How dependable / reliable are relationship / marriage lines?

pravin kumar wrote: As for secret admirers is my way of explaining after I met a number of boys who have professed to have very good relationship with girls from their college days and had exchange of pleasant romantic exchanges even they were married elsewhere and living far apart from each other.

stalin.v wrote:Hello lynn,

Predictive palmists tend to predict that bride is from which direction from the possessor's native place, how many kilo-meter distances she is from, and specific details through reading marriage lines.

bachlor, does not mean that he wont never marry in future. and he is only 23 years of age.

Lynn wrote:
Sorry Pravin I had misunderstood what you meant by 'secret admirer'. When you said "(those who did not profess their love or could speak up)", I thought the person didn't know of the existence of their admirer, maybe someone who looked at them from afar. But now I understand it is a relationship that they kept a secret. Thanks for explanation and sorry for my misunderstanding.

... Sorry Lynn, I think the problem is not solved at all:

For obviously... initially mister Pravin Kumar talked about the example of a person having only 1 or 2 persons in their life:

pravin kumar wrote:
Those with number of relationship ines, having only 1 or 2 persons in their life I would say they had secret admirers from the opposite sex (those who did not profess their love or could speak up) and Prominent Mount of Venus will confirm this as also the Heart Line.

... but in his second example he described a completely different type of example (men who have been involved in NUMERIOUS romantic relationships):

pravin kumar wrote:
As for secret admirers is my way of explaining after I met a number of boys who have professed to have very good relationship with girls from their college days and had exchange of pleasant romantic exchanges even they were married elsewhere and living far apart from each other.

... So, yes, I am sure that there must be some kind of misunderstanding involved. But now I would like to make another recommendation:

One better not associate the 'marriage lines'... with every variant of romantic exchange with any person of the (same- or) opposite sexe!

(For if one does make such loose assocations: then a simple 'kiss', 'love letter', a 'romantic date' and a 'one-night-stand' sort of all become... a synonym for the life-changing choice called 'marriage'! How realistic would that be???)


But I can explain this 'recommendation' with a more simple example...

For, I think if this theoritical-variant really had turn out to be valid over and over again... then the majority of people should have a lot more of these 'marriage' lines!! Simply because many people have quite a few romantic exchanges in their full life-span - while the large majority of people have only a couple of those 'marriage' lines!!


Lynn, how does my new 'recommendation' sound to you?

Martijn (admin) wrote:

Lynn wrote:
Sorry Pravin I had misunderstood what you meant by 'secret admirer'. When you said "(those who did not profess their love or could speak up)", I thought the person didn't know of the existence of their admirer, maybe someone who looked at them from afar. But now I understand it is a relationship that they kept a secret. Thanks for explanation and sorry for my misunderstanding.

... Sorry Lynn, I think the problem is not solved at all:

For obviously... initially mister Pravin Kumar talked about the example of a person having only 1 or 2 persons in their life:

pravin kumar wrote:
Those with number of relationship ines, having only 1 or 2 persons in their life I would say they had secret admirers from the opposite sex (those who did not profess their love or could speak up) and Prominent Mount of Venus will confirm this as also the Heart Line.

... but in his second example he described a completely different type of example (men who have been involved in NUMERIOUS romantic relationships):

pravin kumar wrote:
As for secret admirers is my way of explaining after I met a number of boys who have professed to have very good relationship with girls from their college days and had exchange of pleasant romantic exchanges even they were married elsewhere and living far apart from each other.

... So, yes, I am sure that there must be some kind of misunderstanding involved. But now I would like to make another recommendation:

One better not associate the 'marriage lines'... with every variant of romantic exchange with any person of the (same- or) opposite sexe!

(For if one does make such loose assocations: then a simple 'kiss', 'love letter', a 'romantic date' and a 'one-night-stand' sort of all become... a synonym for the life-changing choice called 'marriage'! How realistic would that be???)


But I can explain this 'recommendation' with a more simple example...

For, I think if this theoritical-variant really had turn out to be valid over and over again... then the majority of people should have a lot more of these 'marriage' lines!! Simply because many people have quite a few romantic exchanges in their full life-span - while the large majority of people have only a couple of those 'marriage' lines!!


Lynn, how does my new 'recommendation' sound to you?

Lynn wrote:
Martijn - I'm not sure that Pravin was talking about numerous relationships in his 2nd message? I took it to mean people who had a 'lover' whilst living away from their spouse (which they kept secret).

pravin kumar wrote:
As for secret admirers is my way of explaining after I met a number of boys who have professed to have very good relationship with girls from their college days and had exchange of pleasant romantic exchanges even they were married elsewhere and living far apart from each other.

Nevertheless, after reading his 3th comment... now I finally as well understand that the 'secret admirers'... refer to: secret relationships.

So, yes: now I see as well that initially I completely misunderstood his 'theory'!


However... oooh-my-god ... Lynn, okay we already expressed that we can not relate to any existing theory about this issue... but it does look like that we are now confronted with a 'new' theory which indirectly implicates/suggests...

... that 'cheating' can be read from the "marriage-lines"!!


... ... I don't know if you perceive the problem I perceive... for I recognize that this discussion has now entered... quite a 'dangerous zone'!!

(For, if people would start accepting such a 'theory', this very likely ends up in that they might get suspicious about what 'people-with-multiple-relationship-lines' say about their love life - especially if those people deny that they have ever been involved with any 'secret love'!!! And then palmistry becomes a very dangerious tool - not because the 'theory' is true... but because the palmist gets suspicious about what people say, only because of what the theory says!!! Welcome in the strange world called ... 'psychology'!)

pravin kumar wrote:
Dear Martinjn,

If a person has multiple relationship/marriage lines then he/she could have had one or two marriages or only one marriage and those others could be attachment to opposite sex other then their wife/husband. These could be secret admirers, secret relationship (I use the word secret as I refer to palms of Indians in Indian where marriage is still respected and one husband one wife system prevails) and only on quite a few occassions boys have spoken about having sweet/beautiful relationship with their college girl friends and these relationship was anything but marriage.
...
Pravin Kumar

Dear mister Pravin Kumar,

First of all, I would like to thank you for explaining once again what your theory implies!! And I am sorry for the misunderstanding regarding your very first short description of your theory.

But I can hardly blame myself for this misunderstanding, because it has been quite confusing how you are using the word 'secret'. But I can confirm that your last description does make sense to me!! (Though I am not saying here that I support your 'theory'... and I will continue my efforts to explain why!)


* By the way, outside India, 'one-on-one marriage' is very respected in far most other countries! Though I am aware that in the western world the 'divorce rates' are much higher than in India - but that is a different topic.


After saying this, I do think that I have now understood your 'theory' properly. But am I right to say that in your theory the word 'secret' simplies anything that relates to: romantic- and/or sexual contacts outside a marriage/relationship.

Did I describe this correctly?


Still, I see multiple dangers in your theory (in my earlier comments I have described how your theory is very susceptible to become a 'self-fulfilling prophecy', and even a 'burden' on the mind of an inexperienced palmist; and I think this discussion also proves that your theory is very susceptible for misunderstandings, etc.).


But let's not forget that we are talking here about some of the hand characteristics which have become 'notorious' for delivering false information!

For today, many palmistry experts AROUND THE WORLD (I could present you quite a few quotes from the most popular palmistry books) believe that these 'marriage lines/relationship lines - or whatever name one is using to describe them - do not provide any reliable info about whether a person will have one-, mulitiple-, or no relationships at all!


Basically, the example you've described showed us how you 'projected' your theory on the experiences described by these 'young men'. But I am still puzzled about what they exactly told you...!!?

I think the fundamental problemetic element in your theory is that it doesn't discriminate any kind of 'romantic activity'... for I can not find where you theory exactly starts between in respective:

- a 'once-in-a-life-time marriage',
- a 'long-term serious relationship',
- a 'secret romantic adventure',
- a 'sponteous romantic moment',
- a 'secret admirer',
-... and an innocent 'romantic kiss'!


It appears that all these types of romantic experiences (I am sure that there are other types to describe)... could fit relatively 'easily' in your theory. And therefore I am not surprize if you would be able to describe us many other examples which you could propose as a confirmation for your theory.

But because you have included so many 'romantic elements' in your theory... I think it is ONLY NATURAL to find various of such experiences in the life of almost every individual!! And because most people have 1 or more relationships in both of their hands... a 'spurious correlation' could be found in quite some examples.


And at the end the implication becomes... that your theory includes so many 'romantic elements' that even despite that I have noticed that your theory includes all elements that could make it a 'self-fulfiling prophecy'... that I will never be able to 'proof' to you that your theory is a 'self-fulfiling prophecy'.

Again, basically because you have adopted so many elements in your theory that usually you will find one of these elements in the life of any person!

But your perception could still very well be a 'delusion' - for in this discussion multiple 'professional members' have shared an opinion - sometimes featured with a few examples - which obviously doesn't support your theory!


Anyway, I have asked questions to understand the details of your theory. And I have tried to describe my multiple 'worries' regarding your theory.

INCLUDING THE FOLLOWING:
1) How the elements of a typical 'self-fulfilling prophecy' can be recognized;
2) That (from my point of view) your theory is really quite different from the classic theory about the 'marriage lines' (which relates to marriage + long-term partner-relationships only... and not all the other 'romantic activities' - big difference!)
3) The presence of multiple 'dangerous aspects' in your theory: beyond the typical elements of a 'self-fulfilling prophecy', I am also aware that especially for people who start believing that your theory will always turn out to be true... these people might easily make other assumptions such as believing that people with multiple 'marriage lines' - will become the ones that will cheat on their husband or wife in a marriage, etc.


And now I can only hope that you can understand my arguments for pointing out to the (hidden) dangers of your 'theory' - and I hope you will recognize from this lengthy response + my multiple arguments... that I do recognize this is as an important issue.



Dear mister Pravin Kumar, just in case you are interested to post some thoughts in return, I am looking forward to read your thoughts!!

Thank you again for sharing your thoughts & ideas so far!

Lynn wrote:I agree that having too much faith in the various interpretations of these lines can be a dangerous thing. Potentially it can ruin people's lives.

one example....
A few years ago I received an email from a man in India who asked my opinion on the accuracy of the relationship lines. He had cancelled his daughter's wedding, because a palmist told him that his daughter had one 'marriage line', whilst the husband-to-be had two lines. If they should marry it was a bad omen for her, because these lines showed that the husband would either cheat on his wife & take a mistress, or he would divorce her and take another wife. To avoid his daughter being hurt by this man, the father cancelled the wedding. He wrote to ask me if I thought he had done the right thing.
(what a responsibility it is being a hand reader!!)

stalin.v wrote:That means , you're years together of reaserch is nothing to do with predictive palmisry. If you really donot predict the life of person, you dont have any work with marriade line............ I'm right?

Martijn (admin) wrote:Hi Lynn, thanks for sharing this example.

The said thing is, maybe those two people really wanted to create a happy marriage; if this marriage was cancelled only because of the higher number of 'marriage lines' in the husband's hand... then I think their marriage was cancelled due to a 'fatalistic' perception on human life in general.

While quite some of us here are aware that those ideas may not express much more than a simplistic belief.

pravin kumar wrote:
I will give you a separate example of a number of children a person has. This I have seen on quite a few occasions people having numerous children line (vertical lines on the relationship line) and it is to assume that a person cannot have numerous children so what happens. My prediction for them: You love children a lot. This has never gone wrong and in 50% of the case the couple have been married for several years and do not have children and hence they love others children. Now in those other 50% cases I found that the prominent vertical lines represented the number of children they had and the other ones were not their own......

If you permit I will show you daily some palm prints in other forums which will defy logic but they are quite few, still they are there. So these certain rare cases are to be explained and not the ones which are commonly followed and have come out right in a majority of other cases. That is my reasoning and I follow that method......

Pravin Kumar

Lynn wrote:
Hi Pravin, I understand what you are saying, when I first learnt palmistry I used to say similar things eg "if they are not your own children, they are children you feel close to, maybe nephews/nieces etc". But eventually I thought...really, what am I saying?! If they represent other children, it means that the "child lines" cannot accurately predict how many children the person will have as their own sons & daughters. I fear we are in the realms of 'making it fit' 'self-fulfilling prophecy' etc. ???

Hi Lynn,

Thanks for sharing your example & your thoughts (I can only confirm what you described).

Yes, you were able to recognize that it doesn't makes sense if one starts using other criteria than counting only the children that have a person's biology.

So I guess you've sort of described how Pravin Kumar's new theory for the 'children lines'... displays the same problems that I have noticed regarding his new theory for the 'marriage lines'.

By the way, your own example (multiple 'marriage lines' in your hands, and only one in your husband's hand.... but you've spend about 2/3 of your life with eachother), I think this very well illustrates the complications that one can usually observe regarding this issue!


Another point of concern in this discussion is... if a palmist is not familiar with the concept of a 'self-fulfilling prophecy', then it probably becomes a MISSION IMPOSSIBLE to build a good discussion and to arrive at some kind of sensible common agreement, etc.


So, I am not sure that we will get beyond the point where we arrived so far in this discussion... and I am not sure that any single example will get us beyond this stage, because if we are only confronted with an example which 'appears' to confirm a theory... does that disprove our other findings?

... Of course not!! I think we really need to have a debate about the 'psychology' behind these theories, discussing examples can actually be 'contra-dictive'... especially when they are PRE-SELECTED to proof one's point, etc.

Hi Pravin, I understand what you are saying, when I first learnt palmistry I used to say similar things eg "if they are not your own children, they are children you feel close to, maybe nephews/nieces etc". But eventually I thought...really, what am I saying?! If they represent other children, it means that the "child lines" cannot accurately predict how many children the person will have as their own sons & daughters. I fear we are in the realms of 'making it fit' 'self-fulfilling prophecy' etc. ???

I can't answer your question why Cheiro, Benham etc talk about relationship lines, but for sure I have found more times these lines are unreliable than they are true!

re "If you permit I will show you daily some palm prints in other forums which will defy logic but they are quite few, still they are there."

stalin.v wrote:Hello martijn,

Thanks for the scientific information. Out of curious, i would like to know, have E-lines been related to any medical disorder statistics on scientific grounds? or The middle one of E-line is explained as shortest among three. had it been confirmed through statistics?

Hello Stalin,

I think my answer to both of your questions will be a 'no' (because I am not aware of any statistics regarding the "E-lines").

By the way, the pictures presented in the first 2 sources that I mentioned (see my former post), display that the middle line is relatively often the shortest (I know, this is not always true - but appears to a common pattern!).

I have noticed the same pattern in quite a few people, but I have no statistics available for that. Sorry, I have never researched this aspect of the hand with statistics.

But I can imagine that these "E lines" can be used as a good point of reference to study this topic in greater detail.