To: Richnorth who wrote (61 ) 8/5/1999 3:37:00 PM From: maouse Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 538
Actually I do understand the modus and the operandi of true AND untrue astrology. I could list the books if you wish, although some I have returned to libraries several years ago (and it would be a waste of my time). I don't know why you think I am so unworthy to be on the same thread as you who have studied it oh so extensively (for was it, 5 years?). (ps. where's your phd?) The reason astrology exists is because man saw the typical cause/effect in nature, expounded upon these ideas and eventually applied it to all of creation. And that is fine, with the exception that man does not know all of creation. And while it is true that as astrology gets more and more history and inclines one to predict the same rubish will happen again in a century, I simply do not think it is all that much help. And all you have to do if it is wrong is say, oh well, "it inclines, it doesn't compel." So its ok if you're wrong. Big deal if so and so company just lost 4 mil or more, no biggie, not my fault, I was inclined to say that it should have turned out that way, but it didn't so oh well... sorry for your luck. Your charts are off. They can be right more often than chance based upon historical accounts/cycles, but so can a history professor's. The case in point; 5 Market Timing "history professors" have beat your "best" astrologer. so bite me monkey boy. ...those who do not LEARN from history are doomed to repeat it... (in cycles) (ps. NASA uses star charts more for gravitational, navigational and physics reasons than for astrological predictions) and ditto on the "A man convinced against his will Is of the same opinion still." sentiment