Guest guest Posted October 10, 2008 Report Share Posted October 10, 2008 HinduCalendar , vbdeshmukh <deshmukhv wrote: Dear Shri Avatarji & Shri Sanatji, Hope this should be OK as I do not know as yet how to load it in the file section as suggested by you ! Regds, VBDeshmukh Report of the Faljyotish(Astrology) Survey After we announced the survey, within a day or two we received around 150 telephone calls of Astrologers from all over Maharashtra informing us their willingness to participate in our survey. We asked them to send us a stamped envelope and their personal information in a prescribed form. Meanwhile a team of Astrologers headed by Mr. S. S. Bhat ( President, Maharashtra Jyotish Parishad), Mr. V. D. Bhat (President, Pune Jyotish Parishad) and others met Prof. Kunte at his residence expressing their concern regarding the Survey. Since Dr. Narendra Dabholkar was a party to the organization of the survey, the astrologers were thinking that the survey will be biased. Prof. Kunte explained to them the detailed procedure of the survey and explained to them the fact that Dr. Dabholkar or Dr. Narlikar had no active role in the conduct of the survey. Dr. Kunte as a statistician was solely responsible for the survey and that it will be conducted in as unbiased manner as possible. Further it will be a double blind survey. All this explanation did not convince the Astrologers and in a meeting presided by Mr. S.S. Bhat the astrologers decided to boycott the survey and requested the astrologer’s community to follow suit. In spite of this boycott 51 astrologers from all over Maharashtra did send us the stamped envelopes for getting the horoscopes. They were given one month time to send their results. Mean while on 01/06/08 Mr Nandkumar Jakatdar of Brahan Maharashtra Jyotish Mandal organized a seminar on the topic ‘Whether surveys are necessary to vindicate the FalJyotish’. In this seminar some astrologers along with Prof. Kunte and Dr. Dabholkar also participated. Dr. Dabholkar explained why astrology is not a science. Prof. Kunte explained the procedure of the current survey in detail. He further mentioned that, if astrology is to establish itself as a science, it can’t escape validation by surveys. Not only the present survey but many such surveys, on many topics, by many workers, repeated several times are necessary before validating astrology as a science. He also mentioned that, since the current survey accepts anybody to participate in the survey, who claims to be an astrologer, the current survey will be able to say something about the community of astrologers as they exist in the society and not about the subject of astrology. Mr. Nandkumar Jakatdar in his concluding remarks said that he could give a set of ten rules which can be used on the horoscopes to answer the question. He also asked the astrologers to participate in such surveys provided they were organized in a fair manner after consultation with the astrologers. Following this meeting the next day Prof. Kunte met Mr. Jakatdar to discuss this matter further. A suggestion was made to ask the astrological institutions to participate in a separate concurrent survey at the institutional level, wherein the entire set of all the 200 horoscopes, numbered randomly, would be given to each institution and that they can get the horoscopes examined by their members using the common rules. This would be a better test of astrological rules. Mr. Jakatdar agreed to this proposal. He told Dr. Kunte that he would definitely participate in such a survey and further he would discuss this matter with various other institutional heads. A formal appeal in this regard was sent to many Institutional heads. Unfortunately only two institutions agreed to participate in such a survey. They were Jyotish Vidya Prasarak Mandal headed by Mr. Maratkar, Pune and Chiranjeev Astro Research Institution Pune headed by Ms. Sunanda Rathi. Mr. Nandkumar Jakatdar for the reasons best known to him decided to back out from the survey. Only Mr. Maratkar did finally submit the answers. Ms. Sunanda Rathi for reasons best known to her did not submit the answers or even communicate her reasons for not responding. Even though Mr. S.S. Bhat had boycotted the survey, he kept meeting Prof. Kunte to discuss various aspects of astrology. He gave Prof. Kunte one of his books, which according to him is used as a text book on astrology in some university. This book mentions a rule which can be used on a horoscope to decide whether the horoscope belongs to a man or a woman. He claims that the rule gives the correct result at least 60% of the times. We used this rule on the two hundred horoscopes that we have. It predicted the sex correctly for only 94 cases out of 200 cases. If the claim of at least 60% right answers is correct, according to statistics the probability of getting only 94 correct answers is less then 5%. In another meeting Mr. S. S. Bhat gave another rule to decide whether a horoscope belongs to an intelligent person. For this rule again Mr. Bhat gave 60% probability for correct prediction. We used this rule on our 200 horoscopes. It predicted 150 persons out 200 to be intelligent. Out of these 150, 75 were really intelligent and another 75 were mentally retarded. These results speak for themselves. We now report the results of the present survey. In all 51 astrologers sent us the stamped envelopes to get the horoscopes. Sets of 40 horoscopes were sent to them. At the end of the survey only 27 astrologers sent back their answers. The others did not even communicate their reasons for not responding. Out of the 27 astrologers, 26 astrologers sent their personal details. We give here the general profile of these 26 astrologers: 15 astrologers practice astrology as a hobby, 8 are practicing astrologers and three did not answer the question related to their practice of astrology. For the 8 practicing astrologers their average experience is 14.4 years. 11 astrologers use Nirayan method out of which 3 also use Krishnamurty method, 7 use Sayan method, 1 uses only Krishnamurty method and the remaining 7 did not mention any specific method. The table below gives the distribution of the astrologers according to the years of experience: 5 or less 6 -- 10 11 -- 15 16 -- 20 21 -- 25 26 -- 30 3 6 9 2 3 3 As for the correct answers out of 40 given by the astrologers they range between the minimum of 8 and maximum of 24. Only one professional astrologer had 24 correct answers. Two astrologers had 22 correct answers. For the remaining 24 astrologers the number of correct answers was less then or equal to 20. The over all average number of correct answers was 17.25 out of 40 , which is around 45%. One professional astrologer reported 37 intelligent and 3 undecided. He of course got 17 correct answers. Mr. Maratkar was the only astrologer who had participated in the survey at his institutional level. He was supplied with all the 200 horoscopes randomly numbered. He got them examined by his team members. The answers were verified in the presence of Dr. P.V. Vartak, a well known name in the field of अधà¥à¤¯à¤¾à¤¤à¥à¤®. It was found out that out of the 200 horoscopes only 102 were correctly identified. Out of the 102 correct answers 51 were of the intelligent students and 51 of the mentally retarded students. This success rate is consistent with the result, which can be obtained by tossing the coin of decision. To conclude the report, the findings of the present survey, hardly support the claim of the predictive power of astrology on the basis of his horoscopes, at least for the question regarding the intelligence of a person. Of course astrology discusses many other aspect of the personality and behavior of individuals on the basis of their horoscopes. Many other surveys will be needed to say anything conclusively, with confidence, about the subject of astrology as a science or otherwise. This survey for certain, does not support such a claim of astrology being a science. In fact, the present survey goes against astrology being considered as a science. ---End of Report. (Dr. Jayant Narlikar), (Dr. Narendra Dabholkar), (Sudhakar Kunte) IUCAA Maharashtra ANS Dept. of Statistics Univ. of Pune. (Prakash Ghatpande) Coordinator. Be the first one to try the new Messenger 9 Beta! Go to http://in.messenger./win/ --- End forwarded message --- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 10, 2008 Report Share Posted October 10, 2008 hinducivilization , " Avtar Krishen Kaul " <jyotirved wrote: Dear Shri S. Sampathji, Namaskar! <The astrologer, in addition to knowledge of Jyotisha, must have the 'achara', discipline, intutive skills and faith in a satvik life.> If one has " achara, discipline, intuitive skills and faith in a satvik life " one does not need the knowledge of predictive gimmicks (what you would like to call jyotisha)for peeping into the future! Then again, if one does not have " achara, discipline, intuitive skills and faith in satvik life " , no amount of the knowledge of " jyotisha " will be of any use to him! <Doctors of previous generation were able to diagnose correctly with little data, but guided by intuition and knowledge; but today's doctors need an array of instruments and test reports to guess (not conclude) and try treatment.> My maternal grandfather used to make correct predictions from the most monstrous astronimcal work viz. Grahalaghava---at par with Surya Sidhanta. That was only because he had all the " qualifications " you ae talking about. <Astrology may be compared to medical " science " . Only a good physician will diagnose correctly from the symptoms explained by the patient, his observation and rapidly cycling through his knowledge base. Doctors of previous generation were able to diagnose correctly with little data, but guided by intuition and knowledge; but today's doctors need an array of instruments and test reports to guess (not conclude) and try treatment. Some astrologers, have become like specialist doctors.> Present " jyotisha " ---especially the so called nirayana jyotisha---- euphemistically knows as " Vedic astrology " ---is the worst kind of farce, actually a cruel joke, that could be played on the gullible public. There cannot be any Lahiri or Ramana or Yukteshwara or Fagan etc. Rashis---twelve neat equal divisions of the zodiac---either astronomically or as per the Vedas---of which nobody knows the starting point--the zero! Let me repeat it here that that does not mean that the so called Sayana Rashis have any scientific basis---no there are no tweleve equal divisions---whether sayana or nirayana! Similarly, there are hundreds of Dasha bhuktis like Vimshotari, ashtotari, yogini, kalachakra, manduka, pluta, tribhagi etc. etc. Then again there are hundreds of Ayanamshas! All such plethora of all the techniques is like defecitve " medical " instruments with which you have to " diaganose " the malady---since no " docor " is himself sure as to which ayanamsha or which asha-bhukti is more accurate than others and so on! There are instances of quite a few highly eminent " Vedic astrologers " having fallen on bad days themselves and even their offspring have had problems galore. The astrological empires they had built are like Babylonia of yesteryears---Iraq of today! The wife of one of the top- notch astrologers had a very miserable exit from the world! Predcitive gimmicks in the name of " Vedic Jyotisha " are detested by nmother Nature! <I believe, those astrolegrs who suggest remedial action - do puja for 48 days, feed as many as you can on specific days, go on a yatra to temples and holy rivers, do japa or parayana - are doing service.> I wonder why I should do puja or go on a yatra to temples and holy rivers etc. only if some " astrologer " tells me to do so! Similarly, for doing Japa and Pranayama, we do not ahve to go to some astrologer since these days Swami Ramdev is doing that sevice free of cost! AND HE ADMONISHES PEOPLE, ONE AND ALL, FROM GOING TO JYOTISHIS---AS MUCH AS HE ADMONISHES THEM ABOUT COCA-COLA ETC. He tells in almost every lecture that if anybody is facing any problems from Shani or Rahu, they must sent those Shani and Rahus to him i.e Swami Ramdev---and he will deal with them all! <I would rather go to such an astrologer than to a psychiatrist.> Usually, when people become despondent that even after having done all the remedial measures as advised by their " family jyotishi " , their miseries have not lessened even a whit, the " jyotshi " then advises them to do some other remedial measure since the earlier one must have not been done in a proper manner, as advised by his " family astrologer " . After performing all the remedial measures time and again, the problems do not diminish---they just increase since a lot of money was spent on performing the remedial measures! Ultimately, it is such people who prefer to go to a psychiatrist! Wht is most ironic is that you have still not realised the unpleasant truth that it is because of this very " jyotisha " that you are defending, you are celebrating all the festivals and muhurtas on wrong days! PL. DO ASK YOUR JYOTISHIS ABOUT SOME REMEDY FOR SUCH A MALADY, which has been created by them With regards, A K Kaul PS It appears hinducivilization , " S Sampath " <sampath_srinivasaraghavan@> wrote: > > Statistics is such a flexible tool that it can be used to derive the > conclusion one wants. If a similar survey is conducted among doctors > with symptom list and test reports of 100 patients, one can expect a > similar variance in diagnosis and treatment from the doctor clan. Even > the exit polls during Gujarat elections showed a remarkable variation in > the prediction by leading media channels and print media. In fact one > channel admitted that it meddled with the survey data (because it > thought that the respondents were biased) to get the forecast it wanted. > In fact even sciences are moving away from certainties to probabilities > in higher areas of science. These surveys will prove nothing, because > another survey can be done to disprove the findings of the earlier > survey. > > Only the media sensationalises this kind of surveys; one paper screamed > -'now it is official, astrology is not a science, direct from a > scientist's mouth'. Tomorrow if Lallu Yadhav says, astrology is a > science, he same media will report it with glee. > > Astrology may be compared to medical " science " . Only a good physician > will diagnose correctly from the symptoms explained by the patient, his > observation and rapidly cycling through his knowledge base. Doctors of > previous generation were able to diagnose correctly with little data, > but guided by intuition and knowledge; but today's doctors need an array > of instruments and test reports to guess (not conclude) and try > treatment. Some astrologers, have become like specialist doctors. I once > saw a programme in BBC, which proved that Homeopathy medicines are as > good as placebos, as both produced same result in a batch of patients > (i.e. statistically insignificant variation in outcome) > > The astrologer, in addition to knowledge of Jyotisha, must have the > 'achara', discipline, intutive skills and faith in a satvik life. > > Astrology is as much an exact science as clinical medicine is! I am not > an astrologer; but I have equal faith in both based on my mixed > experience with doctors and astrologers, some good, some bad. > > I believe, those astrolegrs who suggest remedial action - do puja for 48 > days, feed as many as you can on specific days, go on a yatra to temples > and holy rivers, do japa or parayana - are doing service. I would rather > go to such an astrologer than to a psychiatrist. > > Sampath > > hinducivilization , " Avtar Krishen Kaul " > <jyotirved@> wrote: > > > > HinduCalendar , vbdeshmukh deshmukhv@ > > wrote: > > > > Report of the Faljyotish(Astrology) Survey > > > > After we announced the survey, within a day or two we > > received around 150 telephone calls of Astrologers > > from all over Maharashtra informing us their > > willingness to participate in our survey. We asked > > them to send us a stamped envelope and their personal > > information in a prescribed form. > > Meanwhile a team of Astrologers headed by Mr. S. S. > > Bhat ( President, Maharashtra Jyotish Parishad), Mr. > > V. D. Bhat (President, Pune Jyotish Parishad) and > > others met Prof. Kunte at his residence expressing > > their concern regarding the Survey. Since Dr. Narendra > > Dabholkar was a party to the organization of the > > survey, the astrologers were thinking that the survey > > will be biased. Prof. Kunte explained to them the > > detailed procedure of the survey and explained to them > > the fact that Dr. Dabholkar or Dr. Narlikar had no > > active role in the conduct of the survey. Dr. Kunte as > > a statistician was solely responsible for the survey > > and that it will be conducted in as unbiased manner as > > possible. Further it will be a double blind survey. > > All this explanation did not convince the Astrologers > > and in a meeting presided by Mr. S.S. Bhat the > > astrologers decided to boycott the survey and > > requested the astrologer’s community to follow suit. > > In spite of this boycott 51 astrologers from all over > > Maharashtra did send us the stamped envelopes for > > getting the horoscopes. They were given one month time > > to send their results. > > Mean while on 01/06/08 Mr Nandkumar Jakatdar of > > Brahan Maharashtra Jyotish Mandal organized a seminar > > on the topic ‘Whether surveys are necessary to > > vindicate the FalJyotish’. In this seminar some > > astrologers along with Prof. Kunte and Dr. Dabholkar > > also participated. Dr. Dabholkar explained why > > astrology is not a science. Prof. Kunte explained the > > procedure of the current survey in detail. He further > > mentioned that, if astrology is to establish itself as > > a science, it can’t escape validation by surveys. > > Not only the present survey but many such surveys, on > > many topics, by many workers, repeated several times > > are necessary before validating astrology as a > > science. He also mentioned that, since the current > > survey accepts anybody to participate in the survey, > > who claims to be an astrologer, the current survey > > will be able to say something about the community of > > astrologers as they exist in the society and not about > > the subject of astrology. Mr. Nandkumar Jakatdar in > > his concluding remarks said that he could give a set > > of ten rules which can be used on the horoscopes to > > answer the question. He also asked the astrologers to > > participate in such surveys provided they were > > organized in a fair manner after consultation with the > > astrologers. > > Following this meeting the next day Prof. Kunte met > > Mr. Jakatdar to discuss this matter further. A > > suggestion was made to ask the astrological > > institutions to participate in a separate concurrent > > survey at the institutional level, wherein the entire > > set of all the 200 horoscopes, numbered randomly, > > would be given to each institution and that they can > > get the horoscopes examined by their members using the > > common rules. This would be a better test of > > astrological rules. Mr. Jakatdar agreed to this > > proposal. He told Dr. Kunte that he would definitely > > participate in such a survey and further he would > > discuss this matter with various other institutional > > heads. > > A formal appeal in this regard was sent to many > > Institutional heads. Unfortunately only two > > institutions agreed to participate in such a survey. > > They were Jyotish Vidya Prasarak Mandal headed by Mr. > > Maratkar, Pune and Chiranjeev Astro Research > > Institution Pune headed by Ms. Sunanda Rathi. > > Mr. Nandkumar Jakatdar for the reasons best known to > > him decided to back out from the survey. Only Mr. > > Maratkar did finally submit the answers. Ms. Sunanda > > Rathi for reasons best known to her did not submit the > > answers or even communicate her reasons for not > > responding. > > Even though Mr. S.S. Bhat had boycotted the survey, > > he kept meeting Prof. Kunte to discuss various aspects > > of astrology. He gave Prof. Kunte one of his books, > > which according to him is used as a text book on > > astrology in some university. This book mentions a > > rule which can be used on a horoscope to decide > > whether the horoscope belongs to a man or a woman. He > > claims that the rule gives the correct result at least > > 60% of the times. We used this rule on the two hundred > > horoscopes that we have. It predicted the sex > > correctly for only 94 cases out of 200 cases. If the > > claim of at least 60% right answers is correct, > > according to statistics the probability of getting > > only 94 correct answers is less then 5%. In another > > meeting Mr. S. S. Bhat gave another rule to decide > > whether a horoscope belongs to an intelligent person. > > For this rule again Mr. Bhat gave 60% probability for > > correct prediction. We used this rule on our 200 > > horoscopes. It predicted 150 persons out 200 to be > > intelligent. Out of these 150, 75 were really > > intelligent and another 75 were mentally retarded. > > These results speak for themselves. > > We now report the results of the present survey. In > > all 51 astrologers sent us the stamped envelopes to > > get the horoscopes. Sets of 40 horoscopes were sent to > > them. At the end of the survey only 27 astrologers > > sent back their answers. The others did not even > > communicate their reasons for not responding. Out of > > the 27 astrologers, 26 astrologers sent their personal > > details. We give here the general profile of these 26 > > astrologers: > > 15 astrologers practice astrology as a hobby, 8 are > > practicing astrologers and three did not answer the > > question related to their practice of astrology. For > > the 8 practicing astrologers their average experience > > is 14.4 years. > > 11 astrologers use Nirayan method out of which 3 also > > use Krishnamurty method, 7 use Sayan method, 1 uses > > only Krishnamurty method and the remaining 7 did not > > mention any specific method. > > > > The table below gives the distribution of the > > astrologers according to the years of experience: > > > > 5 or less 6 -- 10 11 -- 15 16 -- 20 21 -- 25 > > 26 -- 30 > > 3 6 9 2 3 3 > > > > As for the correct answers out of 40 given by the > > astrologers they range between the minimum of 8 and > > maximum of 24. Only one professional astrologer had 24 > > correct answers. Two astrologers had 22 correct > > answers. For the remaining 24 astrologers the number > > of correct answers was less then or equal to 20. The > > over all average number of correct answers was 17.25 > > out of 40 , which is around 45%. One professional > > astrologer reported 37 intelligent and 3 undecided. > > He of course got 17 correct answers. > > Mr. Maratkar was the only astrologer who had > > participated in the survey at his institutional level. > > He was supplied with all the 200 horoscopes randomly > > numbered. He got them examined by his team members. > > The answers were verified in the presence of Dr. P.V. > > Vartak, a well known name in the field of > > अधà¥à¤¯à¤¾à¤¤à¥à¤®. It was found out that out of > > the 200 horoscopes only 102 were correctly identified. > > Out of the 102 correct answers 51 were of the > > intelligent students and 51 of the mentally retarded > > students. This success rate is consistent with the > > result, which can be obtained by tossing the coin of > > decision. > > > > To conclude the report, the findings of the present > > survey, hardly support the claim of the predictive > > power of astrology on the basis of his horoscopes, at > > least for the question regarding the intelligence of a > > person. Of course astrology discusses many other > > aspect of the personality and behavior of individuals > > on the basis of their horoscopes. Many other surveys > > will be needed to say anything conclusively, with > > confidence, about the subject of astrology as a > > science or otherwise. This survey for certain, does > > not support such a claim of astrology being a science. > > In fact, the present survey goes against astrology > > being considered as a science. > > > > ---End of Report. > > > > > > (Dr. Jayant Narlikar), (Dr. Narendra Dabholkar), > > (Sudhakar Kunte) > > IUCAA Maharashtra ANS Dept. of > > Statistics > > > > Univ. of Pune. > > > > > > > > (Prakash Ghatpande) > > Coordinator. > > > > > > > > Be the first one to try the new Messenger 9 Beta! Go to > > http://in.messenger./win/ > > > > --- End forwarded message --- > > > --- End forwarded message --- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 10, 2008 Report Share Posted October 10, 2008 some of Avtar ji's messages are being fwded more than once, kindly look into grouply or settings.regrdsOn Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 10:02 PM, Avtar Krishen Kaul <jyotirved wrote: hinducivilization , " Avtar Krishen Kaul " <jyotirved wrote: Dear Shri S. Sampathji, Namaskar! <The astrologer, in addition to knowledge of Jyotisha, must have the 'achara', discipline, intutive skills and faith in a satvik life.> If one has " achara, discipline, intuitive skills and faith in a satvik life " one does not need the knowledge of predictive gimmicks (what you would like to call jyotisha)for peeping into the future! Then again, if one does not have " achara, discipline, intuitive skills and faith in satvik life " , no amount of the knowledge of " jyotisha " will be of any use to him! <Doctors of previous generation were able to diagnose correctly with little data, but guided by intuition and knowledge; but today's doctors need an array of instruments and test reports to guess (not conclude) and try treatment.> My maternal grandfather used to make correct predictions from the most monstrous astronimcal work viz. Grahalaghava---at par with Surya Sidhanta. That was only because he had all the " qualifications " you ae talking about. <Astrology may be compared to medical " science " . Only a good physician will diagnose correctly from the symptoms explained by the patient, his observation and rapidly cycling through his knowledge base. Doctors of previous generation were able to diagnose correctly with little data, but guided by intuition and knowledge; but today's doctors need an array of instruments and test reports to guess (not conclude) and try treatment. Some astrologers, have become like specialist doctors.> Present " jyotisha " ---especially the so called nirayana jyotisha---- euphemistically knows as " Vedic astrology " ---is the worst kind of farce, actually a cruel joke, that could be played on the gullible public. There cannot be any Lahiri or Ramana or Yukteshwara or Fagan etc. Rashis---twelve neat equal divisions of the zodiac---either astronomically or as per the Vedas---of which nobody knows the starting point--the zero! Let me repeat it here that that does not mean that the so called Sayana Rashis have any scientific basis---no there are no tweleve equal divisions---whether sayana or nirayana! Similarly, there are hundreds of Dasha bhuktis like Vimshotari, ashtotari, yogini, kalachakra, manduka, pluta, tribhagi etc. etc. Then again there are hundreds of Ayanamshas! All such plethora of all the techniques is like defecitve " medical " instruments with which you have to " diaganose " the malady---since no " docor " is himself sure as to which ayanamsha or which asha-bhukti is more accurate than others and so on! There are instances of quite a few highly eminent " Vedic astrologers " having fallen on bad days themselves and even their offspring have had problems galore. The astrological empires they had built are like Babylonia of yesteryears---Iraq of today! The wife of one of the top- notch astrologers had a very miserable exit from the world! Predcitive gimmicks in the name of " Vedic Jyotisha " are detested by nmother Nature! <I believe, those astrolegrs who suggest remedial action - do puja for 48 days, feed as many as you can on specific days, go on a yatra to temples and holy rivers, do japa or parayana - are doing service.> I wonder why I should do puja or go on a yatra to temples and holy rivers etc. only if some " astrologer " tells me to do so! Similarly, for doing Japa and Pranayama, we do not ahve to go to some astrologer since these days Swami Ramdev is doing that sevice free of cost! AND HE ADMONISHES PEOPLE, ONE AND ALL, FROM GOING TO JYOTISHIS---AS MUCH AS HE ADMONISHES THEM ABOUT COCA-COLA ETC. He tells in almost every lecture that if anybody is facing any problems from Shani or Rahu, they must sent those Shani and Rahus to him i.e Swami Ramdev---and he will deal with them all! <I would rather go to such an astrologer than to a psychiatrist.> Usually, when people become despondent that even after having done all the remedial measures as advised by their " family jyotishi " , their miseries have not lessened even a whit, the " jyotshi " then advises them to do some other remedial measure since the earlier one must have not been done in a proper manner, as advised by his " family astrologer " . After performing all the remedial measures time and again, the problems do not diminish---they just increase since a lot of money was spent on performing the remedial measures! Ultimately, it is such people who prefer to go to a psychiatrist! Wht is most ironic is that you have still not realised the unpleasant truth that it is because of this very " jyotisha " that you are defending, you are celebrating all the festivals and muhurtas on wrong days! PL. DO ASK YOUR JYOTISHIS ABOUT SOME REMEDY FOR SUCH A MALADY, which has been created by them With regards, A K Kaul PS It appears hinducivilization , " S Sampath " <sampath_srinivasaraghavan@> wrote: > > Statistics is such a flexible tool that it can be used to derive the > conclusion one wants. If a similar survey is conducted among doctors > with symptom list and test reports of 100 patients, one can expect a > similar variance in diagnosis and treatment from the doctor clan. Even > the exit polls during Gujarat elections showed a remarkable variation in > the prediction by leading media channels and print media. In fact one > channel admitted that it meddled with the survey data (because it > thought that the respondents were biased) to get the forecast it wanted. > In fact even sciences are moving away from certainties to probabilities > in higher areas of science. These surveys will prove nothing, because > another survey can be done to disprove the findings of the earlier > survey. > > Only the media sensationalises this kind of surveys; one paper screamed > -'now it is official, astrology is not a science, direct from a > scientist's mouth'. Tomorrow if Lallu Yadhav says, astrology is a > science, he same media will report it with glee. > > Astrology may be compared to medical " science " . Only a good physician > will diagnose correctly from the symptoms explained by the patient, his > observation and rapidly cycling through his knowledge base. Doctors of > previous generation were able to diagnose correctly with little data, > but guided by intuition and knowledge; but today's doctors need an array > of instruments and test reports to guess (not conclude) and try > treatment. Some astrologers, have become like specialist doctors. I once > saw a programme in BBC, which proved that Homeopathy medicines are as > good as placebos, as both produced same result in a batch of patients > (i.e. statistically insignificant variation in outcome) > > The astrologer, in addition to knowledge of Jyotisha, must have the > 'achara', discipline, intutive skills and faith in a satvik life. > > Astrology is as much an exact science as clinical medicine is! I am not > an astrologer; but I have equal faith in both based on my mixed > experience with doctors and astrologers, some good, some bad. > > I believe, those astrolegrs who suggest remedial action - do puja for 48 > days, feed as many as you can on specific days, go on a yatra to temples > and holy rivers, do japa or parayana - are doing service. I would rather > go to such an astrologer than to a psychiatrist. > > Sampath > > hinducivilization , " Avtar Krishen Kaul " > <jyotirved@> wrote: > > > > HinduCalendar , vbdeshmukh deshmukhv@ > > wrote: > > > > Report of the Faljyotish(Astrology) Survey > > > > After we announced the survey, within a day or two we > > received around 150 telephone calls of Astrologers > > from all over Maharashtra informing us their > > willingness to participate in our survey. We asked > > them to send us a stamped envelope and their personal > > information in a prescribed form. > > Meanwhile a team of Astrologers headed by Mr. S. S. > > Bhat ( President, Maharashtra Jyotish Parishad), Mr. > > V. D. Bhat (President, Pune Jyotish Parishad) and > > others met Prof. Kunte at his residence expressing > > their concern regarding the Survey. Since Dr. Narendra > > Dabholkar was a party to the organization of the > > survey, the astrologers were thinking that the survey > > will be biased. Prof. Kunte explained to them the > > detailed procedure of the survey and explained to them > > the fact that Dr. Dabholkar or Dr. Narlikar had no > > active role in the conduct of the survey. Dr. Kunte as > > a statistician was solely responsible for the survey > > and that it will be conducted in as unbiased manner as > > possible. Further it will be a double blind survey. > > All this explanation did not convince the Astrologers > > and in a meeting presided by Mr. S.S. Bhat the > > astrologers decided to boycott the survey and > > requested the astrologer’s community to follow suit. > > In spite of this boycott 51 astrologers from all over > > Maharashtra did send us the stamped envelopes for > > getting the horoscopes. They were given one month time > > to send their results. > > Mean while on 01/06/08 Mr Nandkumar Jakatdar of > > Brahan Maharashtra Jyotish Mandal organized a seminar > > on the topic ‘Whether surveys are necessary to > > vindicate the FalJyotish’. In this seminar some > > astrologers along with Prof. Kunte and Dr. Dabholkar > > also participated. Dr. Dabholkar explained why > > astrology is not a science. Prof. Kunte explained the > > procedure of the current survey in detail. He further > > mentioned that, if astrology is to establish itself as > > a science, it can’t escape validation by surveys. > > Not only the present survey but many such surveys, on > > many topics, by many workers, repeated several times > > are necessary before validating astrology as a > > science. He also mentioned that, since the current > > survey accepts anybody to participate in the survey, > > who claims to be an astrologer, the current survey > > will be able to say something about the community of > > astrologers as they exist in the society and not about > > the subject of astrology. Mr. Nandkumar Jakatdar in > > his concluding remarks said that he could give a set > > of ten rules which can be used on the horoscopes to > > answer the question. He also asked the astrologers to > > participate in such surveys provided they were > > organized in a fair manner after consultation with the > > astrologers. > > Following this meeting the next day Prof. Kunte met > > Mr. Jakatdar to discuss this matter further. A > > suggestion was made to ask the astrological > > institutions to participate in a separate concurrent > > survey at the institutional level, wherein the entire > > set of all the 200 horoscopes, numbered randomly, > > would be given to each institution and that they can > > get the horoscopes examined by their members using the > > common rules. This would be a better test of > > astrological rules. Mr. Jakatdar agreed to this > > proposal. He told Dr. Kunte that he would definitely > > participate in such a survey and further he would > > discuss this matter with various other institutional > > heads. > > A formal appeal in this regard was sent to many > > Institutional heads. Unfortunately only two > > institutions agreed to participate in such a survey. > > They were Jyotish Vidya Prasarak Mandal headed by Mr. > > Maratkar, Pune and Chiranjeev Astro Research > > Institution Pune headed by Ms. Sunanda Rathi. > > Mr. Nandkumar Jakatdar for the reasons best known to > > him decided to back out from the survey. Only Mr. > > Maratkar did finally submit the answers. Ms. Sunanda > > Rathi for reasons best known to her did not submit the > > answers or even communicate her reasons for not > > responding. > > Even though Mr. S.S. Bhat had boycotted the survey, > > he kept meeting Prof. Kunte to discuss various aspects > > of astrology. He gave Prof. Kunte one of his books, > > which according to him is used as a text book on > > astrology in some university. This book mentions a > > rule which can be used on a horoscope to decide > > whether the horoscope belongs to a man or a woman. He > > claims that the rule gives the correct result at least > > 60% of the times. We used this rule on the two hundred > > horoscopes that we have. It predicted the sex > > correctly for only 94 cases out of 200 cases. If the > > claim of at least 60% right answers is correct, > > according to statistics the probability of getting > > only 94 correct answers is less then 5%. In another > > meeting Mr. S. S. Bhat gave another rule to decide > > whether a horoscope belongs to an intelligent person. > > For this rule again Mr. Bhat gave 60% probability for > > correct prediction. We used this rule on our 200 > > horoscopes. It predicted 150 persons out 200 to be > > intelligent. Out of these 150, 75 were really > > intelligent and another 75 were mentally retarded. > > These results speak for themselves. > > We now report the results of the present survey. In > > all 51 astrologers sent us the stamped envelopes to > > get the horoscopes. Sets of 40 horoscopes were sent to > > them. At the end of the survey only 27 astrologers > > sent back their answers. The others did not even > > communicate their reasons for not responding. Out of > > the 27 astrologers, 26 astrologers sent their personal > > details. We give here the general profile of these 26 > > astrologers: > > 15 astrologers practice astrology as a hobby, 8 are > > practicing astrologers and three did not answer the > > question related to their practice of astrology. For > > the 8 practicing astrologers their average experience > > is 14.4 years. > > 11 astrologers use Nirayan method out of which 3 also > > use Krishnamurty method, 7 use Sayan method, 1 uses > > only Krishnamurty method and the remaining 7 did not > > mention any specific method. > > > > The table below gives the distribution of the > > astrologers according to the years of experience: > > > > 5 or less 6 -- 10 11 -- 15 16 -- 20 21 -- 25 > > 26 -- 30 > > 3 6 9 2 3 3 > > > > As for the correct answers out of 40 given by the > > astrologers they range between the minimum of 8 and > > maximum of 24. Only one professional astrologer had 24 > > correct answers. Two astrologers had 22 correct > > answers. For the remaining 24 astrologers the number > > of correct answers was less then or equal to 20. The > > over all average number of correct answers was 17.25 > > out of 40 , which is around 45%. One professional > > astrologer reported 37 intelligent and 3 undecided. > > He of course got 17 correct answers. > > Mr. Maratkar was the only astrologer who had > > participated in the survey at his institutional level. > > He was supplied with all the 200 horoscopes randomly > > numbered. He got them examined by his team members. > > The answers were verified in the presence of Dr. P.V. > > Vartak, a well known name in the field of > > अधॠयातॠम. It was found out that out of > > the 200 horoscopes only 102 were correctly identified. > > Out of the 102 correct answers 51 were of the > > intelligent students and 51 of the mentally retarded > > students. This success rate is consistent with the > > result, which can be obtained by tossing the coin of > > decision. > > > > To conclude the report, the findings of the present > > survey, hardly support the claim of the predictive > > power of astrology on the basis of his horoscopes, at > > least for the question regarding the intelligence of a > > person. Of course astrology discusses many other > > aspect of the personality and behavior of individuals > > on the basis of their horoscopes. Many other surveys > > will be needed to say anything conclusively, with > > confidence, about the subject of astrology as a > > science or otherwise. This survey for certain, does > > not support such a claim of astrology being a science. > > In fact, the present survey goes against astrology > > being considered as a science. > > > > ---End of Report. > > > > > > (Dr. Jayant Narlikar), (Dr. Narendra Dabholkar), > > (Sudhakar Kunte) > > IUCAA Maharashtra ANS Dept. of > > Statistics > > > > Univ. of Pune. > > > > > > > > (Prakash Ghatpande) > > Coordinator. > > > > > > > > Be the first one to try the new Messenger 9 Beta! Go to > > http://in.messenger./win/ > > > > --- End forwarded message --- > > > --- End forwarded message --- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 11, 2008 Report Share Posted October 11, 2008 Sushri Dipikaji, Namaskar! If by duplication, you are talking of one and the same message being posted on one and the same forum more than once, it is because of the problem with my ISP---initially Sify and nor MTNL. While posting the message, I just get disconnected from the net, and when it is reconnected, the message gets re-posted! I delete such duplicates myself as and when they come to my notice. If by duplication you mean my messages appearing in different forums, well, they are cross-postings of my own messages. Regards, AKK , " dipika blr " <blr.aspirant wrote: > > some of Avtar ji's messages are being fwded more than once, kindly look into > grouply or settings. > > regrds > > On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 10:02 PM, Avtar Krishen Kaul <jyotirvedwrote: > > > hinducivilization <hinducivilization% 40>, > > " Avtar Krishen Kaul " > > <jyotirved@> wrote: > > > > Dear Shri S. Sampathji, > > Namaskar! > > <The astrologer, in addition to knowledge of Jyotisha, must have the > > 'achara', discipline, intutive skills and faith in a satvik life.> > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 11, 2008 Report Share Posted October 11, 2008 , " Avtar Krishen Kaul " <jyotirved wrote: hinducivilization , " Avtar Krishen Kaul " <jyotirved@> wrote: Dear Shri S. Sampathji, Namaskar! <The astrologer, in addition to knowledge of Jyotisha, must have the 'achara', discipline, intutive skills and faith in a satvik life.> If one has " achara, discipline, intuitive skills and faith in a satvik life " one does not need the knowledge of predictive gimmicks (what you would like to call jyotisha)for peeping into the future! Then again, if one does not have " achara, discipline, intuitive skills and faith in satvik life " , no amount of the knowledge of " jyotisha " will be of any use to him! <Doctors of previous generation were able to diagnose correctly with little data, but guided by intuition and knowledge; but today's doctors need an array of instruments and test reports to guess (not conclude) and try treatment.> My maternal grandfather used to make correct predictions from the most monstrous astronimcal work viz. Grahalaghava---at par with Surya Sidhanta. That was only because he had all the " qualifications " you ae talking about. <Astrology may be compared to medical " science " . Only a good physician will diagnose correctly from the symptoms explained by the patient, his observation and rapidly cycling through his knowledge base. Doctors of previous generation were able to diagnose correctly with little data, but guided by intuition and knowledge; but today's doctors need an array of instruments and test reports to guess (not conclude) and try treatment. Some astrologers, have become like specialist doctors.> Present " jyotisha " ---especially the so called nirayana jyotisha---- euphemistically knows as " Vedic astrology " ---is the worst kind of farce, actually a cruel joke, that could be played on the gullible public. There cannot be any Lahiri or Ramana or Yukteshwara or Fagan etc. Rashis---twelve neat equal divisions of the zodiac---either astronomically or as per the Vedas---of which nobody knows the starting point--the zero! Let me repeat it here that that does not mean that the so called Sayana Rashis have any scientific basis---no there are no tweleve equal divisions---whether sayana or nirayana! Similarly, there are hundreds of Dasha bhuktis like Vimshotari, ashtotari, yogini, kalachakra, manduka, pluta, tribhagi etc. etc. Then again there are hundreds of Ayanamshas! All such plethora of all the techniques is like defecitve " medical " instruments with which you have to " diaganose " the malady---since no " docor " is himself sure as to which ayanamsha or which asha-bhukti is more accurate than others and so on! There are instances of quite a few highly eminent " Vedic astrologers " having fallen on bad days themselves and even their offspring have had problems galore. The astrological empires they had built are like Babylonia of yesteryears---Iraq of today! The wife of one of the top- notch astrologers had a very miserable exit from the world! Predcitive gimmicks in the name of " Vedic Jyotisha " are detested by nmother Nature! <I believe, those astrolegrs who suggest remedial action - do puja for 48 days, feed as many as you can on specific days, go on a yatra to temples and holy rivers, do japa or parayana - are doing service.> I wonder why I should do puja or go on a yatra to temples and holy rivers etc. only if some " astrologer " tells me to do so! Similarly, for doing Japa and Pranayama, we do not ahve to go to some astrologer since these days Swami Ramdev is doing that sevice free of cost! AND HE ADMONISHES PEOPLE, ONE AND ALL, FROM GOING TO JYOTISHIS---AS MUCH AS HE ADMONISHES THEM ABOUT COCA-COLA ETC. He tells in almost every lecture that if anybody is facing any problems from Shani or Rahu, they must sent those Shani and Rahus to him i.e Swami Ramdev---and he will deal with them all! <I would rather go to such an astrologer than to a psychiatrist.> Usually, when people become despondent that even after having done all the remedial measures as advised by their " family jyotishi " , their miseries have not lessened even a whit, the " jyotshi " then advises them to do some other remedial measure since the earlier one must have not been done in a proper manner, as advised by his " family astrologer " . After performing all the remedial measures time and again, the problems do not diminish---they just increase since a lot of money was spent on performing the remedial measures! Ultimately, it is such people who prefer to go to a psychiatrist! Wht is most ironic is that you have still not realised the unpleasant truth that it is because of this very " jyotisha " that you are defending, you are celebrating all the festivals and muhurtas on wrong days! PL. DO ASK YOUR JYOTISHIS ABOUT SOME REMEDY FOR SUCH A MALADY, which has been created by them With regards, A K Kaul PS It appears hinducivilization , " S Sampath " <sampath_srinivasaraghavan@> wrote: > > Statistics is such a flexible tool that it can be used to derive the > conclusion one wants. If a similar survey is conducted among doctors > with symptom list and test reports of 100 patients, one can expect a > similar variance in diagnosis and treatment from the doctor clan. Even > the exit polls during Gujarat elections showed a remarkable variation in > the prediction by leading media channels and print media. In fact one > channel admitted that it meddled with the survey data (because it > thought that the respondents were biased) to get the forecast it wanted. > In fact even sciences are moving away from certainties to probabilities > in higher areas of science. These surveys will prove nothing, because > another survey can be done to disprove the findings of the earlier > survey. > > Only the media sensationalises this kind of surveys; one paper screamed > -'now it is official, astrology is not a science, direct from a > scientist's mouth'. Tomorrow if Lallu Yadhav says, astrology is a > science, he same media will report it with glee. > > Astrology may be compared to medical " science " . Only a good physician > will diagnose correctly from the symptoms explained by the patient, his > observation and rapidly cycling through his knowledge base. Doctors of > previous generation were able to diagnose correctly with little data, > but guided by intuition and knowledge; but today's doctors need an array > of instruments and test reports to guess (not conclude) and try > treatment. Some astrologers, have become like specialist doctors. I once > saw a programme in BBC, which proved that Homeopathy medicines are as > good as placebos, as both produced same result in a batch of patients > (i.e. statistically insignificant variation in outcome) > > The astrologer, in addition to knowledge of Jyotisha, must have the > 'achara', discipline, intutive skills and faith in a satvik life. > > Astrology is as much an exact science as clinical medicine is! I am not > an astrologer; but I have equal faith in both based on my mixed > experience with doctors and astrologers, some good, some bad. > > I believe, those astrolegrs who suggest remedial action - do puja for 48 > days, feed as many as you can on specific days, go on a yatra to temples > and holy rivers, do japa or parayana - are doing service. I would rather > go to such an astrologer than to a psychiatrist. > > Sampath > > hinducivilization , " Avtar Krishen Kaul " > <jyotirved@> wrote: > > > > HinduCalendar , vbdeshmukh deshmukhv@ > > wrote: > > > > Report of the Faljyotish(Astrology) Survey > > > > After we announced the survey, within a day or two we > > received around 150 telephone calls of Astrologers > > from all over Maharashtra informing us their > > willingness to participate in our survey. We asked > > them to send us a stamped envelope and their personal > > information in a prescribed form. > > Meanwhile a team of Astrologers headed by Mr. S. S. > > Bhat ( President, Maharashtra Jyotish Parishad), Mr. > > V. D. Bhat (President, Pune Jyotish Parishad) and > > others met Prof. Kunte at his residence expressing > > their concern regarding the Survey. Since Dr. Narendra > > Dabholkar was a party to the organization of the > > survey, the astrologers were thinking that the survey > > will be biased. Prof. Kunte explained to them the > > detailed procedure of the survey and explained to them > > the fact that Dr. Dabholkar or Dr. Narlikar had no > > active role in the conduct of the survey. Dr. Kunte as > > a statistician was solely responsible for the survey > > and that it will be conducted in as unbiased manner as > > possible. Further it will be a double blind survey. > > All this explanation did not convince the Astrologers > > and in a meeting presided by Mr. S.S. Bhat the > > astrologers decided to boycott the survey and > > requested the astrologer’s community to follow suit. > > In spite of this boycott 51 astrologers from all over > > Maharashtra did send us the stamped envelopes for > > getting the horoscopes. They were given one month time > > to send their results. > > Mean while on 01/06/08 Mr Nandkumar Jakatdar of > > Brahan Maharashtra Jyotish Mandal organized a seminar > > on the topic ‘Whether surveys are necessary to > > vindicate the FalJyotish’. In this seminar some > > astrologers along with Prof. Kunte and Dr. Dabholkar > > also participated. Dr. Dabholkar explained why > > astrology is not a science. Prof. Kunte explained the > > procedure of the current survey in detail. He further > > mentioned that, if astrology is to establish itself as > > a science, it can’t escape validation by surveys. > > Not only the present survey but many such surveys, on > > many topics, by many workers, repeated several times > > are necessary before validating astrology as a > > science. He also mentioned that, since the current > > survey accepts anybody to participate in the survey, > > who claims to be an astrologer, the current survey > > will be able to say something about the community of > > astrologers as they exist in the society and not about > > the subject of astrology. Mr. Nandkumar Jakatdar in > > his concluding remarks said that he could give a set > > of ten rules which can be used on the horoscopes to > > answer the question. He also asked the astrologers to > > participate in such surveys provided they were > > organized in a fair manner after consultation with the > > astrologers. > > Following this meeting the next day Prof. Kunte met > > Mr. Jakatdar to discuss this matter further. A > > suggestion was made to ask the astrological > > institutions to participate in a separate concurrent > > survey at the institutional level, wherein the entire > > set of all the 200 horoscopes, numbered randomly, > > would be given to each institution and that they can > > get the horoscopes examined by their members using the > > common rules. This would be a better test of > > astrological rules. Mr. Jakatdar agreed to this > > proposal. He told Dr. Kunte that he would definitely > > participate in such a survey and further he would > > discuss this matter with various other institutional > > heads. > > A formal appeal in this regard was sent to many > > Institutional heads. Unfortunately only two > > institutions agreed to participate in such a survey. > > They were Jyotish Vidya Prasarak Mandal headed by Mr. > > Maratkar, Pune and Chiranjeev Astro Research > > Institution Pune headed by Ms. Sunanda Rathi. > > Mr. Nandkumar Jakatdar for the reasons best known to > > him decided to back out from the survey. Only Mr. > > Maratkar did finally submit the answers. Ms. Sunanda > > Rathi for reasons best known to her did not submit the > > answers or even communicate her reasons for not > > responding. > > Even though Mr. S.S. Bhat had boycotted the survey, > > he kept meeting Prof. Kunte to discuss various aspects > > of astrology. He gave Prof. Kunte one of his books, > > which according to him is used as a text book on > > astrology in some university. This book mentions a > > rule which can be used on a horoscope to decide > > whether the horoscope belongs to a man or a woman. He > > claims that the rule gives the correct result at least > > 60% of the times. We used this rule on the two hundred > > horoscopes that we have. It predicted the sex > > correctly for only 94 cases out of 200 cases. If the > > claim of at least 60% right answers is correct, > > according to statistics the probability of getting > > only 94 correct answers is less then 5%. In another > > meeting Mr. S. S. Bhat gave another rule to decide > > whether a horoscope belongs to an intelligent person. > > For this rule again Mr. Bhat gave 60% probability for > > correct prediction. We used this rule on our 200 > > horoscopes. It predicted 150 persons out 200 to be > > intelligent. Out of these 150, 75 were really > > intelligent and another 75 were mentally retarded. > > These results speak for themselves. > > We now report the results of the present survey. In > > all 51 astrologers sent us the stamped envelopes to > > get the horoscopes. Sets of 40 horoscopes were sent to > > them. At the end of the survey only 27 astrologers > > sent back their answers. The others did not even > > communicate their reasons for not responding. Out of > > the 27 astrologers, 26 astrologers sent their personal > > details. We give here the general profile of these 26 > > astrologers: > > 15 astrologers practice astrology as a hobby, 8 are > > practicing astrologers and three did not answer the > > question related to their practice of astrology. For > > the 8 practicing astrologers their average experience > > is 14.4 years. > > 11 astrologers use Nirayan method out of which 3 also > > use Krishnamurty method, 7 use Sayan method, 1 uses > > only Krishnamurty method and the remaining 7 did not > > mention any specific method. > > > > The table below gives the distribution of the > > astrologers according to the years of experience: > > > > 5 or less 6 -- 10 11 -- 15 16 -- 20 21 -- 25 > > 26 -- 30 > > 3 6 9 2 3 3 > > > > As for the correct answers out of 40 given by the > > astrologers they range between the minimum of 8 and > > maximum of 24. Only one professional astrologer had 24 > > correct answers. Two astrologers had 22 correct > > answers. For the remaining 24 astrologers the number > > of correct answers was less then or equal to 20. The > > over all average number of correct answers was 17.25 > > out of 40 , which is around 45%. One professional > > astrologer reported 37 intelligent and 3 undecided. > > He of course got 17 correct answers. > > Mr. Maratkar was the only astrologer who had > > participated in the survey at his institutional level. > > He was supplied with all the 200 horoscopes randomly > > numbered. He got them examined by his team members. > > The answers were verified in the presence of Dr. P.V. > > Vartak, a well known name in the field of > > अधà¥à¤¯à¤¾à¤¤à¥à¤®. It was found out that out of > > the 200 horoscopes only 102 were correctly identified. > > Out of the 102 correct answers 51 were of the > > intelligent students and 51 of the mentally retarded > > students. This success rate is consistent with the > > result, which can be obtained by tossing the coin of > > decision. > > > > To conclude the report, the findings of the present > > survey, hardly support the claim of the predictive > > power of astrology on the basis of his horoscopes, at > > least for the question regarding the intelligence of a > > person. Of course astrology discusses many other > > aspect of the personality and behavior of individuals > > on the basis of their horoscopes. Many other surveys > > will be needed to say anything conclusively, with > > confidence, about the subject of astrology as a > > science or otherwise. This survey for certain, does > > not support such a claim of astrology being a science. > > In fact, the present survey goes against astrology > > being considered as a science. > > > > ---End of Report. > > > > > > (Dr. Jayant Narlikar), (Dr. Narendra Dabholkar), > > (Sudhakar Kunte) > > IUCAA Maharashtra ANS Dept. of > > Statistics > > > > Univ. of Pune. > > > > > > > > (Prakash Ghatpande) > > Coordinator. > > > > > > > > Be the first one to try the new Messenger 9 Beta! Go to > > http://in.messenger./win/ > > > > --- End forwarded message --- > > > --- End forwarded message --- --- End forwarded message --- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.