LifeScape Astrology
#1
This site came to my notice when someone, probably the founder, commented on nirmukta.com

Their basic premise is this:

Quote:Two planets interact or are able to influence each other if angular separation between them is a multiple of 10 degrees.

Out of various multiples. 50,60,70 and 110,120,130 are adverse and rest are supporting.

It appears that they haven taken data from a few people and fit their hypothesis around it. No control groups, no double blind tests, no mechanism for explaining how the effects are caused. But they do want to sell some stones to alleviate/enhance bad/good effects of planets. And they call this science.
Reply
#2
The very notion that inter planetary motions can have some special effects on individual human beings selectively, is baseless and without merit. Let alone a particular gemstone will help you offset these ill effects.

Astrology dwells on the premise that somehow planetary positions have an effect on individual human beings very selectively based on when and where they were born. Call it whatever astrology you will to add mojo to it...chinese, western, lifescape, vedic etc. they all are based on the very same idea.

The idea that planetary positions have selective good/bad effects on individuals is so absurd and if at all there are any effects between interplanetary movements, it would affect a whole general area, not people born on such and such date and time.

Lifescape astrology, just like all other versions of astrology can be dismissed as pseudoscience and bs but sadly, you cannot stop people from buying that gemstone as idiots are dime a dozen on this planet and I won't be surprised if people are queueing up to buy that gemstone.
[+] 1 user Likes Emmy's post
Reply
#3
Its astrologer season!
[Image: 52lifescapeastrology.png]
"Fossil rabbits in the Precambrian"
~ J.B.S.Haldane, on being asked to falsify evolution.
[+] 1 user Likes Ajita Kamal's post
Reply
#4
Quote:from Rakesh Singhal
to XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
date Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 10:47 AM
subject Re: Contact Us
mailed-by lifescapeastrology.com

Hello our mission is different. At the moment, we are working only on natal charts only. We have explained the topic of health, psyche etc on wiki. you may pick up several persons, suffering from serious health problems, and see for your self whether theory holds. This is time to prove whether destiny is there or not. To further make the things easy for you, we have now provided desktop programme, as well, so that making charts become easier for you. regarding mundane astrology, it is sum total of individual charts, and in our approach, we have to analyse the charts of all players involved, for which we do not have data. there fore we would not indulge in this topic. it is better to be certain with whatever we know,, rather than making guesses like current practice, best wishes, rakesh singhal

No

Note this part: "you may pick up several persons, suffering from serious health problems, and see for your self whether theory holds. This is time to prove whether destiny is there or not. To further make the things easy for you, we have now provided desktop programme, as well, so that making charts become easier for you. "
The guy is actually challenging us!

"Fossil rabbits in the Precambrian"
~ J.B.S.Haldane, on being asked to falsify evolution.
Reply
#5
(31-Mar-2011, 10:50 AM)Ajita Kamal Wrote: Note this part: "you may pick up several persons, suffering from serious health problems, and see for your self whether theory holds. This is time to prove whether destiny is there or not. To further make the things easy for you, we have now provided desktop programme, as well, so that making charts become easier for you. "
The guy is actually challenging us!

All he has is some data from people with health problems and a hypothesis to fit that data. He isn't suggesting that we test his hypothesis on people who are both healthy and ill. He wants us to pick people who are ill. That way it is easy to prove that his hypothesis works. Once that is established, he can sell his stones which will ward off the illnesses. But conveniently, there is no data on the efficacy of these stones.
Reply
#6
(31-Mar-2011, 11:27 PM)Lije Wrote: All he has is some data from people with health problems and a hypothesis to fit that data. He isn't suggesting that we test his hypothesis on people who are both healthy and ill. He wants us to pick people who are ill. That way it is easy to prove that his hypothesis works. Once that is established, he can sell his stones which will ward off the illnesses. But conveniently, there is no data on the efficacy of these stones.

I think what he was implying is that we should do the tests ourselves, not just that we should use his data. But even if he is not, there's nothing stopping us from developing our own methodology and using his software to test his claims. Of course in suggesting that we do the test ourselves, he suggests a methodology that's not scientific (no control group, for one). Here's one way how we could go about actually testing this. (I came up with this on the fly, and I'm sure we can design the test in many other ways if we put some thought into it).

Put together a significant size test sample of individuals who are genuinely sick with a properly diagnosed condition- say, cancer. Put together a list of people who have had recent cancer screenings and are known to be cancer free- this is the control group. Plug both groups independently into the software and see if it predicts anything to a statistically significant degree.

Edit: There could be a problem with the methodology I suggested if the predictions can't be made specifically in regards to cancer. But I think the site claims that they can be made specifically in regards to cancer.
"Fossil rabbits in the Precambrian"
~ J.B.S.Haldane, on being asked to falsify evolution.
Reply
#7
thank you very much mr ajita kamal,

Yes what you say is absolutley correct, that we want people to test lifescape astrology. We have not published the control stats, but then when people are willing to ridicule a person without knowing anything about him, then who would believe his control stats.?

some of the posts on this thread have presumed, that we are making money by selling gemstones. because this is the only way they can think. No we do not sell any gemstones, and we have spent lot of money , through hard earned salary income on this research.


regarding your suggestion on collecting and analyzing cancer patients , it is an excellent approach, but calls for significant effort. even the first task of collecting data calls for hospital visits , and corresponding manpower and money.

here i suggest a shortcut.

let me first expalin the topic of health problems, and you will be amazed how easy it is.

just make the charts from date/time/place of birth for people who had serious health problems.

lifescape astrology says:

ceres/earth should make adverse angle (50,60,70 or 110,120,130) with either interamnia or sedna with in tolerance/orb of 1.5 degree.

or moon/chiron should make adverse angle with interamnia or sedna but in that case that moon or that chiron whom so ever is making adverse angle with chiron or sedna, should further make an aspect (any angle which is multiple of 10 degrees with an orb of 1.5 degrees) wih earth or ceres.


theory is just that much.


now if your team takes interest, locating 4/5 persons who had serious health problems, for every one should come with in their known circles and they can collect date/time and place of birth and also time of ailment for further explanations. so effort of data collection becomes minimal.

then they can make the chart and post them on a common thread and i would suggest fourms on lifescapeastrology.com itself.


if above is done, by say even 50 persons, you would have 250 charts in no time and then some body can make control stats.

in case the theory does not hold (which is quite unlikely ), at least future visitors of lifescapeastrology.com would know that.

let me reiterate, we are not in business. any help if required to meet this testing , we would try to extend as per our means.





Reply
#8
Thank you Mr.Rakesh for putting up a viable way of suggesting we get control stats. There is only one statistical downside to the above mentioned methodology is that you impose a bias on it. This is a Human tendency to either assume you are guilty until proven otherwise or, not guilty until proven otherwise. In either case you have imposed a bias. To arrive at an unbiased answer to the question you need a much larger dataset than 250 to predict anything of statistical significance wherein the data will purely dictate the outcome. To put things in perspective, in the CERN LHC experiment to confirm a detection of a particle statistically, we wait for a few million positives before we sit down to do the statistics and come to any conclusion. Given that you expect all of humanity to be covered by your theory a result in 250 out of 7 billion possible people is not a number that inspires any confidence. To put this in perspective even if all 250 turn out to be positive its still not of great statistical significance or imply universality of your theory.

On another side topic, correlation does not indicate causality, it is a fundamental aspect of science and statistical analysis. Unless you have scientific motivations for framing your theory, personally I do not see any reason to even expend the effort to get it tested. I hope the points I make clarify the need for a more scientific explanation/approach.
Reply
#9
(07-Jun-2011, 01:40 AM)preshanth Wrote: Thank you Mr.Rakesh for putting up a viable way of suggesting we get control stats. There is only one statistical downside to the above mentioned methodology is that you impose a bias on it.

On another side topic, correlation does not indicate causality, it is a fundamental aspect of science and statistical analysis. Unless you have scientific motivations for framing your theory, personally I do not see any reason to even expend the effort to get it tested. I hope the points I make clarify the need for a more scientific explanation/approach.

Thanks for your post. We are aware of the fact that testing 250 cases does not prove the theory.

However, if you go through this thread, you will find that some people have outright rejected it. If you do not know some thing, saying that It does not exist, is fallacious.

Suggestion of checking few cases, is just meant to increase little interest and confidence, so that outright rejections are avoided.


Regarding further testing and proving the theory, work is in progress.We are expanding our team. Also we believe that theory has no meaning , if it fails in practical trials. Our practical trials are in nature of advising gemstones and we are taking feedback from them.

By now, we have cured completely or partially severeal cases, whereas these people could not get the cure, even after taking medicines for a long time.Cases are many, like Jitesh, sudhir sharma,sachin saprta, srimoyee sarkar and may be few others; (nothing charged and in one case gemstone supplied by us).

People on sleeping pills, have stopped taking sleeping pills and now they are able to sleep well like rajnikant pandey.

Probably , our next effort would be on mentally dull/retarded students, and we would supply the gemstones as well, provided some school teacher or their parents are willing to monitor these cases and compile the data, and note the changes noticed.

so our belief in theory is certainly not based on correlations alone.We know it is a vast subject, We are not in hurry, and choice is yours, whether you would like to do some checking or not.

However speaking outright lies,that we are selling gemstones , can not be covered under freethinking.

Let me put here Dalton's definition of science:

Make an hypothesis, and as long as hypothesis holds, fine other wise make amendments.

we know, when we are asking you to test on 250 data, those studies would be replicated by many people, and volumes would increase.


If some one wants to start with huge database, He may never be able to start, because such databases do not exist, and there is no organisation support for this kind of research or testing.

rakesh singhal



Reply
#10
(09-Jun-2011, 12:08 PM)Rakesh Singhal Wrote: However, if you go through this thread, you will find that some people have outright rejected it. If you do not know some thing, saying that It does not exist, is fallacious.

You must be referring to me. Given the enormous evidence against the efficacy of all forms of astrology and use of gemstones, there is good reason to outright reject it, unless you have very strong evidence to support your claims. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. You claimed it was scientific, it is your burden to show that it is indeed scientifically verified.

(09-Jun-2011, 12:08 PM)Rakesh Singhal Wrote: However speaking outright lies,that we are selling gemstones , can not be covered under freethinking.

I take back my statement that you are selling gemstones. A more accurate statement would be you are advising people to buy gemstones based on unscientific theories.

(09-Jun-2011, 12:08 PM)Rakesh Singhal Wrote: Let me put here Dalton's definition of science:

Make an hypothesis, and as long as hypothesis holds, fine other wise make amendments.

we know, when we are asking you to test on 250 data, those studies would be replicated by many people, and volumes would increase.

How about using a more modern definition of science? Why are you sticking to old ways? Instead of asking us to test on 250 people who are already sick, why don't you do a double blind study with people who are not sick as one control group and see how well your software works in predicting cancer? Also, can you show us some peer-reviewed studies in mainstream science journals (and not journals of alternative medicine) that show that gemstones work?
[+] 2 users Like Lije's post
Reply
#11
(09-Jun-2011, 12:08 PM)Rakesh Singhal Wrote: we know, when we are asking you to test on 250 data, those studies would be replicated by many people, and volumes would increase.

If some one wants to start with huge database, He may never be able to start, because such databases do not exist, and there is no organisation support for this kind of research or testing.

Actually that's not true. Get in touch with the NCCAM in the US. They have wasted around $2.5 Billion testing so-called cures such as this.

Alternative medicine is big business too - the total UK annual spend on alternative health treatments is £4.5 billion, a market that has grown by nearly 50 per cent in five years. I'm sure you will find many alternative medicine companies who will be interested.
[+] 2 users Like unsorted's post
Reply
#12
I just saw their website with stock photos of westerners.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence
Reply


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  How to debunk astrology for layman? satheeshpaul 1 1,564 17-May-2016, 06:53 PM
Last Post: sumanth2912
  Astrology K. P. S. Kamath 38 22,827 01-May-2013, 11:09 AM
Last Post: prabhakar
  Astrology hurts for real Shitij 1 3,220 20-Nov-2012, 10:07 PM
Last Post: arvindiyer
Wink Astrology is NOT science! BitterPlutonium 5 7,186 18-Nov-2012, 09:42 PM
Last Post: Shitij
Wink Astrology that didn't hold for me Shitij 10 8,250 10-May-2012, 07:38 PM
Last Post: nispat
  Astrology a SIn srikgn 7 9,109 12-Mar-2012, 11:08 AM
Last Post: Lije



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)