Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Creation Model


  • Please log in to reply
13 replies to this topic

#1 kvraghavaiah

kvraghavaiah

    Curious

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 53 posts

Posted 27 April 2013 - 04:20 PM

BRAMHA



Abstract:
The creation is done by the BRAMHA (PARABRAMHA). The creation is the MAYA and the ATMAs bound together. The creation was planned completely before it was started.

Key Words: Creation, PARABRAMHA, MAYA, ATMA, BRAMHA.

Introduction:
The knowledge of the very root(s) of this creation is not available to man till date and it looks impossible. But, understanding that is deeper than what conventional (materialistic) science can tell about the creation and the most knowable depth is presented below. Creation model is presented that satisfies all observations in the nature and also the same model is derived again from some observations. A lot of not known before knowledge is given and many known questions are answered.

Part 1
Creation Model (satisfies all observations):

Many things are not explainable by the conventional scientific logic which does not accept many truths like miracles, omens, etc and tries to answer every question with not a very open view. At most, a conventional researcher on an electron can say that an electron is made up of quarks or strings or go to a bit more detail. Why exactly does a string behave as it does and what is it made from? Yet, there are only partially convincing scientific models with still many puzzles unsolved. What could be done so far is only converting one question in to another or multiple other. If we keep digging for answers in the conventional approach, we will reach a stop where we have a lot of questions without solutions ahead. An atomic particle penetrates infinite barrier wall when it is not able to jump over it, which is in-explainable with conventional logic. There are working magics. So, many things that we know are not interpretable in our minds through materialistic conventional logic. Even the things that we think as understood well are not actually interpretable with conventional logic if analyzed at a deeper level.

So, all the things are happening miraculously or in a manner un-interpretable through materialistic conventional logic. Any illogical thing is possible to happen if it is not actually happening but it is only an illusion to mind as if it is happening. For example; a man can have wings, light may travel in a zigzag manner through space, things may be repelled by the gravitational force and any law of nature is possible to exist in dream (imagination) without need for logic in those happenings. The objects and rules are applicable in illusions also in the same way. That means, everything we sense or perceive in this universe is an illusion without need for logic. If a thing that can be perceived in this universe is not an illusion, it cannot exist because it cannot exist logically. Any rules seen in the illusion universe are just the rules in illusion, not the logically (really) existing rules. It is a rule in the illusion that there exists gravitational force of attraction between any two objects. Actually objects are illusion and the gravitational force too.

When you talk to your friend (illusion), you act to him as you will (think, decide). So, ‘you’ are ‘a willing object undergoing illusion’. When you will to walk, you walk (get walking illusion). When you will to talk, you talk (get talking illusion). But, it will not rain by your will to have rain. That means, ‘you’ and the ‘illusion’ are bound together with certain rules of the illusion.

You get the illusion without creating it. That means, there are at least two objects (you and the illusion creating system) in relation to the illusion. So, there may be one to any number of illusion imposed objects like ‘you’ under the illusion creating system. The illusion creating system is called as BRAMHA, ‘object having will and undergoing illusion’ is called as ATMA and the illusion is called as MAYA.

The logic or theory of the reality of the BRAMHA is beyond our (ATMA’s) scope as ATMAs are objects being done by the BRAMHA and are not at a higher or equal level as the BRAMHA or in a level to observe and understand the reality of the BRAMHA. The scientific knowledge understandable by us (ATMAs) is the rules in the illusion which we (they) feel.

Take the MAYA and the BRAMHA ‘you’ belong to for consideration. Analysis of the number of MAYAs or BRAMHAs is beyond the scope and known needs.

Consider the case of many ATMAs in the MAYA. What happens in the illusion (MAYA) when you are having conversation with your friend is explained as follows. As an ATMA is bound to the illusion for its experiences, ATMA to ATMA direct interaction does not exist. You do illusion conversation with your illusion-friend (not real friend ATMA). At the same time, ‘your friend ATMA’ does illusion conversation with illusion-you (not ‘you’, your illusion). ‘Your illusion’ and ‘your friend illusion’ are in the only one MAYA which is being done by BRAMHA. So, ‘you’ do (will) as ‘your illusion’ does and ‘your friend ATMA’ does (wills) as ‘your friend-illusion’ does. Here, either the MAYA should be behaving in synch with the wills of independent ATMAs or the ATMAs should be willing in synch with the MAYA depending on the BRAMHA. All living beings do not take birth and death on their will. Many of their thoughts and dreams come without their known effort. This means, all ATMAs’ will is controlled to be in synch with MAYA. So, if the ATMAs are having wills in synch with the MAYA, they should be done by the same system which does the MAYA. So, the ATMAs and the MAYA are bonded and are done by the BRAMHA. So, the creation consists of the MAYA and the ATMAs, which are bonded and done by the BRAMHA.

It is not possible to know if there is only myself (ATMA) in this creation or if there are many ATMAs. I cannot know if the friend I am talking to in this MAYA is really associated with an ATMA. At least one ATMA (I) is in this creation.

The creation is continuing over time as we know. The state of the creation in the next instant must be pre planned by the BRAMHA for the creation to have the next state, because creation with MAYA and ATMAs is being executed by the BRAMHA. That means, creation is being executed (done/run) as per the pre decision (plan) by the BRAMHA at least for the next instant.

The rules of the illusion, which sometimes decide the forthcoming incidents, also are effective after a preplanned starting incident. The illusion rules themselves are existing because of being planned in advance.

We predict many things that happen in the future like the weather forecast, the human population estimation, technology growth estimation, etc. But, we do not predict things like just the weather. We predict even future of people and countries based on horoscope, palmistry, numerology, etc. Many times we know things in advance by the omens of the nature (signs that indicate auspicious and inauspicious happenings). So, the state of the creation was not planned for just the next instant. It was planned for a long period in the future.

There cannot be partial planning of the future incidents (state of the creation) for any instant in the future, because all incidents are interlinked and so non-preplanned incidents always affect the pre planned incidents. In a partially planned creation period, a set of not preplanned incidents occurring before and alongside a preplanned incident can fail the happening of the preplanned incident or the successful execution of the preplan requires change of the rules of the illusion, which is contradictory to the practical happening. So, from whatever point till whatever point of time in the creation was planned in one preplan, it was planned completely.

In the creation where there are continuing incidents at any instant in the midcourse of the creation, the start and end points of a preplan happen to be the start and end points of the creation itself. Because, preplan cannot be limited up to a midcourse point of time in the creation from the start point of creation as many incomplete and progressing incidents would be occurring at any instant after the start of the creation; without change of the illusion rules or it being the end of the creation. So, the creation was planned completely for the entire period of the creation, before the creation was started.

Part 2
Creation model (from some observations):

We predict many things that happen in the future like the weather forecast, the human population estimation, technology growth estimation, etc. These predictions are based on a current incident and its known effects. But, we do not predict things like just the weather. We predict even future of people and countries based on horoscope, palmistry, numerology, etc. Many times we know things in advance by the omens of the nature (signs that indicate auspicious and inauspicious happenings). The life incidents on the earth and the position of the planets are independent. Synchronization between the position of the planets and the life incidents on the earth is not possible unless some system executes both of them with synchronization. So the creation is not running on its own. It is being executed by a system. This system is called the BRAMHA.

‘I’ do willing and ‘I’ has experience of the environment. The object ‘I’ and its experienced environment which are in the creation are executed by the BRMHA. The willing and experience of ‘I’ are executed by the BRAMHA. Let ‘I’ be called as an ATMA. The experience of an ATMA is controlled. So, the experience of an ATMA is a perceptional imposition. Perceptional imposition on the ATMA(s) is called the Illusion or the MAYA. So, the creation consists of the MAYA and the ATMAs, which are bonded and done by the BRAMHA.

(The other derived understandings given in the part 1 are applicable here too)

Corollary 1:
The position of the planets at the time of birth is taken to tell the future of a man. Here planets do not have any influence on the man. Planets are just indicators of the already planned destiny of a man. If a man is going to face difficulties in his life for the next one year as planned by the BRAMHA, it is just indicated by the corresponding positioning of the planets by the BRAMHA at his birth time. This is co-plan for the man and the planets together. It is a repetitive rule of the creation that Saturn in a certain position is bad for a man and in a different position is good. So, the incidents on the earth happen in synchronization with the positions of the planets; and the incidents over time are inter-synchronized for the synchronization between the positions of the planets and incidents to be possible. Similar is the case with omens that signal the auspicious and inauspicious happenings.

Corollary 2:
Since the material world we see (sense/observe) is only illusion, many different worlds(universes) can be experienced without displacing our body in the creation, as visiting a different world (universe) requires just switching of the illusion an ATMA is perceiving.

Corollary 3:
Within this creation, the ATMAs are being done with changing happiness and sadness through sense organs and continuous happiness in the state of meditation. Happiness and sadness are perceptions of the ATMAs and so internal to the designed creation being executed by the BRAMHA. So, why this creation was designed as it is and being executed by the BRAMHA is not knowable.

Reference:
http://theknowledgeo...ents/Bramha.htm

#2 Buffy

Buffy

    Resident Slayer

  • Administrators
  • 8946 posts

Posted 27 April 2013 - 04:51 PM

Shorter version for those of you who were not able to make it all the way through the OP:


Since stuff happens that contradicts unscientific "common sense", science is worthless, so BRAMHA did it.

kvraghavaiah: You have two choices: You can steer this thread away from the "explanation of the universe requires God" theme so we can move this to the Theology forum, or you can try to beef up your argument with actual physical evidence, otherwise this thread will simply be moved to Silly Claims, which I don't think you want.


I know it doesn't make sense. Instrumentation reads correct, but the feel is wrong. It's something I can't quite put into words, :phones:
Buffy

#3 kvraghavaiah

kvraghavaiah

    Curious

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 53 posts

Posted 27 April 2013 - 11:09 PM

Shorter version for those of you who were not able to make it all the way through the OP:


Since stuff happens that contradicts unscientific "common sense", science is worthless, so BRAMHA did it.

kvraghavaiah: You have two choices: You can steer this thread away from the "explanation of the universe requires God" theme so we can move this to the Theology forum, or you can try to beef up your argument with actual physical evidence, otherwise this thread will simply be moved to Silly Claims, which I don't think you want.


I know it doesn't make sense. Instrumentation reads correct, but the feel is wrong. It's something I can't quite put into words, :phones:
Buffy


Hi Buffy,

the section 'Part2' in the OP is derivation of the same model/concept from physical evidences(astrology).
Do you want evidence for 'astrology is real'? I can give a few examples of evidence if yo want. Else, if you accept Astrology, then the required evidence is there.

#4 blamski

blamski

    Thinking

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 135 posts

Posted 28 April 2013 - 10:41 AM

i can't speak for buffy, but i for one would love to see some evidence for 'astrology is real'.
  • Moontanman likes this

#5 Buffy

Buffy

    Resident Slayer

  • Administrators
  • 8946 posts

Posted 28 April 2013 - 04:51 PM

Do you want evidence for 'astrology is real'? I can give a few examples of evidence if yo want. Else, if you accept Astrology, then the required evidence is there.


blamski pretty much spoke for me. Lots of proof has been produced that that astrology is not "real"...

Here's a pretty good selection of disproofs with footnotesMy link, and if you have an open mind, here's a pretty good article on "How to Argue That Astrology is Fake" that'll take you through the steps to figure out where you're going wrong.


The folly of mistaking a paradox for a discovery, a metaphor for a proof, a torrent of verbiage for a spring of capital truths, and oneself for an oracle, is inborn in us, :phones:
Buffy
  • CraigD and Moontanman like this

#6 kvraghavaiah

kvraghavaiah

    Curious

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 53 posts

Posted 29 April 2013 - 03:45 PM

In soccer world cup 2010, the Paul octopus predicted results correctly every time.

If some of the current astrological predictions are just as good as random chance predictions...that could be because of the incorrect calculations in the astrological method used. Were all astrological methods studied to judge their effectiveness, in the references given above?

I have a bad day every time I wear a black jacket or pant. Why does it happen to me consistently?

I have happy incidents/omens when some thing good is going to happen to me soon.

I had twice dreamed the incidents happening at my home 500 km away, with out knowing them happening in advance.

There are happening prophecies.

We can not rule out the astrology just because an incorrect astrological method fails. Open mind is required to accept truths with out bias.

If astrology keeps conventional scientific logics in difficulty, we should not look for excuses to dismiss astrology. There cannot be real progress in science unless facts are accepted.

#7 Buffy

Buffy

    Resident Slayer

  • Administrators
  • 8946 posts

Posted 29 April 2013 - 09:51 PM

In soccer world cup 2010, the Paul octopus predicted results correctly every time.

Um, are you saying that the octopus cast Astrology charts to make his predictions?

One of the most fundamental fallacies used to support things like Astrology and divine prophecies is that "you can't get order from chaos," and therefore any sufficiently long streak of predictions is proof of the predictive power of the oracle or whatever. This is easily proven untrue by simple experiments I once wrote a random coin flip program that in a very short time produced a string of over 300 "heads" in a row: taking the full distribution of heads-to-tails was still 50-50, but seemingly "illogical" streaks of "being right" can occur in completely random processes.

That's not something you need to "believe in" or "have an open mind about", you can *test* it yourself.

That's Science.

If some of the current astrological predictions are just as good as random chance predictions...that could be because of the incorrect calculations in the astrological method used. Were all astrological methods studied to judge their effectiveness, in the references given above?

That's what they all say. In fact one of those link explicitly points that excuse out as a *misdirection* to attempt to limit the data set to "right" predictions.

If you can simply take any prediction that failed and say, "it wasn't done right" and find some minor error as an excuse to exclude it from the measured set of predictions you're introducing what we call "selection bias" and it's guaranteed to provide misleading results.

Now the fact of the matter is that any survey done that doesn't back Astrology is going to be attacked on this point, and allowing Astrologers to determine which charts were "correctly drawn" is simply absurd. But there's another way to measure this: Astrology has been around for a very long time. Don't you think by now someone would have figured out a way to make a fortune on it? Use it to predict the stock market? Bet on the horses at the race track? Or if the Astrology Gods don't like selfish acquisition, to regularly save people from storms and earthquakes and holocausts?

I have a bad day every time I wear a black jacket or pant. Why does it happen to me consistently?

That's called the Power of Suggestion. Click that link, you'll learn something.

You're also subject here to selection bias here: you only remember the bad stuff when you're wearing black, and you're not counting very accurately.

And this of course is what the octopus was doing, and has no bearing on Astrology at all, unless your chart keeps saying not to wear black.

I have happy incidents/omens when some thing good is going to happen to me soon.

I had twice dreamed the incidents happening at my home 500 km away, with out knowing them happening in advance.

That's nice! Me too! Deja vu is one of the most common human experiences, and one of the results of studying the phenomenon is that there's a strong correlation between a person's belief in their ability to see the future and the accuracy and detail of their predictions.

Of course the big problem is that there's no way to objectively determine what the person actually predicted unless you always capture their predictions *before* the event occurs, and you always capture *every* dream they had, so you can tell how many times they *failed*.

I have often had the feeling I would win at blackjack and have, but I've never had the feeling that I would clear exactly $478. I've had dreams about dating cute guys when that never happened or when it did it turned out to be an absolute disaster because the guy turned out to be a turkey.

There are happening prophecies.

We can not rule out the astrology just because an incorrect astrological method fails. Open mind is required to accept truths with out bias.

Bottom line is there is no way to measure any of this stuff with any accuracy, and so your plea to "accept truths without bias" is pretty hollow, since every one of your proofs is overflowing with selection bias.

If astrology keeps conventional scientific logics in difficulty, we should not look for excuses to dismiss astrology. There cannot be real progress in science unless facts are accepted.

Happy to hear any facts you have, but so far, you've provided none.


No man is allowed to be a judge in his own cause, because his interest would certainly bias his judgment, and, not improbably, corrupt his integrity. With equal, nay with greater reason, a body of men are unfit to be both judges and parties at the same time, :phones:
Buffy
  • Moontanman and JMJones0424 like this

#8 LaurieAG

LaurieAG

    Explaining

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1550 posts

Posted 30 April 2013 - 07:51 AM

No man is allowed to be a judge in his own cause, because his interest would certainly bias his judgment, and, not improbably, corrupt his integrity. With equal, nay with greater reason, a body of men are unfit to be both judges and parties at the same time, :phones:
Buffy

Well put Buffy,

I found the following in a book ages ago and it covers similar ground. Hermes was the ancient Greek counterpart of the Egyptian god Thoth according to Robert Graves.

According to certain Egyptian doctrines, Hermopolis is the city created by the god Thoth, where the world began. This is the location where the claw of Atum, the god of creation, killed the cosmic serpent and put an end to formless chaos. The sign of this city is a slippery serpent, joined around itself, with its mouth eating it's tail in endless cycles of rebirth.

Plato, in Phaedrus 274c5-275b2 (c. 360BC), tells us more about Thoth. ‘I heard that … one of the ancient gods in Egypt has the sacred bird called the Ibis dedicated to him. The name of this deity is Thoth and I am told that it was he who first invented numbers and calculation, geometry and astronomy and, furthermore, draughts and dice and, finally, letters of the alphabet. Now at that time Thamos was king of all Egypt and he lived in the big city of Upper Egypt which the Greeks call Egyptian Thebes. They call Thamos 'Ammon'. Thoth went to him, showed him his inventions and said that they should be made public to other Egyptians. Thamos asked what good each one did, and when Thoth explained, he criticises and blamed the ideas depending on the merit he thought each one had… It would take too long to run through all the pros and cons Thamos raised about each invention. But when Thoth reached the letters of the alphabet, he said 'King, this subject will make the Egyptians wiser and improve their memory. The drug of memory and of wisdom has been discovered.' Thamos replied, 'Most skilful Thoth, the man who has the ability to invent the objects of science and the man who can judge the extent of damage or good that those objects will bring are not one and the same. Now, through fondness for your invention of letters, you, their inventor have ascribed to them the opposite capacity from the capacity they in fact have. This, you see, will cause forgetfulness in the minds of people who learn them because they will not practice using their memory - if they rely on writing, they will be reminded from the outside, by external characters, not from the inside, by themselves. What you have discovered is a drug not of memory but of reminding. You are providing those who learn your letters what seem to be wisdom, but is not real wisdom. If they are very attentive to you, then without teaching they will seem to be very knowledgeable, but they will as a rule be ignorant and hard to get on with because they are apparently wise instead of really wise.'



#9 Buffy

Buffy

    Resident Slayer

  • Administrators
  • 8946 posts

Posted 30 April 2013 - 10:07 PM

Well put Buffy,


I didn't say that: :phones: is "Buffy's Asterisk" so I encourage you to Google the quote! :cheer:

Interesting quote: It's kind of the reason I never take notes except to catch numbers, dates and occasionally names. It's much more useful to concentrate on absorbing things.

It also reminds me of the Issac Asimov short story about the future when everyone does arithmetic with calculators, and a fellow who can do it in his head leads to him being whisked off to the Pentagon...

But to focus on the OP it is interesting how religions (in this case Egyptian) try to keep knowledge from the common folk by discouraging them from learning the tools of knowledge, often with tricky arguments like this "if you learn how to learn then you won't learn anything."

Genesis had it: "A little knowledge is dangerous."


If knowledge can create problems, it is not through ignorance that we can solve them, :phones:
Buffy
  • Turtle and like this

#10 LaurieAG

LaurieAG

    Explaining

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1550 posts

Posted 30 April 2013 - 11:00 PM

Hi Buffy,

Interesting quote: It's kind of the reason I never take notes except to catch numbers, dates and occasionally names. It's much more useful to concentrate on absorbing things.

It also reminds me of the Issac Asimov short story about the future when everyone does arithmetic with calculators, and a fellow who can do it in his head leads to him being whisked off to the Pentagon...

But to focus on the OP it is interesting how religions (in this case Egyptian) try to keep knowledge from the common folk by discouraging them from learning the tools of knowledge, often with tricky arguments like this "if you learn how to learn then you won't learn anything."

Genesis had it: "A little knowledge is dangerous."

If knowledge can create problems, it is not through ignorance that we can solve them, :phones:
Buffy


You and your unorthodox quote tags lol.

Actually the main point of Plato's quote was that the inventor is the worst person to set out the con's of their invention much like a project manager should not be the risk manager of the same project, as they both tend to think their babies are perfect.

Robert Heinlein had a similar character. http://en.wikipedia....w_Jackson_Libby

Andrew Jackson "Slipstick" Libby is a fictional character featured in the so-called "Future History" series of science fiction novels by Robert A. Heinlein. He is an enormously talented and intuitive mathematician, but received little formal education. His talent was first appreciated in the short story Misfit, where he helps guide an asteroid into the correct orbit after the guidance computer has failed.


Also, the Egyptians had their own 'Book of the Dead', so the 'weighing of the heart' was most likely a more metaphorical and philosophical term in Plato's version. Robert Graves discussion about the Greater Elusinian mysteries makes this distinction clear.

After the abolition of royal male sacrifices, a feature of matriarchy, the Mysteries were open to all judged worthy of initiation; as in Egypt, where the Book of the Dead gave similar advice, any man of good repute could become an Osiris by being purified of all uncleanness and undergoing a mock death. In Eleusis, Osiris was identified with Dionysus.


  • Buffy likes this

#11 kvraghavaiah

kvraghavaiah

    Curious

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 53 posts

Posted 01 May 2013 - 06:06 AM

Um, are you saying that the octopus cast Astrology charts to make his predictions?

One of the most fundamental fallacies used to support things like Astrology and divine prophecies is that "you can't get order from chaos," and therefore any sufficiently long streak of predictions is proof of the predictive power of the oracle or whatever. This is easily proven untrue by simple experiments I once wrote a random coin flip program that in a very short time produced a string of over 300 "heads" in a row: taking the full distribution of heads-to-tails was still 50-50, but seemingly "illogical" streaks of "being right" can occur in completely random processes.

That's not something you need to "believe in" or "have an open mind about", you can *test* it yourself.

That's Science.


How can an octopus cast astrology charts :)? The activities of the octopus and the soccer game were synchronized by BRAMHA/God (this is the concept explained in OP).
There can be order from chaos even in a creation not run by god, but the frequency and magnitude of order in practical incidents is far better than random chance.

That's called the Power of Suggestion. Click that link, you'll learn something.

You're also subject here to selection bias here: you only remember the bad stuff when you're wearing black, and you're not counting very accurately.

And this of course is what the octopus was doing, and has no bearing on Astrology at all, unless your chart keeps saying not to wear black.

I counted things accurately. And the kind of explanation/excuse you are giving is a common excuse given by a typical conventional scientist. This kind of invented ideas just to disprove astrology and related sciences actually creates more problems to those who take counselling with such ideas. Better not to introduce such ideas for the sake of dislike of astrology, rather go with simple commonsense in counselling the needy.

That's nice! Me too! Deja vu is one of the most common human experiences, and one of the results of studying the phenomenon is that there's a strong correlation between a person's belief in their ability to see the future and the accuracy and detail of their predictions.

Of course the big problem is that there's no way to objectively determine what the person actually predicted unless you always capture their predictions *before* the event occurs, and you always capture *every* dream they had, so you can tell how many times they *failed*.

I have often had the feeling I would win at blackjack and have, but I've never had the feeling that I would clear exactly $478. I've had dreams about dating cute guys when that never happened or when it did it turned out to be an absolute disaster because the guy turned out to be a turkey.


Again, the coincidence of the dream and the actual incident is more than random probability, because i remember just 10 or 20 dreams per year and one of them happen to be the same as the real incident and the dream is on the same day as the real incident. There are say 1000s of different important incidents in an year in my real life, how come 1 out of 10 dreams coincide with reality in such a large count of different real incidents? This can not happen by chance.

Bottom line is there is no way to measure any of this stuff with any accuracy, and so your plea to "accept truths without bias" is pretty hollow, since every one of your proofs is overflowing with selection bias.


Happy to hear any facts you have, but so far, you've provided none.

Top line is .. you are trying to give excuses rather than accepting the facts :).

#12 Buffy

Buffy

    Resident Slayer

  • Administrators
  • 8946 posts

Posted 01 May 2013 - 11:15 AM

How can an octopus cast astrology charts :)? The activities of the octopus and the soccer game were synchronized by BRAMHA/God (this is the concept explained in OP).
There can be order from chaos even in a creation not run by god, but the frequency and magnitude of order in practical incidents is far better than random chance.

That is an interesting hypothesis, but you run into a simple problem: Nowhere have you defined the exact level of probability required to prove that BRAMHA is actually doing all these things, this gives you in your own mind the ability to perceive everything as BRAMHA's intervention.

Now if you were to pick a particular probability as the threshold, you might have the beginnings of a *valid* hypothesis (although you might find that it is still disproven by facts, but at least facts could be applied). The problem is that you're just taking your vague, unverified memories and thrown them out as "facts" and demand they be accepted as such, even though they blatantly violate every principle of the scientific method.

That's your own Ego working. Not very convincing, let alone scientific.

I counted things accurately. And the kind of explanation/excuse you are giving is a common excuse given by a typical conventional scientist. This kind of invented ideas just to disprove astrology and related sciences actually creates more problems to those who take counselling with such ideas. Better not to introduce such ideas for the sake of dislike of astrology, rather go with simple commonsense in counselling the needy.

Again, the coincidence of the dream and the actual incident is more than random probability, because i remember just 10 or 20 dreams per year and one of them happen to be the same as the real incident and the dream is on the same day as the real incident. There are say 1000s of different important incidents in an year in my real life, how come 1 out of 10 dreams coincide with reality in such a large count of different real incidents? This can not happen by chance.

How do any of us know you counted them accurately? Or counted them all? Or that the ones you "didn't remember" just happened to be the ones that were completely wrong?

The kind of "explanation/excuse" I'm using here is called "science." You're the one who is attempting to make BRAMHA a scientific truth. And you're doing it in the most unscientific way possible: simply declaring it as truth and ignoring any and all scientific facts that get in your way.

You have completely ignored my discussion of the Power of Suggestion and most of the first few Statistics courses you would take in school spend inordinate amounts of time on why statistics go wrong, yet every post you have put in this thread is filled with the kind of statistical error that any freshman statistics major would get a Failing Grade on.

Top line is .. you are trying to give excuses rather than accepting the facts :).

Ahem. You might want to take a look in the mirror, pal.

There's an awfully big difference between "opening one's mind" and "fooling one's self," and you're mostly doing the latter.

Last chance: you gonna keep waving your hands or give us some actual *verified* data to work with?


When I use a word, it means exactly what I want it to mean, no more and no less, :phones:
Buffy

#13 kvraghavaiah

kvraghavaiah

    Curious

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 53 posts

Posted 01 May 2013 - 03:25 PM

Proofs of 'Astrology is real'

http://www.llewellyn...f-of-astrology/

http://www.astrologe...ofastrology.htm

http://lifescapeastrology.com/

http://answers.yahoo...27020830AArzkqE

#14 Buffy

Buffy

    Resident Slayer

  • Administrators
  • 8946 posts

Posted 01 May 2013 - 04:06 PM

Sorry, one of the rules around here is that you can't just post links and say "here's proof": you need to explicitly say what behind the links addresses specific points you are trying to make. We know you can write volumes. So this is just plain lazy, and doesn't motivate anyone to respond to you.

I have read the links though, and they all have oodles of disproofs. The fact that you find them convincing says only that you're a true believer.

But really, go ahead and tell us what you think those links demonstrate *specifically*. It will be great fun.


The reason is that in a group, individual errors on either side of the true figure cancel each other out, :phones:
Buffy