Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

Justification after the fact

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

Scholars: I am by training a scientist. Justifying a mishap after it has

happened is laborious but doable and some times easy.

We however try to cross every T and dot all i's before beginning a process. 99%

of the time every thing works well, however, that remaining 1% is due to an

error or some extraneous uncontrollable situation.

I believe the AF accident is just that.

A question I would like to ask is, does the best of the best astrologer sit at

home and views all of his family's horoscopes as to when they are going to die

and therefore predict their timing of death in their face.

The answer is no.

The astrologer views the horoscope only when a calamity happens and tries to

predict how to reduce its effects.

 

I hope you get my drift.

 

The intention of this note is not to insult any one but just to put in my two

cents worth.

 

Dilip Nene

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

To All,

 

Dilip ji says :

 

<<< " 99% of the time every thing works well, however, that

remaining 1% is due to an error or some extraneous uncontrollable

situation. I believe the AF accident is just that. ....(i.e, there is no

astrological factor)..... " >>>

 

This " scientist " is shirking from his basic scientific duty : a scientist ought

to explain things instead of burying the problem by putting the blame on some

" some extraneous uncontrollable

situation " . With so much instantaneous data from satellites and ground stations,

why AF447 was not warned about severe atmospheric turbulence in its path ? Even

one day after the mishap, some French journalists were shamelessly praising the

capacity of Airbus to withstand hurricanes and lightening, and were expressing

" surprise " at the disappearance of AF447.

 

<<< " <<< " does the best of the best astrologer

sit at home and views all of his family's horoscopes as to when they

are going to die and therefore predict their timing of death in their

face. The answer is no. The astrologer views the horoscopeonly when a calamity

happens and tries to predict how to reduce its effects..........Justifying a

mishap after it has happened is laborious but doable and some times easy. " >>>

 

Scientists try to find black boxes & c and then try to find out

the causes. Then, they do the act of " Justifying a mishap after it has

happened " . But such exercises are necessary for building better crafts. It is

another matter that with so much " after the event " analses, scientists like

Dilip Ji fail to reduce the frequency of calamities and try to put the blame on

" some extraneous uncontrollable

situation " !

 

Dilip Ji does not know that many astrologers have succeeded in making good

predictions. But sceptics like Dilip Ji see only the bad astrologers, not the

good ones. Moreover, he dislikes " after the event " case studies which is the

accepted scientific method for knowing a process. It raises doubts about his

faith on scientific method. If Dilip Ji does not object to, may I know his

contributions in the

field of science, or in any field ? My intention is not to insult any

one, but I want to talk something about his discipline, whatever it be,

because talking with him on astrology is futile. Thereafter, I will talk about

my scientific contributions, verified by NASA and IISc.

 

He has counted all astrologers and had concluded that no one makes correct

predictions !

 

<<< " The intention of this note is not to insult any one " >>>

 

No individual is insulted, only astrology has been insulted by a person who has

no knowledge and therefore no faith in it.

 

-VJ

========================== ====

 

 

________________________________

Dilip <ndilipm45

 

Thursday, June 4, 2009 5:10:05 PM

Justification after the fact

 

 

 

 

 

Scholars: I am by training a scientist. Justifying a mishap after it has

happened is laborious but doable and some times easy.

We however try to cross every T and dot all i's before beginning a process. 99%

of the time every thing works well, however, that remaining 1% is due to an

error or some extraneous uncontrollable situation.

I believe the AF accident is just that.

A question I would like to ask is, does the best of the best astrologer sit at

home and views all of his family's horoscopes as to when they are going to die

and therefore predict their timing of death in their face.

The answer is no.

The astrologer views the horoscope only when a calamity happens and tries to

predict how to reduce its effects.

 

I hope you get my drift.

 

The intention of this note is not to insult any one but just to put in my two

cents worth.

 

Dilip Nene

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Dear Mr./Dr. Nene,

 

The basic assumption that when an astrologer is looking at a chart he or she is

only using 'logic' is not always true. I have heard from very famous astrologers

of our times that they often do some yogic meditation, saadhana etc to clear

their mind before seriously looking at a chart. They like others also run into

situations where there are multiple factors playing in a chart. They use the

acceptable strenght of evidence and weight of evidence approaches, obviously,

but they are also helped by their inner astrologer! It is this that often leads

their mind to the significant factor or factors and then astrology follows or

accompanies. And if they do not admit it, it is not that they are hiding

anything or doing it to be hypocritical. Delineation is perhaps a very complex

multilayered process and often the individual is not fully aware of all the

complex electrical dance that is happening within their brain at the moment.

Perhaps a scientist like you may someday design a MRI or PET/CAT scanning

experiment while an astrologer is delineating a horoscope. Of course the heavy

duty magnets and its 'hum' may overcome the inner beat and disrupt the process

of delineation. Sometimes the act of observing changes the response of the

observed!

 

RR

 

 

, " Dilip " <ndilipm45 wrote:

>

> Scholars: I am by training a scientist. Justifying a mishap after it has

happened is laborious but doable and some times easy.

> We however try to cross every T and dot all i's before beginning a process.

99% of the time every thing works well, however, that remaining 1% is due to an

error or some extraneous uncontrollable situation.

> I believe the AF accident is just that.

> A question I would like to ask is, does the best of the best astrologer sit at

home and views all of his family's horoscopes as to when they are going to die

and therefore predict their timing of death in their face.

> The answer is no.

> The astrologer views the horoscope only when a calamity happens and tries to

predict how to reduce its effects.

>

> I hope you get my drift.

>

> The intention of this note is not to insult any one but just to put in my two

cents worth.

>

> Dilip Nene

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...