Palmistry is not a science. It has no standardised curriculum, no licensing exam, no agreed upon textbook. Instead, it is a collection of traditions, each with its own rules.
One reader trained in Indian palmistry may emphasize mounts and finger shapes. Another trained in Cheiro's Western system may focus on the four major lines. A modern psychological palmist may read lines as symbols of personality rather than predictors of events.
These differences are not signs of incompetence. They are signs of a diverse, unstandardized field. The same hand can be read correctly within multiple traditions. Correctly, that is, according to the rules of that tradition. Not according to any external reality.
