Re: Try to calculate Your choroscope by substracting 6 years from

On 11 Aug 2006 23:58:18 -0700, ivars.fabriciuss@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

Shane wrote:
On 11 Aug 2006 11:47:03 -0700, ivars.fabriciuss@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

[top post moved]
dkomo wrote:
ivars.fabriciuss@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

Take Your birthdate and subtract exactly 6 years place, time does not

change. Place,sex, is very important, also accurate time ( up to
30min). It will take You 5 minutes.


so if You were born on May1st, 1982 , 22:00 put in May 1st, 1974,22:00


If event happened in 11/09 2001 time put in 11/09 1995 time.


Try to play with major earthquake dates- compare charts from year as we

know it and Year - 6 .
(e.g put for banda Aceh 7:58 am December 26, 1998 instead of december
26, 2004.) Amazing! in 2004 nothing spectacular, in 1998 - absoluty
assymetry!


I did it with mine (entered 1957) and it was fantastic- excatly on
spot vs. when I put in 1963 its very approximate and wrong.
You can use this easy programm with simple free choroscopes and charts.

Print out both choroscope and forecast. I am still stunned by what I
read.


http://www.astro.com/


Please share with me Your findings.


Your subject line reads as if written by someone who never made it past
6th grade. What kind of idiot can make half a dozen typos and
grammatical errors in the subject line alone?

--dkomo@xxxxxxxx

Does it really matters when idea is important?

If you want your ideas treated with respect, treat the ideas of other
people with respect. A lot of people think that correct spelling and
grammar are a good idea.

I will try. Is this now bottom- post?

Yes, and the preferred method for t.o. Note that other groups may prefer
top posts, but a quick browse of a few threads will soon let you know
which is which.

Another thing I wanted to check is how many people would agree after
making horoscope in a way I suggested that it is better.

In a science newsgroup you are not likely to find many that would agree
that any horoscope has any value at all.

I suppose it will be either 50% agree, 37,5% disagree, 12,5 % can not
decide or 50% disagree, 37,5% agree , 12,5% can not decide.

In first case hypothesis would be worth looking into deeper. In second
it is obviously wrong.
As it stands now it is 60% for ( 3 of 5) , 40% against .

Unfortunately no one answers. Please just try.

See my above comment. I have absolutely no interest in horoscopes, and
am also aware that you can correlate just about anything in history to
anything else in history or nature. This does not, however, show
causality.

If You do not want to
post the result, you may keep results for yourself, change them etc.
But if You do not try, how can You know is can not be right? Because it
just can not? Well , let us then prove it by the results of this game.
I think groups is so convenient to run this type of research - it is
global and fast. Please give some feedback on results.

If you are doing some research, then I suggest that you should have been
up-front about it and introduced both yourself and your research goal.
Newsgroups are often spammed by various people for various reasons, and
yours came across as just another one of those and was most likely
ignored partly for that reason and partly for the reason I gave above.

Grammar may be a problem , but by reading your posts I will get the
feeling of good way to construct posting sentences soon.

If english is not your first language then good on you for posting here.
Generally you will not get too many spelling/grammar flames, but your
posts will be judged by how well you present your ideas. This is an
english language group, so rightly or wrongly that is how it goes. Also
being up front about english being a second language will gain you some
respect. We all make mistakes in spelling and grammar, but it is a good
idea to try to minimise them.

Spelling is a
chronic porblem for me- is there a spellchecker available inside posts?

That depends upon your newsreader. If you are particularly concerned
about this, then write your replies in a word processor or text editor
program, spell check it there and cut and paste it into your newsreader.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: elementary Sanskrit blunder by Harvard professor
    ... community is under the influence of more than one language - the form ... there isn't any reason why it would be uniformly ... (One might wonder how you think English has ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: elementary Sanskrit blunder by Harvard professor
    ... community is under the influence of more than one language - the form ... there isn't any reason why it would be uniformly ... (One might wonder how you think English has ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: OT - PatnTonys potatoes
    ... What you suggested above was making a new, alternative rule for apostrophes. ... The reason is, I think, that this is usually how we say it, which is the rule of thumb for most of these things. ... We may lose either the clarity or the beauty of our language, ... You only have to look at other internet forums (and I stick resolutely to the English plural here) to see how garbled and unclear and ugly English can become when it's carelessly used. ...
    (uk.media.radio.archers)
  • Re: why still use C?
    ... only discussion of the language itself ... Of the people who have replied to you, I consider Jack ... subjects, easily rectified, and without any reason ... have caused him to associate your nonfluency with English ...
    (comp.lang.c)
  • Re: Leodhasach & Hearasch - Gaelic help please
    ... course our own traditional language is even more neglected than Gaelic is. ... who speak English soon get the gist of it. ... is someone who truly appreciates Scottish culture in that you won't find ...
    (soc.culture.scottish)