

>

> Forfeiture of a Test

>

> The answer is NO. Now that we know Tsunami happens I

> am sure some astrolgers will cover their bases and put

> on their web page an annual prediction " There will be

> waves in ocean, some will be large" If Tsunami does

> happen again they will be sending on all jyotish

> groups how they predicted it.

>

> As I said before if you have tested and researched

> principles that you can share here please do so. If

> you are trying to glorify yourself or your guru to

> gain publicity..well thats your choice.

>

> Satish

>

> --- ramalingam2_sekar <ramalingam2_sekar

> wrote:

>

> > -

> > hello sir,

> > what happened nadal lost ? ur greatness why did u

> > fail?why donot make

> > some great techiqnues for advancing mundane

> > astrology it is easy

> > critisise any one.

> > bye

> > ramalingam

> > -- In , SPK

> > <aquaris_rising@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Which USA open you are talking about ? What sport

> > ?

> > > Please sepcify.

> > >

> > > If you are talking about tennis, look at the

> > seeding

> > > and you know what the organizers beleive.

> > >

> > > 1. Federer

> > > 2. Nadal

> > >

> > > Roddick may sneak into semis.

> > >

> > > Did anyone predict Oval test outcome as a

> > forfeiture ?

> > > This happened for the first time in 129 years of

> > > Cricket history. If astrology could see these

> > things,

> > > this was an instance where a completely unusual

> > and

> > > unexpected happened. Did anyone see it ...NO NO

> > NO.

> > > Did you predict that the tri sereis will not

> > > happen..NO.If you are really interested in

> > advancing

> > > this tool and research try and make some positive

> > > contributions..not some generalities.Let those who

> > > actually do the predicting post on the groups. Why

> > are

> > > you posting on behalf of someone else.

> > >

> > > Satish

> > >

> > > --- ramalingam2_sekar <ramalingam2_sekar@>

> > > wrote:

> > >

> > > > hello list members,

> > > > why donot the people who continously put down

> > other

> > > > people predict

> > > > on usa open .some one made mocking comment it is

> > so

> > > > easy?

> > > > any one can do it? it is only choice of two? any

> > > > country war will

> > > > happen. why are making any predictions? theory

> > of

> > > > randomness and

> > > > probabilty can be used.

> > > > bye

> > > > ramalingam

> > > >

> > > > -- In , SPK

> > > > <aquaris_rising@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Hello Sundeep,

> > > > >

> > > > > Excellent post. I have been making similar

> > point

> > > > for

> > > > > sometime now. Your post makes an excellent

> > > > observation

> > > > > of probability of being randomly correct.

> > > > >

> > > > > Its like someone saying that Australia will do

> > > > well in

> > > > > next cricket world cup. I mean they have been

> > in

> > > > > finals in the past 3 world cups, so someone

> > touts

> > > > that

> > > > > as a prediction, I feel that does not need any

> > > > > astrological knowledge what so ever. If one

> > puts

> > > > > country chart and tithi pravesha and 20

> > divisional

> > > > > charts to back their prediction, I would

> > consider

> > > > it a

> > > > > waste of time as same can be arrived at with

> > an

> > > > ounce

> > > > > of commonsense.

> > > > >

> > > > > Anyone who can read and can use a program to

> > cast

> > > > a

> > > > > horoscope can tell what lagna is in all the

> > > > divisions,

> > > > > what arudha is for a chart, yada yada yada. It

> > is

> > > > > ameaningless banter. Predict when there are

> > more

> > > > than

> > > > > two possibilities ( low probability of an

> > event)

> > > > and

> > > > > do it consistently.

> > > > >

> > > > > Unfortunately I do not see anyone who can do

> > such

> > > > a

> > > > > thing, even the most celebrated ones can not

> > do

> > > > this.

> > > > > Thats why astrology is not taken seriously by

> > most

> > > > > rational people.

> > > > >

> > > > > Satish

> > > > >

> > > > > --- vedicastrostudent <vedicastrostudent@>

> > > > > wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > > Dear Bharatji,

> > > > > > Not only that, I feel what most people dont

> > > > > > understand is that in

> > > > > > order to understand the true value of a

> > > > prediction,

> > > > > > you must

> > > > > > additionally attach to it the probability of

> > > > > > randomly being correct.

> > > > > > For example, in two-outcome situations with

> > > > > > approximately equally

> > > > > > matched opponents e.g. a match between two

> > teams

> > > > or

> > > > > > an election

> > > > > > between two candidates or a bill being

> > > > > > passed/rejected by lawmakers,

> > > > > > the probability of randomly being correct in

> > a

> > > > > > prediction, without

> > > > > > using any principles whatsoever, is 0.5.

> > > > > > Consequently, any prediction

> > > > > > of such situations does not carry much

> > weight to

> > > > > > begin with. In order

> > > > > > for a prediction to carry a lot of weight,

> > the

> > > > > > probability of

> > > > > > randomly being correct should be very low.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > For example, if an astrologer were to

> > correctly

> > > > > > predict the month and

> > > > > > year of birth of the first child of a person

> > > > when

> > > > > > the person was not

> > > > > > even thinking of being married, it would be

> > an

> > > > > > extremely impressive

> > > > > > prediction, because the probability of

> > randomly

> > > > > > being correct would

> > > > > > be very low. A random prediction would have

> > to

> > > > > > select from at least

> > > > > > 10 childbearing years in each of which there

> > > > would

> > > > > > be 12

> > > > > > possibilities. So there would be at least a

> > 100

> > > > > > possibilities making

> > > > > > the probability of a random hit being 0.01.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Such predictions have to be highlighted (I

> > mean

> > > > > > those in which random

> > > > > > chance of correctness is very low).

> > Otherwise,

> > > > if

> > > > > > two-outcome

> > > > > > situations are what are to be focussed on,

> > then

> > > > a

> > > > > > string of two

> > > > > > outcome situations must be shown e.g. a list

> > of

> > > > > > twenty matches, in

> > > > > > each of which the prediction came true. The

> > > > > > probability of RANDOMLY

> > > > > > being correct in ALL 20, would be

> > 0.5*0.5*0.5..

> > > > > > twenty times, which

> > > > > > is very low.

> > > > > >

> >

> === message truncated ===

>

September 12, 2006