View Full Version : Never believe conspiracy theories...
Never believe conspiracy theories... except when the actual and provable facts exist.
And especially when its not a conspiracy, but rather actual and proven actions by both the US Treasury Exchange Stabilization Fund (ESF), and the gold buy & sell actions by the European Central Bank (ECB) (Gold price manipulation/control proof (http://www.itulip.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4640)).
Mish is at it again today, trying to spin and squirm out from under having been busted for both not doing his homework and also quite dubious journalism - as noted in Dollar intervention: Facts versus ideology (http://www.itulip.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4808).
There is no reason to believe that dollar manipulation or gold manipulation is the driving force behind movements in gold, silver, and currencies. Never believe conspiracy theories or screams of manipulation when far simpler explanations such as (insert Mish spin)Translation: spin and more attempts to avoid:
The actual timing and dollar details of the recent intervention are as follows:
As of the reporting weeks ending June 13th & June 20th, $6.381 billion dollars were sold by the ESF for Euros (approx. 9.8 billion Euros).
During that first week, the value of the dollar index moved from 72.39 to 74.15 and then back to 73.43 the following week.
The reporting of the ESF actions from the weeks ending June 13th & June 20th was not made public until July 14th.
The dollar index closed at 71.87 on July 15th, which was the recent low.
The actual facts show that the ESF intervention preceded any other significant factor to the dollar move, to the best of my knowledge.
His comment also implies that my original iTulip post was not about the proven dollar intervention being the current driving force, but rather about it being the primary trigger. For any who are familiar with the area of logical fallacies, that's called a straw man. The use of logical fallacies, rather than dealing with the facts, is nothing more than an admission that he knows he has blown it - in other words, more dubious journalism.Straw Man (Fallacy Of Extension): attacking an exaggerated or caricatured version of your opponent's position. For example, the claim that "evolution means a dog giving birth to a cat (http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/creation/dogcat.html)."
Another example: "Senator Jones says that we should not fund the attack submarine program. I disagree entirely. I can't understand why he wants to leave us defenseless like that." And he continues:
There are now screams of "gold manipulation" just as there were currency manipulation. I will not suggest there is no manipulation, but I will suggest that manipulation if and when it occurs does not work.
At least Mish has backed off ridiculing that manipulation/control exists, but again he completely fails to directly address the actual facts as laid out in points 1-4 above regarding the ESF, and also ignores the 500+ tonne gold sale recently by the ECB ( Gold price manipulation/control proof (http://www.itulip.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4640) ) during the week ending 7/18/2008.
Screams? - sorry Mish, no. Just plain facts and thorough research.
And from later today:
Many claim that that dollar was rising because of manipulation. Such claims are completely baseless and were totally debunked in (link to his original article that has been proven wrong, per my research and facts).
I see that Mish has now stooped even lower and is basically into maximum spin. Bald assertions with wrong facts is one guarantee of dubious journalism.
Perhaps he will continue to ignore that the ECB gold sale was during the same week that the ESF made its $6.3 billion Euro purchase public too? After all, central banks never talk to each other, especially during periods of financial crisis... "Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive."
It's again quite odd, to say the least, that he asserts that it did not work when the actual facts show that gold peaked the following week and is down almost $200 since then. More distortion, exaggeration etc. and quite questionable and dubious journalism.
If gold continues down and corrects over 40% like it did in 1975, will he still say it doesn't work?
Note that I'm not saying it will, but I am saying that its far from impossible.
I'm also saying, as I have for years, that I expect gold to peak at well over $2000 in the current long term hard asset cycle.
I have no bone to pick with those who buy & hold during primary bull markets, but rather prefer myself to trade the corrections and avoid the truly massive draw downs that always happen.
I also prefer to look at all the facts that I can locate, rather than being wedded to fixed viewpoints that can be very dangerous and perilous to your wealth & portfolio.
And again, this is not about judging the right and wrong about what the ESF or ECB have done or are doing - it's about that they exist and that they can and do have massive negative effects on one's portfolio.
Mish's motto: "Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain." (http://www.nowandfutures.com/grins/oz_curtain.wav)
My motto: "Ignore the man behind the curtain at your peril."
Mish is apparently feeling the heat
Of course I see manipulation. Manipulation is all over the place. And I have commented on manipulations every week for months on end.
The issue here is that all of the items he has noted (and listed like the TAF and Paulson speeches, etc.) are not behind the scenes and very poorly known items like the ESF and ECB gold interventions, etc.but at least now he clearly is admitting that manipulation exists.
Stated another way, he continues to avoid not only his actual error in failing to do his homework on the ESF, but also avoiding all of the other points I noted in the initial post on this thread.
The main issue here remains this:
Mish's motto: "Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain." (http://www.nowandfutures.com/grins/oz_curtain.wav)
My motto: "Ignore the man behind the curtain at your peril."
And then we have:
However, other than a short term effect, not a single one of those accomplished a damn thing.Another odd assertion, and for two reasons:
He was the one that built the list of items that show some manipulation, so of course it would be expected that he would assert that nothing happened.
To assert that things like the TAF, PDCF & TSLF did not accomplish anything is just that - assertions. He cited no facts, has no examples nor did he even address what likely would have happened to the various banks which have been borrowing from those facilities if they had not existed.
Again, I submit that this is continuing evidence of actual dubious journalism.
So Much For The Manipulation Theory
On Saturday, while exchanging emails Steve pinged me with the following idea:He agrees earlier that manipulation does exist, and now implies it doesn't by citing data from August 13th... when the actual ESF data and chart shows that those interventions initially occurred in June and were made public the day before the actual USDX bottom on July 14th?
Allow me to yet again remind Mish of part of what I said in post #1 of this thread:
The actual timing and dollar details of the recent intervention are as follows:
As of the reporting weeks ending June 13th & June 20th, $6.381 billion dollars in the Euro account were sold by the ESF for dollars.
During that first week, the value of the dollar index moved from 72.39 to 74.15 and then back to 73.43 the following week.
The reporting of the ESF actions from the weeks ending June 13th & June 20th was not made public until July 14th.
The dollar index closed at 71.87 on July 15th, which was the recent low.
The actual facts show that the ESF intervention preceded any other significant factor to the dollar move, to the best of my knowledge.
Mish can quote any of the very fine folk for whom we both have a great deal of respect like Faber and Turk, etc. but the real point here is that none of their comments deal directly with the actual ESF data or chart or Mish's comments and problems with them as noted in post #1... and many of them even agree in public (like Mr. Turk) that intervention did occur.
I did not "concoct" the data from the ESF about their intervention (or the ECB about gold, or the U.S. Treasury about TIOs, etc) - they are all very real and major establishments, and the facts are right there. To even use a word like concoct in this context and about the ESF and another time period... well, its almost ludicrous.
Again, in my opinion we have another example of dubious journalism. Mish continues to avoid that he goofed on analysis and research of the actual facts about the ESF, and the actual existence of behind the scenes intervention, etc.
And then we top it off with:
There is simply no real evidence that a small manipulation in currencies played a significant role in the recent dollar rally or the gold decline, regardless of how loud manipulation theorists shout. Correlation is not causation, not matter how much anyone wants to believe otherwise.
Again, nothing but an assertion about real evidence and again not dealing directly with any of my points, including about the issues surrounding the BoJ intervention (for which Mish has still not cited any direct proof from the BoJ) and its purposes and actual success. And this, even after the admission that manipulation does occur and does exist.
And then we have the old tired "causation is not causation", which as I noted earlier in this thread both fails to deal with the actual facts, and also completely ignores that when there is causation, correlation is always present.
Its also a weak point at best as noted in Empirically observed covariation is a necessary but not sufficient condition for causality. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_causation)
Finally, I also note that he continues to avoid all the actual well known examples where intervention does work, probably the best known of which is Paul Volcker's action in the late '70s and early '80s which broke the back of inflation.
And I do expect Mish to avoid that and the many other times where intervention does actually work, and provably so... as well as continue to protest about and ignore that behind the scenes intervention actually does exist and does work, regardless of the time period in question.
And again, intervention like from the ESF is far from the only cause of the USDX move but no one has cited anything substantial that occurred earlier in time... and my motto remains "Ignore the man behind the curtain at your peril".
More dubious journalism and issues surrounding the facts vs. ideology area.
(duplicate post from the other thread, but added here to keep all my comments on Mish's blog after the initial one in one place)
Silver investigation: CFTC does U-turn
http://www.investegate.co.uk/invarticle.aspx?id=68374
Spartacus
12-13-08, 03:23 PM
hey Bart - do you think the Brits could have bankrupted Soros if they had really set their minds to it?
I sure do.
There is simply no real evidence that a small manipulation in currencies played a significant role in the recent dollar rally or the gold decline, regardless of how loud manipulation theorists shout. Correlation is not causation, not matter how much anyone wants to believe otherwise.
He's making an extraordinary claim to knowledge - he's saying he knows the entire economic system's stimulus response curve.
He claims to know that if you inject 10 cc, it will have 1/10 the effect of injecting 100 cc (or however you want to interpret this analogy).
This denies the possibility that the economic system's liver can clear 10 cc, but add that 11th cc and the entire body will die (make up your own analogy if you don't like this one).
Or put another way, closer to economic issues, the message that the government is trying to knock down the currency reaches some desks and THEY react appropriately - the currency crashes.
Bernanke and before him Greenspan used this to extraordinary effectiveness (usually temporary) for years- Puplava called it the "Open Mouth committtee". Maybe they had extraordinarily bad halitosis, and that had a negative effect on trading, but I doubt it - it was the threat of manipulation.
B and/ or G did not need to put ANY MONEY behind their threats to get some serious market moves. Surely any gubmit angency WILLING TO SPEND to knock down the currency sends a much larger message, and will have a much larger effect.
hey Bart - do you think the Brits could have bankrupted Soros if they had really set their minds to it?
I sure do.
In general, yes... but its almost impossible to know, and the effects would probably have been worse on the long term for the UK.
Originally Posted by mish;
There is simply no real evidence that a small manipulation in currencies played a significant role in the recent dollar rally or the gold decline, regardless of how loud manipulation theorists shout. Correlation is not causation, not matter how much anyone wants to believe otherwise.
He's making an extraordinary claim to knowledge - he's saying he knows the entire economic system's stimulus response curve.
He claims to know that if you inject 10 cc, it will have 1/10 the effect of injecting 100 cc (or however you want to interpret this analogy).
This denies the possibility that the economic system's liver can clear 10 cc, but add that 11th cc and the entire body will die (make up your own analogy if you don't like this one).
Or put another way, closer to economic issues, the message that the government is trying to knock down the currency reaches some desks and THEY react appropriately - the currency crashes.
Bernanke and before him Greenspan used this to extraordinary effectiveness (usually temporary) for years- Puplava called it the "Open Mouth committtee". Maybe they had extraordinarily bad halitosis, and that had a negative effect on trading, but I doubt it - it was the threat of manipulation.
B and/ or G did not need to put ANY MONEY behind their threats to get some serious market moves. Surely any gubmit angency WILLING TO SPEND to knock down the currency sends a much larger message, and will have a much larger effect.
Very much agreed on all points, and especially about Mish and how he plays on emotions and broadly held (but provably false) data, and merely asserts things without actual facts or proof.
That's one of the great things about EJ and iTulip - he doesn't opinionate or babble or name drop, but actually presents well thought out pieces with real facts and historical parallels, etc. And when he goofs as we all do, he doesn't stay with the same wrong opinion for 4+ years. He also doesn't ban people from a forum when they disagree vehemently, as Mish did with me on SI... and which resulted in my thread here - Dollar intervention: Facts versus ideology (http://www.itulip.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4808).
Just the bit about correlation not being causation not only diverts away from the actual facts being presented but also completely ignores that causation is always accompanied by correlation. It's lazy at best and yet another example of dubious journalism.
I just spent quite a bit of time answering a post on the thread Astrology and markets (http://www.itulip.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7106) only to find that the thread had been closed when I tried to post it... and was quite miffed at the apparent censorship.
So I'm just posting it here.
The comment about "fraudulent magical thinking" and it being "a waste of iTulip community brain power" is somewhat reminiscent of Galen & Harvey a few hundred years ago, and does not at all seem in the tradition of free and open discussion on iTulip.
“I would rather err with Galen than be right with Harvey.”
-- Comment from an eminent physician in the 1820s when the great Dr. Harvey made the discovery in London that the heart functions as a pump for blood, which contradicted the prevailing wisdom from Galen, a Greek from around 200 AD.
================================================== ===========
...
But the key here is the statement about modeling and tuning. Just as a climate model, or a circuit simulation model, or any other model can be tuned to predict behavior - the prediction is only good if the model covers all possible ranges of behavior.
As someone with intimate experiences with circuit modeling if not necessarily a statistician, I have seen firsthand numerous instances where new circumstances (i.e. smaller geometries or highly sensitive analog designs) bring about behaviors completely not predicted nor predictable by previous models. The models are then updated until the next unanticipated situation arises.
My problem with astrological, numerological, or whatever crap is that they are nothing more than smokescreens for precisely this type of modeling and tuning. Sure, with enough variables and backtesting for past behavior, they theoretically could have predictive value if past circumstances repeat.
But the markets encompass far more variables than the 500 or so in a circuit simulator model, offer far fewer Monte Carlo range data points to validate against, and furthermore are completely non-natural systems.
Why then should these numbers have true predictive power beyond any other type of modeling?
And should these models be relied on when we are clearly in a situation with very few precedents?
EDIT: I call the stock market a non-natural system because a stock market is like a Ponzi scheme. In nature there are no Ponzi schemes, because there are few substitutes for food. Animals eat, or they die. Animals can invest other animals' food, but they can't loan food or charge food interest. Animal IPOs happen all the time, but there are no animal venture capitalists. And there definitely aren't animal bailouts - only humans do that.
Believe it or not, I don't think our views are all that far apart.
No model will ever be able to cover all possible ranges of behavior.
"Essentially, all models are wrong, but some models are useful."
-- George E.P. Box (Professor Emeritus of Statistics at the University of Wisconsin)Successful investing or trading involves many factors, not the least of which is risk management or control when one's guesstimates turn out wrong. Using Bradley as an example, there are more than a few points where it was just plain wrong, and using it without stops is less than wise - to say the least.
Traders especially are a bit nutty and subject to trends in order to get an edge, including off the wall things like Bradley (or Phi), and now that it has gotten a lot more public attention over the last year or so its likely to be of more use as a contrarian indicator... but who knows.
And the self fulfilling and reinforcing nature of certain signals, including TA tools like RSI & MACD, are also a factor that should never be ignored... but they do model actual and real world momentum based factors... and will never be even vaguely close to 100% workable.
As far as "if past circumstances repeat", they don't... but
"History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme."
-- Mark Twain
In other words, a combination of tools that include fundamental, technical and sentiment ones can increase one's win percentage more than a little.
I agree that there are just plain way too many causes and effects in markets to allow any model or combination of models to consistently work... and these apply too:
“There is nothing so disastrous as a rational investment policy in an irrational world.”
-- John Maynard Keynes
"When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?"
-- John Maynard Keynes
And hopefully that at least partially address your should "these models be relied on when we are clearly in a situation with very few precedents?".
In other words, my unequivocal answer is no... but I won't ignore them either. Its a bit like my earlier example of how helpful the 28 day cycle has been in understanding some women - its far from always being correct, but it has been helpful many times in keeping me from putting my foot deeply in my mouth.
And more specifically about the markets of today, there are some precedents - previous bear markets. My chart of them has been quite helpful on providing time period hints on shorter term trend reversals, but the overall guideline on times like these very recent ones is to either stand aside or only do smaller trades - which is what I've been doing.
In other words, its the actual personal human element and judgment that when combined with the facts and various models and risk management etc. that is the main key... not terribly unlike some of my favorite Livermore quotes about markets.
"I know from experience that nobody can give me a tip or a series of tips that will make more money for me than my own judgment."
-- Jesse Livermore
“All through time, people have basically acted and re-acted the same way in the market as a result of: greed, fear, ignorance, and hope – that is why the numerical (technical) formations and patterns recur on a constant basis”
-- Jesse Livermore, "How to Trade in Stocks"
There is no holy grail of investing or trading success, other than defining one's own approach, being aware of BS and vested interests, always using risk management - and refining it as things change. And that statement is also a platitude... c'est la vie.
The way some of you guys go on about astrology you would think it had been used in the White House :rolleyes:
The way some of you guys go on about astrology you would think it had been used in the White House :rolleyes:
The number of people who think its about astrology amazes me, as well as the many who categorically reject something workable just because it doesn't fit in some comfortable or convenient slot. And going for censorship and prevention of discussion is beyond worrisome.
And just to tweak those who must hammer an unfamiliar view:
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
-- Arthur C. Clarke
The number of people who think its about astrology amazes me, as well as the many who categorically reject something workable just because it doesn't fit in some comfortable or convenient slot. And going for censorship and prevention of discussion is beyond worrisome.
And just to tweak those who must hammer an unfamiliar view:
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
-- Arthur C. Clarke
Sorry to cut you off mid-post. I know that's frustrating.
It's not that we do not understand Astrology. We do. It's one of many popular forms of magical thinking.
"Rational beliefs bring us closer to getting good results in the real world." - Albert Ellis
Sorry to cut you off mid-post. I know that's frustrating.
It's not that we do not understand Astrology. We do. It's one of many popular forms of magical thinking. "Rational beliefs bring us closer to getting good results in the real world." - Albert Ellis
And as I noted above:
“There is nothing so disastrous as a rational investment policy in an irrational world.”
-- John Maynard Keynes
Rationality is not always defined by what the majority think or believe.
“I would rather err with Galen than be right with Harvey.”
-- Comment from an eminent physician in the 1820s when the great Dr. Harvey made the discovery in London that the heart functions as a pump for blood, which contradicted the prevailing wisdom from Galen, a Greek from around 200 AD.
Just because some think that something is "magic" doesn't make it so.
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
-- Arthur C. Clarke
Many people have looked at the world at one point in time and have been wrong. "Miracles" and "magic" do exist.
"There is not the slightest indication that nuclear energy will ever be obtainable. It would mean that the atom would have to be shattered at will."
-- Albert Einstein, 1932
"The search for truth implies a duty. One must not conceal any part of what one has recognized to be true."
-- Albert Einstein
And as I noted above:
“There is nothing so disastrous as a rational investment policy in an irrational world.”
-- John Maynard Keynes
That is correct and iTulip stands on its record of analysis of the global political economy and market calls derived therefrom since 1998. No Astrology involved.
That is correct and iTulip stands on its record of analysis of the global political economy and market calls derived therefrom since 1998. No Astrology involved.
All well & good and iTulip has done well by many, and has also taught many a better path and has helped them to avoid huge losses, etc.
However - my own returns, sometimes using astrology or other non "politically correct" tools and analysis (including 'behind the scenes' factors ) etc., far exceed iTulip's.
In other words, just because someone does or doesn't use some method or methods of analysis does not make those tools or method of analysis incorrect or wrong in any way.
And I still submit that your comment about "fraudulent magical thinking" and it being "a waste of iTulip community brain power" is very far from representative of what I thought iTulip was all about.
I avoid discussing short term trading here since its not iTulip's focus and most don't have the temperament for it, but tools like Fibonacci ratios or RSI or MACD (or yes, even a siderograph) as well as fundamentals and sentiment are part of my overall and successful approach.
Categorically closing threads is censorship, by definition, and I object to it.
All well & good and iTulip has done well by many, and has also taught many a better path and has helped them to avoid huge losses, etc.
However - my own returns, sometimes using astrology or other non "politically correct" tools and analysis (including 'behind the scenes' factors ) etc., far exceed iTulip's.
In other words, just because someone does or doesn't use some method or methods of analysis does not make those tools or method of analysis is incorrect or wrong in any way.
And I still submit that your comment about "fraudulent magical thinking" and it being "a waste of iTulip community brain power" is very far from representative of what I thought iTulip was all about.
I avoid discussing short term trading here since its not iTulip's focus and most don't have the temperament for it, but tools like Fibonacci ratios or RSI or MACD (or yes, even a siderograph) as well as fundamentals and sentiment are part of my overall and successful approach.
Categorically closing threads is censorship, by definition, and I object to it.
You'll never see us close a thread on your own forum.
You'll never see us close a thread on your own forum.
Thank you.
Wow this sounds like a Christmas story.
Once upon a time a star "*" (a dollar root star aka $#*) was flickering, now and then, on an internet forum. Three kings/magi (like in the biblical story magi > people with astrological knowledge) went forth to search for the birth of a miraculous subject of discussion as indicated by the star, and they went through the iTulip kingdom, from "Education and Resources" to "Rant and Rave" because had to offer , siderographs, Fibonaci numbers and Bradley models.
King Fred decided that the miraculous new born subject had to be killed. First he send a ruffian to kill the newborn. When the king's brute failed then the King used his authority and ordered the slaying of the innocent posts, by choking the thread.
One good hearted inn keeper offered a modest manger in his sub-forum as a birth place for that subject.
Merry Christmas to you all! To whom applies: Have a merry <style type="text/css"> <!-- @page { size: 21.59cm 27.94cm; margin: 2cm } P { margin-bottom: 0.21cm } --></style>Hanukkah, Kwanzaa Deygān,Yule,Choimus, Beiwe Festival, Amaterasu, Dongzhi. Saturnalia, Korochun, Dogon Goru or... just a safe and joyful Boxing Day Stampede!
Now going back to the new born subject sitting in Bart's manger, as a skeptic I can accept that solar spot cycles influence crop yields and can have an influence on the economy.
The problem with the starcharts, siderographs and other methods to track the geocentric movement of celestial objects, is that every culture has different astrological interpretation for the same stars and planets, because every culture has different legends and religions.
If we accept that the stars affect markets by the unintended and involuntary coordinated actions of all those who believe in astrology, creating the effect of the self-fulfilled prophecy, it would be very interested to see what exact flavor of astrology correlates the best with the markets. For example, if hindu or dogon astrology predictions are most accurately synchronized with the market, it means that a group of dogons or hindus maybe those who involuntary influence the markets.
It would be very interesting to identify the source of the synchronization signal. (I may disappoint many, but I don't think it's the jews, at least not this time :p).
The file attached shows the well known the constellation set of the greek/indo-european pagan set which was adopted later by the Roman Empire. (Image obtained with the GNU Stellarium)
...
Now going back to the new born subject sitting in Bart's manger, as a skeptic I can accept that solar spot cycles influence crop yields and can have an influence on the economy.
The problem with the starcharts, siderographs and other methods to track the geocentric movement of celestial objects, is that every culture has different astrological interpretation for the same stars and planets, because every culture has different legends and religions.
If we accept that the stars affect markets by the unintended and involuntary coordinated actions of all those who believe in astrology, creating the effect of the self-fulfilled prophecy, it would be very interested to see what exact flavor of astrology correlates the best with the markets. For example, if hindu or dogon astrology predictions are most accurately synchronized with the market, it means that a group of dogons or hindus maybe those who involuntary influence the markets.
I know a very little about astrology and since you obviously know more than I, it sounds like a great project for you? ;)
Seriously though, I have little clue why the Bradley siderograph is over 50% correct on its call of turns, although the amount of people believing in it has to be part of the reason.
I just use it amongst dozens of other tools.
And as long as we're in the land of the weird tool, there are some pretty odd historical correlations between sunspot minima and maxima and major economic or historical events too.
It would be very interesting to identify the source of the synchronization signal. (I may disappoint many, but I don't think it's the jews, at least not this time :p).
Can't blame it on the Jews?!? :eek: ;)
http://www.nowandfutures.com/grins/scooby_ruh_roh.jpg
I know a very little about astrology and since you obviously know more than I, it sounds like a great project for you? ;)
I know very little about astrology too. Till recently I was completely dismissive of it. The problem with astrology is that is worse than normal financial forecast. Even some astrologers say that 90%+ of what one can find on the web is just cooks and crooks. It's full of mystic Crammers which are as concise as Lukester. :D
Seriously though, I have little clue why the Bradley siderograph is over 50% correct on its call of turns, although the amount of people believing in it has to be part of the reason.
From a statistical point of view the problem is more complicated. Can the Bradley fans impose a market evolution only 50% of the time, or is the Bradley siderograph superimposed only 50% over the real source signal, if there is one...
I just use it amongst dozens of other tools.
I dont' use it at all, but if I dig deep and find something interesting, precise and actionable ... why not?. Look I don't believe in Alchemy either, but after doing a lot of digging into financial alchemy I made a lot of money (I'm talking about the Modern Goldman Sachs school of Financial Alchemy that uses the Swaps Loophole as Philosopher's Stone in a commodities-futures-markets alembic and after a lot of regulatory "abbrah-cadabrah magisterus paulsonius", it is able to transform worthless paper into real money :D This miracle has been seen by everybody in the world and the recent crude contracts bear true witness to it)
And as long as we're in the land of the weird tool, there are some pretty odd historical correlations between sunspot minima and maxima and major economic or historical events too.
IMHO the Jevons Hypothesis makes a lot of sense, but that has little to do with astrology and I'm focusing now on astrology.
I know very little about astrology too. Till recently I was completely dismissive of it. The problem with astrology is that is worse than normal financial forecast. Even some astrologers say that 90%+ of what one can find on the web is just cooks and crooks. It's full of mystic Crammers which are as concise as Lukester. :D
I give it two rimshots and a TARP in a pear tree... and very much agree about many amateurs and idiots and charlatans in the field.
The single attraction to me is just the simple workability of whatever Bradley is doing & charting... and my suspicion is that its also a tool past its prime.
From a statistical point of view the problem is more complicated. Can the Bradley fans impose a market evolution only 50% of the time, or is the Bradley siderograph superimposed only 50% over the real source signal, if there is one...
That too, but empirically we don't have to know why when it clearly does have something going for it. I did study some astrology trying to get a clue but failed... it came across to me somewhat like Elliot waves - very complex and full of odd and conflicting rules. Elliot waves just don't work for me, although I know a few who seem to do well with the approach.
I dont' use it at all, but if I dig deep and find something interesting, precise and actionable ... why not?. Look I don't believe in Alchemy either, but after doing a lot of digging into financial alchemy I made a lot of money (I'm talking about the Modern Goldman Sachs school of Financial Alchemy that uses the Swaps Loophole as Philosopher's Stone in a commodities-futures-markets alembic and after a lot of regulatory "abbrah-cadabrah magisterus paulsonius", it is able to transform worthless paper into real money :D This miracle has been seen by everybody in the world and the recent crude contracts bear true witness to it)
Indeed, and alchemy is a good characterization (can you do it in iambic pentameter? ;) ) - if there's only one general tool I can point to in order to account for my successes over the last few years, it's the behind the scenes and crooked scum boogie.
It was literally a flare going off, for example, when the ESF started intervening with the dollar back in July. I jumped in on the long side and pyramided. And anyone can guess what I did when the dollar started moving down earlier this month and the ESF didn't publish its balances or activities that week - although I didn't pyramid.
IMHO the Jevons Hypothesis makes a lot of sense, but that has little to do with astrology and I'm focusing now on astrology.
That was a new one on me, I'd never heard of Jevons before. Cool way he deals with induction vs. deduction and the whole area of the hypothesis and even falsifiable hypotheses - at least from a cursory glance.
That too, but empirically we don't have to know why when it clearly does have something going for it.
That is true, but usually I don't rely on things I don't understand.
I did study some astrology trying to get a clue but failed...
Than I may try to ask you through email about some of your findings. Hopefully I will not repeat the same wrong turns ( and I can share the conclusions if you want) At least this will not produce more discomfort Fred. (Look I don't agree with Fred that there are subjects a skeptic rationalist should not investigate.... There were times when the oil bubble thread was frowned upon too, however it's a private forum after all)
it came across to me somewhat like Elliot waves - very complex and full of odd and conflicting rules. Elliot waves just don't work for me, although I know a few who seem to do well with the approach.
The Elliot wave was one of the things that got my attention too... Ok the sunspots may have influence on crops, the moon may have influence on how the fish spawns (tidal effects) :confused:
... but Orion .... from 26 light years away ... WTF influences ? The navigation and flight control instruments of the Tooth Fairy ? :eek:
I've seen recently some very interesting Elliot Wave charts made in 2004 by some top level astrologer, which were pretty good, to say the least ... but I couldn't find any logical explanation for the modulation factors that led to those charts.
if there's only one general tool I can point to in order to account for my successes over the last few years, it's the behind the scenes and crooked scum boogie.
Yup. And I have my own Illuminati hypothesis too :D
It was literally a flare going off, for example, when the ESF started intervening with the dollar back in July. I jumped in on the long side and pyramided. And anyone can guess what I did when the dollar started moving down earlier this month and the ESF didn't publish its balances or activities that week - although I didn't pyramid.
I know the feeling,:) but, not from that event because I'm not into dollar
That was a new one on me, I'd never heard of Jevons before. Cool way he deals with induction vs. deduction and the whole area of the hypothesis and even falsifiable hypotheses - at least from a cursory glance.
Yup, and the Coal Question is a must read in order to understand where the Peak Oilers , and where the Inexhaustible Oilers are wrong... There is nothing more fun to watch than a spirited debate between a Jehova's Witness and a Seventh Day Adventist, on the subject of who will get to heaven when the Day comes...:D
By the way, in the Coal Question, in 1860, Jevons was talking about renewables from solar and tidal energy ;)
So, in order to conclude the thread, .... while searching for financial astrology information I got an interesting quote from a goldbug porn site :
http://www.goldstockbull.com/10-predictions-for-2009/
Those with metaphysical inclinations may also be interested to know that the 3-5 year time horizon forecasts that we reach a bottom somewhere around the year 2012. Dec 21st of 2012 is the end of the long count of the Mayan calendar which started 5,125 years ago and coincides with the first time in approximately 26,000 years that the Sun will rise to conjunct the intersection of the Milky Way (eye, heart, center) and the ecliptic plane. According to the ancient Maya, this date will mark the end of one world as we know it and the beginning of another. No matter your beliefs, we are in for a period of significant change that will require reflection, adjustment and adaptation to a very different world that awaits. Well ...if the things happen exactly as predicted by the mayan calendar, with Milky Way , eye-heart-center, then obviously ... it's the mexicans :)
http://www.goldstockbull.com/wp-content/uploads/NEW_08/2009_crystal_ball.jpg
Bart,
I agree - we are both on the same wavelength.
What you're saying is that you'll be pragmatic and use whatever works given some proof of consistency.
What I'm saying is astrology per se is complete hogwash. The interpretation of it may have some value as ultimately it is the person driving the inputs who may have something to offer.
But I personally am very uncomfortable relying on this type of slipshod mental construct.
As for the 'basic' signal - again it is the person who is the 'basic' signal. People who have spent a LOT of time with the markets and who have some type of rigorous mental model do gain insight into general behavior - similar to EJ's 'I just know it' view on gold.
But, as EJ demonstrated, said models are just that: models. The EJ floor didn't hold, but I still listen to him. So perhaps I do believe in astrology...or EJ-ology :)
Anyone with any mathematical understanding knows that several completely different theories can converge on the same reality with equal accuracy, or lack thereof.
If you take two steps back and look at what astrology is, it is just a variation of cycles dressed up in an occcult wardrobe.
If you have enough slightly different cycles of whatever derivation, with enough effort you can derive any harmonic you want, and thus match anything that seems cyclical in the real world as closely as you like.
That is why astrology seems to work to a certain extent in the right hands, just as other cycle-based theories works to a certain extent in the right hands.
Anyone with any mathematical understanding knows that several completely different theories can converge on the same reality with equal accuracy, or lack thereof.
If you take two steps back and look at what astrology is, it is just a variation of cycles dressed up in an occcult wardrobe.
Yup.
If you have enough slightly different cycles of whatever derivation, with enough effort you can derive any harmonic you want, and thus match anything that seems cyclical in the real world as closely as you like.
Exactly
That is why astrology seems to work to a certain extent in the right hands, just as other cycle-based theories works to a certain extent in the right hands.
Yup but the big question remains. Is somehow astrology in proper hands a driver (due to the actions of people who follow astrological advice) or a descriptor of natural economic cycles ... or a little bit of both? To my knowledge in the economic wave field almost nobody has been able to find a solid explanation of what creates different waves (Jevons may be considered one of the few exceptions with his solar sunspot theory)
Sorry to cut you off mid-post. I know that's frustrating.
It's not that we do not understand Astrology. We do. It's one of many popular forms of magical thinking."Rational beliefs bring us closer to getting good results in the real world." - Albert Ellis
Rational, what about quantifiable?
That's the problem. When you have things that are not provable.
Like what you ask?
How bout the E theory of physics, testable - possibly, not right now with current methods. Provable? Heh, the greatest critique of the theory is that
"what do you call a scientific theory that explains a subject, the math fits, but is not provable? Well, that depends on if you are studying Philosophy or Science, are you searching for Truth or are you trying to map reality."
From one of Brian Greene's critiques.
I think that to only accept what is Provable into one's cannon, is to severely distort one's picture of actual reality. Why, because if it's real but not provable, and you don't accept it, you understanding of reality is FLAWED in just the same way that if you accept something that is FALSE as genuine, your understanding of reality will be equally flawed. (Of course if you allow something that is unprovable into your cannon and it turns out to be false, yet again your perception of reality will be flawed).
So my solution is to use my own judgment and constantly evaluate my cannon and add to it or remove from it based on further information that comes to light. I think that is the very best we can do and far better than either accepting false ideas into our cannon or excluding ideas from it because they are likely or very likely, but not provable, with the caveat that you must be willing to adjust it as new information becomes available AND that you must rigorously and critically evaluate it on a daily basis.
(For what it's worth.)
JT
I have kept out of this thread till now. In my experience, astrology, like numerology, chartology, and other such "ologies" are not so much about the devices that they are based on, but rather about intuition and intuitives. The various "devices" are nothing more than focuing aids to sharpen intution.
Intution and precognition have been shown to be existant phenomenon in a multitude of scientific studies over the last forty years.
Some of the flavor of these studies can be seen in the article (http://vb.spiritual-nature.com/showthread.php?p=23474) excerpted below
Our journey starts with an experiment conducted in 1976. Dr. Kornhuber asked a number of volunteers to be wired with EEG electrodes to measure their brain activity. He then asked the volunteers to flex the index finger of their right hand, suddenly and at various times of their own choosing. He wanted to measure how fast it took for the mental decision to move the finger to actually make the finger move. His results were not what he expected.
Kornhuber expected to find a sharp peak in electrical activity when the decision was consciously made, at which point he would begin timing the trials. However, what he found is remarkable, namely that there is a gradual build-up of recorded electric potential for a full second, or perhaps even up to a second and a half, before the finger is actually flexed. This seems to indicate that the conscious decision process takes over a second in order to act! Even more surprising was that the volunteers were not aware of this delay and believed they were acting spontaneously and instantly.
So what happened? Did the brain somehow “know” that the decision would be made in the future and begin planning the action?
The experiment received little attention until another experiment conducted by Dr. Libet in 1979 raised questions about our conscious perception of time and the idea of “now.”
Everything “now” happened already!
Libet tested subjects who had to have brain surgery for some reason unconnected with the experiment and who consented to having electrodes placed at points in the brain, in the somatosensory cortex. He monitored the electrical activity while stimulating their skin. To his amazement it took about a half-second before the subjects were able to perceive the stimulation. Further experiments showed that this same delay — about a half second — was needed for all sensory input to reach consciousness.
The significance of this is enormous. Everything we know about the external world right now — the sounds, the sights, the feelings — are all being delayed. Everything that you think is happening right now actually happened already, about half a second ago!
So how is this possible? How do we drive cars, catch baseballs, swat flies and write or draw if it’s all delayed? Well, the obvious answer is that we have adapted the ability to compensate for the delay by projecting our behavior into the future, which is really “now.”
Confusing? Wait… It gets even better.
Five Seconds In The Future
Marilyn Schlitz connected volunteers to a series of monitors, similar to a lie detector, to measure their heartbeat, perspiration and other nervous activity. She then had them sit in front of a computer screen and began showing them a series of images which were selected at random by the computer from a large collection. These images were described as either “neutral” (boring) or “emotional” (erotic or morbid). As expected, the subjects showed physical and mental excitement when the “emotional” images were shown and showed less reaction to the “neutral” images. But as the experiment continued, something weird happened.
Researchers began to see that most people, unconsciously, began to react to the “emotional” images a full 5 seconds before they were selected by the computer program! What’s more, they did not react to the “neutral” images. This result was statstically significant (p=0.00003) and has been repeated many times. It strongly suggests hat subjects can perceive the future.
Another study, described in the Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine, was reported by psychophysiologist Rollin McCraty and his colleagues from the Institute of Heartmath in Boulder Creek, California. McCraty’s group simultaneously measured skin conductance, heart rate, and brainwave activity before, during, and after 26 participants viewed emotional and calm pictures. They found that both the heart (p < 0. 001) and the brain (p < 0. 05) responded about 5 seconds before the future emotional stimuli, and to their amazement, that the heart responded before the brain. they also observed significant gender differences in the processing of this future information (women performed better, on average, than men). they concluded: “Our findings suggest that intuitive perception is not a discrete function produced by a single part or system of the body alone. Rather, it appears that intuition may in fact be a system-wide process involving at least the heart and brain, together, in the processing and decoding of intuitive information.” They highlighted that “the fact that the heart is involved in the perception of a future external event is a surprising, even astounding result, especially from the classical perspective that assigns the brain an exclusive role [for perception].”
I am reasonably certain that intuition and precognition play a major role in success and failure
I have kept out of this thread till now. In my experience, astrology, like numerology, chartology, and other such "ologies" are not so much about the devices that they are based on, but rather about intuition and intuitives. The various "devices" are nothing more than focuing aids to sharpen intution.
Intution and precognition have been shown to be existant phenomenon in a multitude of scientific studies over the last forty years.
Some of the flavor of these studies can be seen in the article (http://vb.spiritual-nature.com/showthread.php?p=23474) excerpted below
I am reasonably certain that intuition and precognition play a major role in success and failure
Experience informs intuition. A chart may help remind the experienced intuitive where he or she has been. A disciplined intuitive keeps even more careful track of errors than of correct calls, else a gambler's mentality develops.
The gambler may lose five bets before winning one. The gambler thinks, "I won!" And conveniently forgets all time she or she lost. This is the case of many market forecasters as well. Roubini, for example, has been calling for a recession for years. Eventually, of course, a recession will occur.
So-called predictive market charts are only interesting if they show all "On this date we invested X believing that Y would occur by date Z" with the results. Try putting one of those together yourself using the statements made by one of these services. It's a lot of work and generally no one goes to the trouble, which is one of the reasons they are successful.
These services are typically forward looking and "back test" by selecting out those parts of the formula that produced negative results in the past.
That's true of market forecasters as well. Someone has to go to the trouble to collect all of the assertions made over time to uncover the revisionism. (http://www.itulip.com/awards.htm#Cramer) Lucky for them, few do go to the trouble and even when they do there is an unspoken rule in the financial media to not expose each other's market commentators' inconsistencies; the iTulip Kazoo versus Bullhorn rule applies.
I am reasonably certain that intuition and precognition play a major role in success and failure
Sorry Rajiv, but you are mistaking the normal function of the brain for something else.
The brain is not a quantum organ; it works as a massively parallel but slow device.
As Bruce Lee demonstrated - conscious thought is the slowest of all reactions. The brain fortunately has many levels which operate also at many levels.
It is possible to train at least some of these levels, but it is no more magical than anything else.
Sure, it is theoretically possible to train all the levels on your brain to perfectly synthesize all incoming data and make perfect conclusions, but neither the training nor the data is controllable.
Thus while there can be some value in those with highly trained subconscious systems - it is far to dangerous to rely on them for anything substantive. It also opens you up to being screwed over by those pretending, by those who are wrong for the right reasons, right for the wrong reasons, just lucky, etc etc.
I'd rather just roll the dice.
Lukester
12-28-08, 12:54 PM
Fred - Not sure why you are engaging in considered or carefully argued substantiations here. You summarily closed discussion of this topic elsewhere, on the grounds that in the broadest sense, the topic itself had insufficient merit and detracted time from more productive discussions. Now you are apparently engaged in re-defending your original assertion? Conviction that the topic was a mere time waster would have induced me if I were a forum editor, to either stand aside without further comment, or to summarily shut down yet another thread, due to it's being yet another instance of the same worthless debate? Where is the editorial consistency? Are you "rehabilitating" this intriguing topic? ;)
Experience informs intuition. A chart may help remind the experienced intuitive where he or she has been. A disciplined intuitive keeps even more careful track of errors than of correct calls, else a gambler's mentality develops.
The gambler may lose five bets before winning one. The gambler thinks, "I won!" And conveniently forgets all time she or she lost. This is the case of many market forecasters as well. Roubini, for example, has been calling for a recession for years. Eventually, of course, a recession will occur.
So-called predictive market charts are only interesting if they show all "On this date we invested X believing that Y would occur by date Z" with the results. Try putting one of those together yourself using the statements made by one of these services. It's a lot of work and generally no one goes to the trouble, which is one of the reasons they are successful.
These services are typically forward looking and "back test" by selecting out those parts of the formula that produced negative results in the past.
That's true of market forecasters as well. Someone has to go to the trouble to collect all of the assertions made over time to uncover the revisionism. (http://www.itulip.com/awards.htm#Cramer) Lucky for them, few do go to the trouble and even when they do there is an unspoken rule in the financial media to not expose each other's market commentators' inconsistencies; the iTulip Kazoo versus Bullhorn rule applies.
Than I may try to ask you through email about some of your findings. Hopefully I will not repeat the same wrong turns ( and I can share the conclusions if you want)
I'm afraid I may have given you the wrong impression about how much time I've spent studying astrology. It has just been a couple dozen hours plus bits & pieces discussing the area over the years with others.
About the only link I saved from recent studies is http://www.astropro.com/forecast/predict/2008-all.html - for what its worth.
The Elliot wave was one of the things that got my attention too... Ok the sunspots may have influence on crops, the moon may have influence on how the fish spawns (tidal effects) :confused:
... but Orion .... from 26 light years away ... WTF influences ? The navigation and flight control instruments of the Tooth Fairy
? :eek:
...
I've seen recently some very interesting Elliot Wave charts made in 2004 by some top level astrologer, which were pretty good, to say the least ... but I couldn't find any logical explanation for the modulation factors that led to those charts.
Indeed... and nowhere have I found any explanations, although I sure could speculate... but my tinfoil hat is far too thin for that. ;)
Yup, and the Coal Question is a must read in order to understand where the Peak Oilers , and where the Inexhaustible Oilers are wrong... There is nothing more fun to watch than a spirited debate between a Jehova's Witness and a Seventh Day Adventist, on the subject of who will get to heaven when the Day comes...:D
By the way, in the Coal Question, in 1860, Jevons was talking about renewables from solar and tidal energy ;)
As Edison was a few decades later, and many more since. And I won't comment on anything about Tesla either - this thread is already pretty far out there.
About the only thing I know is that there are solutions to the "energy problem".
So, in order to conclude the thread, .... while searching for financial astrology information I got an interesting quote from a goldbug porn site :
http://www.goldstockbull.com/10-predictions-for-2009/
Well ...if the things happen exactly as predicted by the mayan calendar, with Milky Way , eye-heart-center, then obviously ... it's the mexicans :)
Weren't the Aztecs descended from Jews, Genghis Khan and the Illuminati? That could really package it all up, with a dollop or two of Age of Aquarius moments... :eek: :rolleyes: :D
Bart,
I agree - we are both on the same wavelength.
What you're saying is that you'll be pragmatic and use whatever works given some proof of consistency.
What I'm saying is astrology per se is complete hogwash. The interpretation of it may have some value as ultimately it is the person driving the inputs who may have something to offer.
But I personally am very uncomfortable relying on this type of slipshod mental construct.
As for the 'basic' signal - again it is the person who is the 'basic' signal. People who have spent a LOT of time with the markets and who have some type of rigorous mental model do gain insight into general behavior - similar to EJ's 'I just know it' view on gold.
But, as EJ demonstrated, said models are just that: models. The EJ floor didn't hold, but I still listen to him. So perhaps I do believe in astrology...or EJ-ology :)
We are indeed on the same wavelength, especially about the basic person being primary.
About the only difference is that I don't think that astrology is complete hogwash. I both don't know enough about it in the sense of deep and long study, but have also been beat up way more than once during my life about things I thought weren't true and were, or vice versa.
Its in a sort of limbo for me, and its near the bottom of things I'd like to know more about.
I have kept out of this thread till now. In my experience, astrology, like numerology, chartology, and other such "ologies" are not so much about the devices that they are based on, but rather about intuition and intuitives. The various "devices" are nothing more than focuing aids to sharpen intution.
Intution and precognition have been shown to be existant phenomenon in a multitude of scientific studies over the last forty years.
Some of the flavor of these studies can be seen in the article (http://vb.spiritual-nature.com/showthread.php?p=23474) excerpted below
...
I am reasonably certain that intuition and precognition play a major role in success and failure
Very nicely put, and I'll even generalize a bit more - we as either individuals or as humanity just plain don't know it all... and what an understatement that is.
By far the area of which we know the least is the terra incognita of the human mind and spirit, although the manipulation side of them are sadly more well known than the actual capabilities and aspects of the spirit (or person, in order to keep it out of religious areas).
Astrology and all the rest could just be manifestations of that terra incognita.
And just to lighten it up a bit, a thought for the day:
Reintarnation:
Coming back to life as a hillbilly.
Lukester
12-28-08, 06:43 PM
All of which IMO reiterates why agnostics are smarter than atheists.
Very nicely put, and I'll even generalize a bit more - we as either individuals or as humanity just plain don't know it all... and what an understatement that is.
By far the area of which we know the least is the terra incognita of the human mind and spirit, although the manipulation side of them are sadly more well known than the actual capabilities and aspects of the spirit (or person, in order to keep it out of religious areas).
Astrology and all the rest could just be manifestations of that terra incognita.
And just to lighten it up a bit, a thought for the day:
Reintarnation:
Coming back to life as a hillbilly.
All of which IMO reiterates why agnostics are smarter than atheists.
http://www.nowandfutures.com/grins/no_pony.jpg
;)
Lukester
12-28-08, 07:08 PM
<DD class=hwrd>ra·tio·nal·ism http://www.merriam-webster.com/images/audio.gif (http://javascript<b></b>:popWin('/cgi-bin/audio.pl?ration06.wav=rationalism')) </DD><DT class=pron>Pronunciation: <DD class=pron>"rash-n-li-z-m" OR "ra-sh-n-li-"<DT class=func>Function: <DD class=func>noun <DT class=date>Date: <DD class=date>1: reliance on reason as the basis for establishment of religious truth<DD class=date>2: a theory that reason is in itself a source of knowledge superior to and independent of sense perceptions <DD class=date>3: rash-n-lis-tik OR ra-sh-n-lis-\ adjective — ra·tio·nal·is·ti·cal·ly http://www.merriam-webster.com/images/audio.gif (http://javascript<b></b>:popWin('/cgi-bin/audio.pl?ration09.wav=rationalistically')) \-ti-k(-)lē\ adverb
921
</DD>
I don't think I have any quarrel with you on this one! Short term intuition is there in each one of us, -- and is considered to be the normal functioning of the body.
But I think you missed the key part of the heartmath study -- namely the body reacted to the content of the message even before the computer had drawn the random number which decided on the content of the image!
I don't think I have any quarrel with you on this one! Short term intuition is there in each one of us, -- and is considered to be the normal functioning of the body.
But I think you missed the key part of the heartmath study -- namely the body reacted to the content of the message even before the computer had drawn the random number which decided on the content of the image!
To tell you the truth, I did see it and do understand it... and could name lots of other and similar phenomena like the Duke University experiments in the 1950s or the SRI stuff, or even the experiment in the very early 1900s where a dying man was on a very sensitive scale and the scale measured an actual weight loss at time of death... but I'm a bit concerned that we're going way outside both what some or many folk can accept or deal with, or even a broad interpretation of what iTulip is about.
But truly out there phenomena does exist, and who knew that this thread could go in this direction when starting with somewhat innocuous subjects like a Bradley chart and astrology.
But truly out there phenomena does exist, and who knew that this thread could go in this direction when starting with somewhat innocuous subjects like a Bradley chart and astrology.
Yeah there is a lot of stuff out there. And there is nothing wrong with examining something "way out there" as long as the examination can be done in a measurable and rational way. Keeping dying people on a scale it's not the kind of measurements I would enjoy, although I'm really curious if Lukester experiences any measurable weight loss after writing one of his legendary "concise" posts of 15,000 words or less.
The thing about astrology is that it should be very easy to verify. I have a software package that allows me to see the position of every star and every planet even a few thousands years back.
One should be able to take an astrological model and check it against historical data. If everything is just the movement of starts one should be able to verify it against historical data.
My problem is that I can't find anywhere a clear set of data on the "actions" attributable to various celestial bodies with which I can assemble my own astrological model .
I'm looking of basic general set of instructions like, Jupiter governs <something and="" something="">, Mars governs <something and="" something="">. When Jupiter is in opposition (or conjunction) with Mars that means that <set of="" effects="">
Not only there are few different astrological schools, but even members of the same school cannot agree.
Each astrologer I found on the web seems to have his/hers own personalized concept of astrological cause and effect relationship.
If anybody knows a good book that explains the generally accepted astrological corrections in a certain astrology school I would be grateful if anybody can provide me with a good reference source.
The problem with economic cycles, like with any cyclic process, is that while the existence of a cyclical activity can be easily determined through statistical means, the real cause/characteristic that determines it may be difficult to explain ... of course one can always speculate...
To give a simple example, </set></something></something>since I've registered on, I<something and="" something=""><something and="" something=""><set of="" effects="">'ve observed that every 28.6 days metalman becomes irascible and grouchy and that is difficult to explain ... of course one can always speculate...</set></something></something>
Intution and precognition have been shown to be existant phenomenon in a multitude of scientific studies over the last forty years.
Many routine and simple functions of the human body do not require the brain. Rather, decisions take place in the spinal cords. See, for example:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomic_nervous_system
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reflex_arc
Basically, some functions cannot afford the latency.
I became fascinated with this topic many years ago as a philosophy student - because when the body makes decisions without querying the brain, it becomes very difficult to locate phenomena such as "consciousness" "memory" and "mind", even more difficult to describe them, and more difficult yet to develop ethics involving them.
Considering the reflex phenomenon, experience suggests that a subject is only aware of the consequence of the reflex action after the fact. The phenomena of precognition may describe the delay between when the reflex/autonomic nervous system acknowledges & reacts to stimuli, and when the brain is notified.
REALLY fun discussion, by the way. Thanks to all...
What you say is true, except that you appear to have missed a key finding of the heartmath study, -- namely the body reacted to the content of the image even before the computer had drawn the random number which decided on the content of the image!
What you say is true, except that you appear to have missed a key finding of the heartmath study, -- namely the body reacted to the content of the image even before the computer had drawn the random number which decided on the content of the image!
We had to do a Mental Telepathy test when I was in a class in 4th grade. Two people were in each test group. One would pull the top card off the deck and would see if the other person (who couldn't see the cards) could tell what card was drawn without seeing it. The results were relayed after the test was complete. (If you've seen Ghostbusters I then you've seen this test)
"A couple of wavy lines?" ZAP!!!!!
Anyway, this guy that was my partner (I was the one pulling the top card off) got every single card wrong which is a statistical anomoly by itself. But the really interesting thing was that he had a string of 17 cards that he called in advance. That's right, not after they had been drawn but BEFORE they had been drawn.(he would call the NEXT card to be drawn Correctly, but it wasn't the card I was holding in my hand at the time) So he was one ahead of my draw, and called the Next Draw correctly 17 consecutive times.
I think there were 5 types of cards and a test ran 50 cards.
That was just plain strange. I knew he wasn't cheating because I was drawing the cards and I had shuffled them (plus it was rather competive, competition among 4th graders is cutthroat)
Anyway food for thought. It's one of those things that you can only believe if you see it. I did, so... Freaky.
P.S. Not tooting my own horn, just setting the stage for you this was in TAG (Talented and Gifted Classroom), not just a random selection of 4th graders.
Lukester
12-29-08, 09:58 PM
OK, this one's for you Jtabeb -
Last week I decided to "consult the laws of chance" ( :rolleyes: ) as to whether I should continue holding a really obscenely large silver bullion position for the long term. So in true kamikaze (or you might call it dimwitted) fashion, I decided to "flip the coin" and see what the matrix of supernatural randomness was bleeping back at me?
I carry two good luck coins. A US silver eagle and a Mexico 1 Peso coin. I flipped each coin 15 times to see if lady eternity was going to send me a signal. Heads suggested I keep the silver, and tails suggested I sell it. Of course, this sort of reading of the chicken's entrails is moronic but this is what I got:
US Eagle flipped 15 times = Heads 13, Tails 2 ( I think about 10 of those heads were consecutive)
Mexico 1 Peso coin flipped 15 times = Heads 12, Tails 3
Hey, some smarty pants like the chronically self congratulatory "Symbols Kid" may like to rattle off chromium plated gleaming reasons why this is all statistical noise and I'm a dupe. Speaking for myself, I was wondering whether the coins were loaded like loaded dice, or something mundane like that.
Footnote: Just to be a contrarian, I went ahead and sold one half of my silver bullion anyway. However my conclusion has long been that those prone to lean heavily on "rashnlizm" to explain how we already have the phenomena around us 100% figured out are adopting a somewhat pedestrian approach to this world of wonders.
The Barts and Rajivs (and presumably also the Jay's and Jtabeb's as they are clocking in here on these anomalys too) have it right, and those adhering rigidly to current definitions of rationalism [ rashnlizm ] are plodding along in the rear guard. Agnostics are alert to these little signals where the "laws of chance" suddenly get all squirrely and inform those able to listen that our understanding is likely still quite primitive.
In a nutshell? A little humility as to what fully constitutes the "rational" goes a long way.
Hey, some smarty pants like the chronically self congratulatory "Symbols Kid" may like to rattle off chromium plated gleaming reasons why this is all statistical noise and I'm a dupe. Speaking for myself, I was wondering whether the coins were loaded like loaded dice, or something mundane like that.
Try to make a similar test with the coin shaken in a dice cup. Compare your lucky silver eagle with a regular silver eagle. If you get a large dispersion between the two coins using a cup ... then you should believe me when I tell you that every time I buy a lottery ticket I win at least $100 :)
When I was a kid is liked to perform "magic" tricks. After a little bit of training an amateur illusionist can pretty much throw heads or tails with stunning accuracy.
Sapiens
12-30-08, 02:48 AM
When I was a kid is liked to perform "magic" tricks. After a little bit of training an amateur illusionist can pretty much throw heads or tails with stunning accuracy.
http://www.streethustlereconomics.com//pics/dancer.gif
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,22556281-661,00.html
Right Brain v Left Brain
THE Right Brain vs Left Brain test ... do you see the dancer turning clockwise or anti-clockwise?
If clockwise, then you use more of the right side of the brain and vice versa.
Most of us would see the dancer turning anti-clockwise though you can try to focus and change the direction; see if you can do it.
LEFT BRAIN FUNCTIONS
uses logic
detail oriented
facts rule
words and language
present and past
math and science
can comprehend
knowing
acknowledges
order/pattern perception
knows object name
reality based
forms strategies
practical
safe
RIGHT BRAIN FUNCTIONS
uses feeling
"big picture" oriented
imagination rules
symbols and images
present and future
philosophy & religion
can "get it" (i.e. meaning)
believes
appreciates
spatial perception
knows object function
fantasy based
presents possibilities
impetuous
risk taking
To me it was not even close -- one direction all the way -- I am sure the regulars can figure out which way I went!!!
Footnote: Just to be a contrarian, I went ahead and sold one half of my silver bullion anyway
Ouch! I wish I could have bought it from you to teach you a lesson.
(I would have given it back to you at a later date even if it was for a more preciouse price, not kidding).
I know this is a "belief" rather than a rational choice, but man how do I say this, Lukester GO BUY IT BACK. Seriously, I mean it. I don't know "why" exactly, but my intuition is yelling at the top of its lungs.
Wish you all the best and hope you are spot on and that I'm absolutly dead wrong.
To me it was not even close -- one direction all the way -- I am sure the regulars can figure out which way I went!!!
I got it going both ways but only when I looked away and then back, I only got it to switch mid animation when the lifted leg was at the very front, and only 1 time.
Strange, I stared for two minunites and couldn't make it switch but if I looked away and then back i could do it.
we_are_toast
12-30-08, 10:32 AM
This is too cool!
Get a couple of people to look at the same time and have them call out which way she's spinning. :p
I don't buy any of the left, right brain stuff. If I look at the image from a sharp angle on the screen I can get her to switch directions at will.
What you say is true, except that you appear to have missed a key finding of the heartmath study, -- namely the body reacted to the content of the image even before the computer had drawn the random number which decided on the content of the image!
No, I read that part of your post too. My comments were more general - just that the nervous system and decision-making is much more complicated than commonly believed. I think we are in agreement on this point.
With respect to your quoted text, it looks like this is the original source: The World is Waiting Just For … What? (http://www.wariscrime.com/2008/11/30/news/the-world-is-waiting-just-for-what/) (published on www.wariscrime.com (http://www.wariscrime.com/), by a guest author from ViewZone.com (http://www.viewzone.com/)). There are no links to the original studies, but I am going to look for them if time allows. Seems debate should be focused on the merit of the original studies instead of this article.
I'd also note that summarizing scientific studies to make them more accessible to laymen often forces compromises on content - for instance, methodology is almost always omitted in pop science media. Pop science summaries also make contextual leaps not always present in the source material. Everyone has an agenda, however benign. There's an applicable quote re: statistics: "tell me what you want to argue, and I'll find statistics to support it". The author of your excerpt is trying to argue a specific point, and is using data from other work to support his argument. There is nothing wrong with this method, but it would be educational to read the primary sources to rule out editorial equivocation.
The quoted excerpt concludes that the body reacted to an event before the event's predicate occurred. Testing this would seem to be an empirical nightmare! Deductive proof is probably out of the question. So, what amount of evidence, in your opinion, would be sufficient to inductively conclude -> precognition?
I wouldn't say I'm a card-carrying nominalist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominalism), but I find myself behaving like one most of the time! It seems to me that the term precognition is a placeholder, to be superceded by more descriptive language if/when the phenomenon is better understood.
Jay, I have talked with the primary researchers on this -- though it was a few years ago. Their methodology seemed sound. the system was totally automated, with no researcher input other than starting the computer program.
However, I did not look at the programming and statistical extraction of the data -- The researchers were experienced and reputable -- and I believe the findings caught the researchers totally off-guard -- in other words, they did not expect the findings to go this way -- they expected it to go the way you had gone -- which is of course the more reasonable line of thinking!
ThePythonicCow
12-30-08, 08:33 PM
Rather, decisions take place in the spinal cords.I recall once touching a hot stove. My first conscious awareness of this was seeing my hand jerk back. I was even briefly puzzled as to why my hand did that. A fraction of a second later, I learnt why.
ThePythonicCow
12-30-08, 08:42 PM
I got it going both ways but only when I looked away and then backYeah - same here. I'm still trying to figure out how to turn on the lighting on her, however. :D
Clockwise for me. I can get her going the other direction pretty easily though, but every time I refresh my look she's going clockwise. I'm left handed, at least for fine motor functions for what it is worth, and right handed for gross motor functions like throwing.
Yeah there is a lot of stuff out there. And there is nothing wrong with examining something "way out there" as long as the examination can be done in a measurable and rational way.
But sometimes that's not possible given current understanding or fixed ideas or technology... and then there's "issues" like Galen & Harvey too.
Keeping dying people on a scale it's not the kind of measurements I would enjoy, although I'm really curious if Lukester experiences any measurable weight loss after writing one of his legendary "concise" posts of 15,000 words or less.
Maybe we can get a grant to study it?
The thing about astrology is that it should be very easy to verify. I have a software package that allows me to see the position of every star and every planet even a few thousands years back.
One should be able to take an astrological model and check it against historical data. If everything is just the movement of starts one should be able to verify it against historical data.
My problem is that I can't find anywhere a clear set of data on the "actions" attributable to various celestial bodies with which I can assemble my own astrological model .
I'm looking of basic general set of instructions like, Jupiter governs <something and="" something="">, Mars governs <something and="" something="">. When Jupiter is in opposition (or conjunction) with Mars that means that <set of="" effects="">
Not only there are few different astrological schools, but even members of the same school cannot agree.
Each astrologer I found on the web seems to have his/hers own personalized concept of astrological cause and effect relationship.
If anybody knows a good book that explains the generally accepted astrological corrections in a certain astrology school I would be grateful if anybody can provide me with a good reference source.
The problem with economic cycles, like with any cyclic process, is that while the existence of a cyclical activity can be easily determined through statistical means, the real cause/characteristic that determines it may be difficult to explain ... of course one can always speculate...
</set></something></something>
Not terribly unlike various schools of economics... but seriously, I know that there are books that cover what you're looking at but suspect none of them are online. I'd start at public libraries in large cities and ignore anything published after 1960 or 1970.
And if you expect to prove that everything is just the movement of stars and other celestial bodies, you will fail since I'm unaware of any of astrology's strongest proponents that anything like that opinion.
...
-- which is of course the more reasonable line of thinking!
Sort of like no reasonable person in the early '80s expected that the Berlin Wall would come down, or in 2005 that housing prices could go down... :eek: ;)
But sometimes that's not possible given current understanding or fixed ideas or technology... and then there's "issues" like Galen & Harvey too.
Still that is not a valid reason to avoid looking into things. A road of 1000 li starts with the first step ( or with a cash advance on your VISA if you are a westerner :D)
although I'm really curious if Lukester experiences any measurable weight loss after writing one of his legendary "concise" posts of 15,000 words or less.Maybe we can get a grant to study it?
I believe we can raise the money here on iTulip (no need to apply for a grant) . I believe that even Fred would help us by making it an official iTulip fundraising campaign (of course only if we promise in the proposal that the study will involve some form of vivisection :D)
Not terribly unlike various schools of economics... but seriously, I know that there are books that cover what you're looking at but suspect none of them are online. I'd start at public libraries in large cities and ignore anything published after 1960 or 1970.
I know, but I was trying to save time by getting from knowledgeable iTulipers pointers to "the book" or "the man" that is/are considered the ultimate authority.
And if you expect to prove that everything is just the movement of stars and other celestial bodies, you will fail since I'm unaware of any of astrology's strongest proponents that anything like that opinion.
Actually, I'm looking to match wave pattern harmonics with periods of various celestial bodies using astrology as source of clues for connections. I'm not saying astrology is bunk. I just want to look at this a mathematical/statistical approach.
By the way...
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=081231111701.bbz7nhhj&show_article=1
The world can look forward to peace and harmony in 2009, but Chinese soothsayers warned that the road to economic recovery will be long. The Year of the Rat, marked by an unprecedented, global financial crisis, will give way to a much more stable Year of the Ox, Chinese astrologists and feng shui masters predicted.
"The soil represents a garden or a green field, a feng shui symbol for harmony, relaxation, and recovery," Raymond Lo, Hong Kong feng shui expert, told AFP.
Chinese fortune-tellers study the changing balance of the five spiritual elements they believe form the core of the universe -- gold, wood, water, fire, and soil. A person's element can be calculated by using the exact time and date of his birth.
Each of the elements is further divided into the yin and the yang strands, the two complementary qualities representing respectively the passive and active side of nature.
Coincidentally, Lo said, quite a few world leaders in 2009 were associated with "yin soil", including US President-elect Barack Obama and French president Nicolas Sarkozy.
"People belonging to the yin soil tend to be more charming and charitable. They love peace rather than war. They are usually the ones who contribute to science and humanity," he said.
Examples include Leonardo da Vinci, Charles Darwin, Abraham Lincoln, and Sigmund Freud, he said.
However, the feng shui master said he did not expect Obama or other state leaders to be able to turn around the global economic situation in 2009 because the element of fire -- which stands for the force that motivates financial activities -- is missing for most of next year.
"It is a year for Obama to lay the foundation for his administration, rather than achieve anything.
"The financial markets will go up a little in the first couple of months but this will be short-lived. Investors are bound to be disappointed in the end," he said.
The prediction is similar to the forecasts of many financial analysts.
Sarkozy's administration will be more stable than it was in 2008, because the strength of water will weaken in 2009, said Lo.
"There was a lot of water in 2008, which is not good for a yin soil leader because it will flood the soil," he said.
The Chinese calendar moves in 60-year cycles, meaning the world will experience similar events in the new year to those that took place 60 years ago.
In 1949, the People's Republic of China was established by communist leader Mao Zedong. Lo said that 2009's year of the Ox could similarly see a new world order being forged.
Professions or events that can be associated with wood will fare well next year because the element thrives on soil, Lo said.
He predicted that former US Vice President Al Gore, who has since turned himself into an environmental activist, will make big progress in his efforts to combat global warming.
Next year will also be good for professions that are related to wood, paper, and energy, including fashion, news media, entertainment, oil and air travel, said Lo.
Mak Ling-ling, a celebrity astrologist and feng shui master, said the financial markets would be very quiet next year and economic problems would be particularly acute in the west.
"Businesses will be even worse than now. Social order will be disturbed, with the number of fraud cases will rise," she said, but added that the situation would improve after next year.
While many of the wealthiest and the most powerful businessmen in Hong Kong will continue to suffer in the present financial climate, Mak said some low-profile individuals would be able to seize the chance to profit from the crisis with their courage and original ideas.
She warned the Hong Kong government against relying too heavily on Beijing, saying China will have its own problems to solve next year.
"I think it will be unwise for Hong Kong to keep hoping that it can forever rely on mainland Chinese tourists to boost the domestic economy," she said.
Still that is not a valid reason to avoid looking into things. A road of 1000 li starts with the first step ( or with a cash advance on your VISA if you are a westerner :D)
Very much true grasshopper, and sometimes public discretion or delay is the better part of valor too. I knew about TIOs and ECB gold manipulation/control etc. well before I published articles and charts on them, since I'd already experienced some significant "blowback" from my efforts at reconstructing M3.
There are other unpublished articles for which I'm still in a holding pattern too. And there are some charts which will always remain private, both since they involve a lot of work on my part and also since (regardless of how well they work and help my returns) I'm tired of ridicule from those with fixed ideas and blinders.
I know, but I was trying to save time by getting from knowledgeable iTulipers pointers to "the book" or "the man" that is/are considered the ultimate authority.
Actually, I'm looking to match wave pattern harmonics with periods of various celestial bodies using astrology as source of clues for connections. I'm not saying astrology is bunk. I just want to look at this a mathematical/statistical approach.
Hopefully someone will either post publicly, or send you a private message... and then you can post charts that will amaze and delight the various iTulip denizens. :)
By the way...
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=081231111701.bbz7nhhj&show_article=1
In the immortal words of Scooby Doo - "Ruh Roh"... and what an interesting concept for part of 2009 with the picture of an ox being gored, and it ending up better overall in a one worlder sense. One can hope not on that last part... and I still say that 2009 will be another year like 2008 where the basics are paramount.
And just for the helluvit, mid July is showing a massive turn for Bradley.
vBulletin® v3.7.0, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.