2 of 2
2
Whilst I am strongly opposed to Sun Sign Astrology….I must
Posted: 23 June 2006 01:11 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 16 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  635
Joined  2005-02-06

Yes, but I retired at the age of 48. Fed up with it for the time being.

Rod

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 June 2006 12:08 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 17 ]  
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  765
Joined  2006-06-01

[quote author=“Rod”]Yes, but I retired at the age of 48. Fed up with it for the time being.

Rod

Why? doctors make good money….and the great green is what we all need….

 Signature 

Get with it. Millions of galaxies of hundreds of millions of stars, and a speck on one in a blink. That’s us, lost in space. The cop, you, me… Who notices?
-Vincent

Profile
 
 
Posted: 08 August 2006 07:39 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 18 ]  
Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  842
Joined  2006-02-19

What happened here? I leave for a little while, and everything goes to hades!

When last I was here, I asked why astrology should work. This should be the fumdamental question posited to all who buy into supernatural claims. It’s not enough to say, “well, I find it usefull and so it must work.” If I believe that the Tic Tac that I am swallowing is really a Tylenol, my headache will likely go away, but that doesn’t mean that sugary candies have medicinal properties.

The question, again is, exactly why should astrology work? What forces are the celestial bodies emanating that they should have influences over us?

But the question was dodged! Instead we get as segue into a Cruise-ian rant on the corupted nature of modern psychology and pharmacology! Whilst this may be a subject worth visting, I, for one, would still like to know the answer to the questions that I and others asked in response to the stated topic of this particular posting.

 Signature 

People have said that an infinite number of monkeys typing on an infinite number of keyboards would produce the works of Shakespeare, but the internet has shown this to be wrong.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 09 August 2006 02:18 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 19 ]  
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  765
Joined  2006-06-01

there is no conclusive proof and have long since given up interest in Astrology….existence is too hard in this shithole otherwise known as Korea for me to study somethign unverifable…it’s probably all bullshit…nowadays I am an Astrology-Agnostic….hope that answers your questions….

 Signature 

Get with it. Millions of galaxies of hundreds of millions of stars, and a speck on one in a blink. That’s us, lost in space. The cop, you, me… Who notices?
-Vincent

Profile
 
 
Posted: 09 August 2006 04:44 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 20 ]  
Newbie
Rank
Total Posts:  11
Joined  2006-08-09

[quote author=“Celsus”]What happened here? I leave for a little while, and everything goes to hades!

When last I was here, I asked why astrology should work. This should be the fumdamental question posited to all who buy into supernatural claims. It’s not enough to say, “well, I find it usefull and so it must work.”

If I believe that the Tic Tac that I am swallowing is really a Tylenol, my headache will likely go away, but that doesn’t mean that sugary candies have medicinal properties.

The question, again is, exactly why should astrology work? What forces are the celestial bodies emanating that they should have influences over us?

But the question was dodged! Instead we get as segue into a Cruise-ian rant on the corupted nature of modern psychology and pharmacology! Whilst this may be a subject worth visting, I, for one, would still like to know the answer to the questions that I and others asked in response to the stated topic of this particular posting.

There is no need to answer that question.  Most people believe in a self, this works for them - though buddhists think otherwise.  Scientifically, this notion of a separate self that continues through time, is on weak footing.  But nobody seems to get mad about that one.

There are many things we do that we continue to do because they work for us.  This does not serve as proof for others, but there is nothing wrong with that.

Unfortunately many astrologers see a causal relationship and thus raise the issue you are talking about.  How do these celestial bodies cause certain things to happen or traits to arise in an individual.  Many astrologers do not think of it this way.  There is a pattern that occurs both in the patterns of the planets at the birth moment - for example - and there is a similar pattern in the individual born at that moment.  They match and they fit.

There were Africans and non-african scientists who thought that elephants knew what other elephants were doing over long distances.  They were sure of this.  Others questioned them, saying that there was no mechanism, confusing this with a proof that there wasn’t one.  Later ultra sound was discovered to be the way they were communicating.

We don’t always have to wait for science to validate something to know it.

And the theories out there in current physics are far weirder than Astrology.  In fact QM is really strange and has non-causal relations, particles traveling back in time, instantaneous ‘caues’ over vast distances.  And so on.  And QM is old hat.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 09 August 2006 02:36 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 21 ]  
Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  842
Joined  2006-02-19

[quote author=“Sanfu”]There are many things we do that we continue to do because they work for us.  This does not serve as proof for others, but there is nothing wrong with that.


While I agree that people have every right to believe whatever nonsense they whish, I also feel that it is encumbent upon us to lay to rest such superstitious nonsense. I especially believe that when, as with astrology, hucksters and flim-flam artist rake in wealth by deluding people, people who often are in a fragile position, ripe to be taken advantage of. These charlatians prey on those who are vulnerable or in need of help, shedding them of their hard earned cash by providing a riddiculously useless non-service. There is something wrong with that.

[quote author=“Sanfu”]Unfortunately many astrologers see a causal relationship and thus raise the issue you are talking about.  How do these celestial bodies cause certain things to happen or traits to arise in an individual.  Many astrologers do not think of it this way.  There is a pattern that occurs both in the patterns of the planets at the birth moment - for example - and there is a similar pattern in the individual born at that moment.  They match and they fit.

Do they? Many of the astrological charts that modern astrologers rely upon were drawn up hundreds, if not thousands of years ago. The celestial bodies (which are ever in motion) have shifted since then. If the position of the planets in relation to the stars is of crucial importants to the astrological “system,” then modern readings based on those charts would be fatally flawed. Even those who believe that the “system” really works should be incapable of creating accurate readings.

But, of course, as you stated, most of the “truths” revealed by an astrological reading are read back into it after the fact. It would seem to me that astrology would work in much the same way as “cold readings.” I myself have dabbled with that technique (although I let the people know upfront that there is nothing supernatural involved), and have been amazed how well this works. People seem to be willing, even eager to forget the misses and concentrate on the “hits.”

[quote author=“Sanfu”]There were Africans and non-african scientists who thought that elephants knew what other elephants were doing over long distances.  They were sure of this.  Others questioned them, saying that there was no mechanism, confusing this with a proof that there wasn’t one.  Later ultra sound was discovered to be the way they were communicating.

We don’t always have to wait for science to validate something to know it.

But science did validate that belief. Scientist have been investigating paranormal phenomina for centuries (True! Infact the originator of my nom de plum wrote a book exposing the tricks of magicians nearly 2000 years ago, though it is now, quite unfortunately lost). In all that time, with all that scrutiny, wouldn’t you think at least some of astrologies claims would have been verified? The elephants in your story were able to comunicate through natural, and detectible, means. Astrology, on the other hand, still would seem to rely upon powers of a supernatural origin.

[quote author=“Sanfu”]And the theories out there in current physics are far weirder than Astrology.  In fact QM is really strange and has non-causal relations, particles traveling back in time, instantaneous ‘caues’ over vast distances.  And so on.  And QM is old hat.

Quantum mechanics is based on the scientific principle. The theory was arrived at through observations, testing, and mathmatical equations. The proofs for QM are reproducable by multiple scientist world wide.

Astrology, on the other hand, will generate different results depending on who is doing the reading, or what system they are using to produce those readings. QM might seem weird to the layman, but it has practical applications. Astrology is pure Bulls*Hit. Comparing the two is just silly.

 Signature 

People have said that an infinite number of monkeys typing on an infinite number of keyboards would produce the works of Shakespeare, but the internet has shown this to be wrong.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 10 August 2006 12:34 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 22 ]  
Newbie
Rank
Total Posts:  11
Joined  2006-08-09

Of course there are terrible astrologers and the people who find them through the back pages of women’s magazines and the like are often meeting what you fear.  But there are many astrologers who do not fit what you are saying.  I can also tell that you have little experience with what happens when intelligent clients meet intelligents astrologers, yet you assume that their interactions are abusive and clients are victims, to weak intellectually to see through the BS, as you put it.  These judgements of yours are not based in reality.  My clients tend to be college educated professionals who use critical thinking on a daily basis in a variety of ways.  They are not weak pathetic people.  I am sure you will assume that at best they are lapsing into irrationality when they meet me, but your description of the relationship is hallucinatory. 

There are many scientists who believe in paranormal activity and feel that their studies have validated that in all the ways scientists like.  a fairly mainstream example is Rupert Sheldrake.  There are also some statisticians who have set out to disprove astrology, a French man names Gauquelin (sp) is one example.  He ended up developing his own school of astrology.

The elephant example shows that it can be rational to trust one’s intuition and not wait around for scientific validation. 

It is not silly to bring up QM.  Most people who are groupies of science do not know much about science.  They are children of Newton, have not integrated Einstein and have no idea that there is QM, let alone later developments.  You were demanding a causal connection between the celestial bodies and us.  That is making assumptions about correlation that QM at the very least calls into question.  Also rationalists tend to consciously or unconsciously argue from a weirdness criterion and astrology sounds weird to them, stuck instinctively in Newton’s billiard ball universe.

It is rational for me to believe that astrology can be a valuable tool both for myself and in my interactions with others.  20 years of experience bears this out.  You want to claim it is the placebo effect.  If I had another client pool, I might wonder more, but my clients, including scientists, and including people who I did long distance readings for whom I never met in person, have seemed to smart for me to take their compliments are simply the productions of naivte and my predatory nature.

None of this, of course, is proof, for you.  But I don’t care about that.  If you want to believe that all intuition not already validated by science in double-blind tests should not be used, that is, literally, your problem.


[quote author=“Celsus”][quote author=“Sanfu”]There are many things we do that we continue to do because they work for us.  This does not serve as proof for others, but there is nothing wrong with that.


While I agree that people have every right to believe whatever nonsense they whish, I also feel that it is encumbent upon us to lay to rest such superstitious nonsense. I especially believe that when, as with astrology, hucksters and flim-flam artist rake in wealth by deluding people, people who often are in a fragile position, ripe to be taken advantage of. These charlatians prey on those who are vulnerable or in need of help, shedding them of their hard earned cash by providing a riddiculously useless non-service. There is something wrong with that.

You critique involving the shifting of celestial bodies shows some misunderstandings of astrology.  I think.  It is hard to tell.  In any case it does not work as a critique.

I am sure cold readings can ‘work’ with non-critical people.  Sun sign astrology in newspapers seems to ‘work’ though that is ridiculous.  You could try to prove your case, not that I think the onus is on you.  Challenge one of the graduates of the German Astrological Schools to a contest.  You do 5 cold reading and he or she can do 50 astro readings and see who gets more hits.

[quote author=“Sanfu”]Unfortunately many astrologers see a causal relationship and thus raise the issue you are talking about.  How do these celestial bodies cause certain things to happen or traits to arise in an individual.  Many astrologers do not think of it this way.  There is a pattern that occurs both in the patterns of the planets at the birth moment - for example - and there is a similar pattern in the individual born at that moment.  They match and they fit.

Do they? Many of the astrological charts that modern astrologers rely upon were drawn up hundreds, if not thousands of years ago. The celestial bodies (which are ever in motion) have shifted since then. If the position of the planets in relation to the stars is of crucial importants to the astrological “system,” then modern readings based on those charts would be fatally flawed. Even those who believe that the “system” really works should be incapable of creating accurate readings.

But, of course, as you stated, most of the “truths” revealed by an astrological reading are read back into it after the fact. It would seem to me that astrology would work in much the same way as “cold readings.” I myself have dabbled with that technique (although I let the people know upfront that there is nothing supernatural involved), and have been amazed how well this works. People seem to be willing, even eager to forget the misses and concentrate on the “hits.”

[quote author=“Sanfu”]There were Africans and non-african scientists who thought that elephants knew what other elephants were doing over long distances.  They were sure of this.  Others questioned them, saying that there was no mechanism, confusing this with a proof that there wasn’t one.  Later ultra sound was discovered to be the way they were communicating.

We don’t always have to wait for science to validate something to know it.

But science did validate that belief. Scientist have been investigating paranormal phenomina for centuries (True! Infact the originator of my nom de plum wrote a book exposing the tricks of magicians nearly 2000 years ago, though it is now, quite unfortunately lost). In all that time, with all that scrutiny, wouldn’t you think at least some of astrologies claims would have been verified? The elephants in your story were able to comunicate through natural, and detectible, means. Astrology, on the other hand, still would seem to rely upon powers of a supernatural origin.

[quote author=“Sanfu”]And the theories out there in current physics are far weirder than Astrology.  In fact QM is really strange and has non-causal relations, particles traveling back in time, instantaneous ‘caues’ over vast distances.  And so on.  And QM is old hat.

Quantum mechanics is based on the scientific principle. The theory was arrived at through observations, testing, and mathmatical equations. The proofs for QM are reproducable by multiple scientist world wide.

Astrology, on the other hand, will generate different results depending on who is doing the reading, or what system they are using to produce those readings. QM might seem weird to the layman, but it has practical applications. Astrology is pure Bulls*Hit. Comparing the two is just silly.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 10 August 2006 02:08 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 23 ]  
Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  842
Joined  2006-02-19

First off, just because scientist believe in woo woo, it doesn’t make it true. Just like regular folks, scientist can be hoplessly lost when they step outside their field. Back in the 1970’s, many scientist were convinced that Uri Gellar exhibitted real psychic powers, until the Amazing Randi was able to show them that he could replicate everything Gellar could do with ordinary magic tricks.

As you seem to be a professonal, perhaps you can explain a few things. For instance, I have seen experiments where a number of people are given what they are told are personally created astrological readings. Afterwords, the vast majority of the readers claim that these readings are mostly to exceptionally accurate. It was then revealed to them that everyone had been given the same paper. There have also been experiments where supposedly accurate astrologers were given information about a variety of people, everything relevent to an astrological reading except the individuals name. None of the astrologers were able to accurately predict anything about those individuals. Indeed, they often gave very warm and rosey reading for such reprehensible individuals as Hitler, the Son of Sam, and John Wayne Gacy! If astrology is as scientific as QM, shouldn’t the stars have informed those astrologers that one of their profiles was responsible for the deaths of millions of people?

However these things probably don’t raise questions in your mind. Thats fine. As I stated before, you have every right to believe in what ever nonsense you wish, just as I have every right to call into question any nonsense I wish. It still never ceases to amaze me that this is the forum for the book “the End of Faith,” and yet we often seem to get posters who want to claim that their personal beliefs should be exempt from the aim of this book. It amazes me even more that these people seem to be shocked that anyone would question the veracity of their faith, because their personal experiences with their faith proves that it’s true. Perhaps you don’t see it this way, but astrology is a faith, and as you seem to be an astrologer, you have a vested intrest in trying to keep your faith alive. Fine. If you want to believe in all sorts of paranormal notions that have either been invalidated by science, and want to ignore the information that debunks their claims, well, my friend, I would have to say that that is literally your problem.

By the by, you don’t seem to have that great of an understanding of QM. QM equations work fine at the subatomic level, where they do accurately predict actions, but have been shown to be woefully inadaquite for use in the larger world, which is still governed by Newtonian physics, else quantum mechanics would be used to plot the courses of spacecraft. This is why Unified Field Theories are still the holy grail of many research scientist. This is why we have Super-String theory, which atleast seems to work at both the micro and macro levels, but nothing is conclusive about that yet. Don’t go counting your alternate universes until they’re hatched.

 Signature 

People have said that an infinite number of monkeys typing on an infinite number of keyboards would produce the works of Shakespeare, but the internet has shown this to be wrong.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 11 August 2006 01:19 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 24 ]  
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  765
Joined  2006-06-01

[quote author=“Celsus”]First off, just because scientist believe in woo woo, it doesn’t make it true. Just like regular folks, scientist can be hoplessly lost when they step outside their field. Back in the 1970’s, many scientist were convinced that Uri Gellar exhibitted real psychic powers, until the Amazing Randi was able to show them that he could replicate everything Gellar could do with ordinary magic tricks.

As you seem to be a professonal, perhaps you can explain a few things. For instance, I have seen experiments where a number of people are given what they are told are personally created astrological readings. Afterwords, the vast majority of the readers claim that these readings are mostly to exceptionally accurate. It was then revealed to them that everyone had been given the same paper. There have also been experiments where supposedly accurate astrologers were given information about a variety of people, everything relevent to an astrological reading except the individuals name. None of the astrologers were able to accurately predict anything about those individuals. Indeed, they often gave very warm and rosey reading for such reprehensible individuals as Hitler, the Son of Sam, and John Wayne Gacy! If astrology is as scientific as QM, shouldn’t the stars have informed those astrologers that one of their profiles was responsible for the deaths of millions of people?

However these things probably don’t raise questions in your mind. Thats fine. As I stated before, you have every right to believe in what ever nonsense you wish, just as I have every right to call into question any nonsense I wish. It still never ceases to amaze me that this is the forum for the book “the End of Faith,” and yet we often seem to get posters who want to claim that their personal beliefs should be exempt from the aim of this book. It amazes me even more that these people seem to be shocked that anyone would question the veracity of their faith, because their personal experiences with their faith proves that it’s true. Perhaps you don’t see it this way, but astrology is a faith, and as you seem to be an astrologer, you have a vested intrest in trying to keep your faith alive. Fine. If you want to believe in all sorts of paranormal notions that have either been invalidated by science, and want to ignore the information that debunks their claims, well, my friend, I would have to say that that is literally your problem.

By the by, you don’t seem to have that great of an understanding of QM. QM equations work fine at the subatomic level, where they do accurately predict actions, but have been shown to be woefully inadaquite for use in the larger world, which is still governed by Newtonian physics, else quantum mechanics would be used to plot the courses of spacecraft. This is why Unified Field Theories are still the holy grail of many research scientist. This is why we have Super-String theory, which atleast seems to work at both the micro and macro levels, but nothing is conclusive about that yet. Don’t go counting your alternate universes until they’re hatched.

No one is dying over astrology. People are dying over religion. However unverifiable it is astrology is not killing anyone. This is a major point made often by Sam Harris. You sound like a technocrat who believes that science will unravel every mystery ever to cross man’s mind. I disagree, in any event we homo sapiens will destroy ourselves in a nuclear holocaust long before such a point is ever reached. I would not want you on a board for education since you would most likely outlaw the study of language, literature and anything else not verifiable by the scientific method…read Brave New World and 1984 again if you have not yet done so. There are people who spend years studying the works of Joyce and Rousseau. Nothing contained therein is verifiable by the scientific method, are these endeavours consequently useless? There are more things in heaven and earth, dear Celsus, than are dreamt of in your philosophy (scientific method)...techocratic thinking such as yours is what is destroying psychiatry in your country, where the swallowing of a pill is considered effective treatment for any inappropriate state of mind. I am strongly opposed to relgious faith but as a person who has spent years studying, language, literature and history I cannot agree with the premise that the only thing worthy of our study is something reducable to the scientific method….

 Signature 

Get with it. Millions of galaxies of hundreds of millions of stars, and a speck on one in a blink. That’s us, lost in space. The cop, you, me… Who notices?
-Vincent

Profile
 
 
Posted: 11 August 2006 11:55 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 25 ]  
Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  842
Joined  2006-02-19

Me, a technocrat? Hardly! The two main obsessions of my life are art and literature. I never leave home without a sketchbook, camera, and something to read. I can actually get positively giddy in an art museum! If anything, I would like to see a return to a more classical style of learning, where an understanding of the arts was considered crucial, if for no other reason than to supply me with friends and co-workers who can understand what I’m talking about!

You say that astrology doesn’t hurt anyone, but I disagree. I’ve known a few people who take astrology seriously, so seriously that they will base their feelings of others on their “sign.” A person who believes that they can’t get allong with anyone who’s a “Cancer,” for instance, is certainly limiting their social interactions. I’ve known people who base major decisions, such as whether or not to take a job, or when to have a child, based on readings given to them by astologers.

Is that truely harmless? You may feel it is, but I don’t. By your statements, we should be accepting of psychics, homeopaths, faith healers,dowsers, and any other supplier of false hopes and promises. Just because something may not physically harm you, it doesn’t mean it’s harmless.

 Signature 

People have said that an infinite number of monkeys typing on an infinite number of keyboards would produce the works of Shakespeare, but the internet has shown this to be wrong.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 11 August 2006 04:53 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 26 ]  
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  765
Joined  2006-06-01

[quote author=“Celsus”]Me, a technocrat? Hardly! The two main obsessions of my life are art and literature. I never leave home without a sketchbook, camera, and something to read. I can actually get positively giddy in an art museum! If anything, I would like to see a return to a more classical style of learning, where an understanding of the arts was considered crucial, if for no other reason than to supply me with friends and co-workers who can understand what I’m talking about!

You say that astrology doesn’t hurt anyone, but I disagree. I’ve known a few people who take astrology seriously, so seriously that they will base their feelings of others on their “sign.” A person who believes that they can’t get allong with anyone who’s a “Cancer,” for instance, is certainly limiting their social interactions. I’ve known people who base major decisions, such as whether or not to take a job, or when to have a child, based on readings given to them by astologers.

Is that truely harmless? You may feel it is, but I don’t. By your statements, we should be accepting of psychics, homeopaths, faith healers,dowsers, and any other supplier of false hopes and promises. Just because something may not physically harm you, it doesn’t mean it’s harmless.

As I indicated in an earlier post…I have since given up the pursui of astrology…I have too much work and life is too stressful….I am an agnostic when it comes to astrology…I simply do not think about it anymore. Having said that I resent that you lump me into this pot of people who maintain that faith healing, psychics, et al. are valid fields of pursuit. I have never claimed that. I originally posted my SUBJECTIVE experience with astrology….and now at this point in time no longer have a place for it in my life. Wake up, people’s opinions change all the time, I am open to new ideas, thus did I change my mind…you have obviously missed what I intended to convey in the above posts…

 Signature 

Get with it. Millions of galaxies of hundreds of millions of stars, and a speck on one in a blink. That’s us, lost in space. The cop, you, me… Who notices?
-Vincent

Profile
 
 
Posted: 11 August 2006 05:34 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 27 ]  
Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  842
Joined  2006-02-19

[quote author=“stardusk”]As I indicated in an earlier post…I have since given up the pursui of astrology…I have too much work and life is too stressful….I am an agnostic when it comes to astrology…I simply do not think about it anymore. Having said that I resent that you lump me into this pot of people who maintain that faith healing, psychics, et al. are valid fields of pursuit. I have never claimed that. I originally posted my SUBJECTIVE experience with astrology….and now at this point in time no longer have a place for it in my life. Wake up, people’s opinions change all the time, I am open to new ideas, thus did I change my mind…you have obviously missed what I intended to convey in the above posts…

My above post, while it was in response to your last post, wasn’t entirely aimed at you. If I have missrepresented your claims, I am sorry, however, what I was doing was perhaps exagerating certain ideas sugested by both you and sanfu as to the claims of astrology. And I never claimed that you did believe in pseudo-science, but was trying to show that astrology should be lumped in there. Maybe I came across a little harshly, but it was entirely unintended.

Glad to hear that you’ve become agnostic on astrology. Now if Sanfu will only follow you :wink:

 Signature 

People have said that an infinite number of monkeys typing on an infinite number of keyboards would produce the works of Shakespeare, but the internet has shown this to be wrong.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 22 September 2006 07:33 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 28 ]  
Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  985
Joined  2005-12-16

Celsus, stardusk,

Many months ago on this forum I participated in a debate on astrology. My interest in the subject is due to my brother, a “working” astrologer in Poland, who had radio and TV appearances on the subject but who does not cast horoscopes for money. In fact, he is mostly interested in applying astrology to the history of mankind and the history of the ideas such as the idea of universalism originating in Rome, continuing in Christianity and now incarnated in the bodies of the European Union and United Nations.

The debate motivated me to explore the internet and find out more about the famous works of Michel Gauquelin to see where we are today in the “debate” astrology vs science. The history of the debate is fascinating in itself and demonstrates that dishonesty, falsification of data and other similar “tactics” are practiced fervently on both sides of the debate. You can explore the topic yourself but for your convenience here is the summary of the conclusions I reached.

The Mars effect is real and has been confirmed rather than debunked by numerous efforts undertaken by both sides of the debate. For astrologers, however, it is a Pyrrhus victory: all traditionally accepted methods used by astrology to cast personal horoscopes fell apart when statistics got applied to them. Interestingly, the Mars (or Venus, Jupiter, Mrcury) effect is demonstrated on the very small fragment of the population: the best athletes, the best writers, the best politicians - crop of the crop only. It doesn’t apply to the rest of us, average Joes.

On the other hand I am not prepared to discard the astrology for my personal use, or to interpet the history the way my brother presented to me. Why? Well, the following site provides an explanation I like:
http://www.jaguarmoon.org/

By the way, upon learning that Stephen Hawking is the personal enemy #2 of astrology (#1 being the British Royal astronomer) I only confirmed my suspicions that his Big Bang theory and all the nois around it smack a little of pseudo-science.

Yours truely,

Thomas Orr
Never Afraid of Being Controversial

Profile
 
 
Posted: 22 September 2006 07:50 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 29 ]  
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  765
Joined  2006-06-01

[quote author=“Thomas Orr”]Celsus, stardusk,

Many months ago on this forum I participated in a debate on astrology. My interest in the subject is due to my brother, a “working” astrologer in Poland, who had radio and TV appearances on the subject but who does not cast horoscopes for money. In fact, he is mostly interested in applying astrology to the history of mankind and the history of the ideas such as the idea of universalism originating in Rome, continuing in Christianity and now incarnated in the bodies of the European Union and United Nations.

The debate motivated me to explore the internet and find out more about the famous works of Michel Gauquelin to see where we are today in the “debate” astrology vs science. The history of the debate is fascinating in itself and demonstrates that dishonesty, falsification of data and other similar “tactics” are practiced fervently on both sides of the debate. You can explore the topic yourself but for your convenience here is the summary of the conclusions I reached.

The Mars effect is real and has been confirmed rather than debunked by numerous efforts undertaken by both sides of the debate. For astrologers, however, it is a Pyrrhus victory: all traditionally accepted methods used by astrology to cast personal horoscopes fell apart when statistics got applied to them. Interestingly, the Mars (or Venus, Jupiter, Mrcury) effect is demonstrated on the very small fragment of the population: the best athletes, the best writers, the best politicians - crop of the crop only. It doesn’t apply to the rest of us, average Joes.

On the other hand I am not prepared to discard the astrology for my personal use, or to interpet the history the way my brother presented to me. Why? Well, the following site provides an explanation I like:
http://www.jaguarmoon.org/

By the way, upon learning that Stephen Hawking is the personal enemy #2 of astrology (#1 being the British Royal astronomer) I only confirmed my suspicions that his Big Bang theory and all the nois around it smack a little of pseudo-science.

Yours truely,

Thomas Orr
Never Afraid of Being Controversial

Yes well I am agnostic on the subject…I would need hard evidence that astrology works. Until that is forthcoming I cannot stake anything of importance on astrology. In my New Age days I voluntarily threw out hundreds of Euros on astrological consulations. I will never do that again. Give me hard evidence and I will resubscribe. Case in Point, my chart( condensed version), which I will go through briefly here:
Sun in Pisces, Moon in Cancer

This astrological combination is a very harmonious one. Much about you is fluid and receptive. Your emotional nature is highly developed, and your sympathies extend to the universe at large. However, you are most at peace with yourself in your own home, where your sensitivity of heart and mind are best expressed. There is always a danger in your life of withdrawing into a life of introspection and suspended activity. One who is as receptive as you should choose your environment carefully and with discrimination. You must always be aware of the dangers in being too receptive to the thoughts and feelings of others. You may meet with psychic experiences, as you can transcend the confines of self and take on the form of another. By using your will to screen out detrimental influences, your sensitive nature will not be exploited or open to the entrance of harmful forces. This is the key to a happier existence.

Subjectively speaking I can readily identity with this description as I did for many years when I was an astrophile. However it begs the question that virtually anyone could probably identify with the description above. I reckon that 90% of the people on the forum would see themselves in that description and I reckon that their charts are not nearly as waterlogged as mine (a majority of planets, rising sign and houses in either Cancer, Scorpio or Pisces). But you be the judge. Do you see yourself in the description above?

Ascendant in Cancer, Moon in the Twelfth House

At the time of your birth the zodiacal sign of Cancer was ascending in the horizon. Its ruler the Moon is located in the twelfth house.

Cancer is the fourth sign of the zodiacal belt and its natives are under the rulership of the Moon. Your life will be full of changes and intermittent periods of activity and relaxation. Your vulnerability to external influences makes you subconsciously imitate the manners and ways of those with whom you relate.

In many instances, circumstances will require that you play the role of worldliness and sophistication but under the mask there will exist a very sensitive human being who is easily offended, and also very perceptive of the more subtle influences and impressions, as well as of psychic vibrations.

Cancer gives the tendency to completely retreat when hurt or frightened of a situation. This happens to you often because you tend to interfere in the affairs of others when you are not needed or wanted. Throughout your life, your responses will be emotional rather than rational.

Cancer also gives a tendency for life to be centered in the home and family; your attachment to your private and domestic habits is so strong that without them you could hardly endure. In love matters, you are emotional and gentle.

For the difficult aspects we must warn you against becoming overly preoccupied with trivial details of a psychological nature. Another tendency that you have is to flatter and to criticize carelessly, without regard for the other person’s feelings.

Destiny may place you in environments where your natural traits can be best expressed. You will be happier when allowed to be occupied with searching for a person or a thing, though not necessarily in important work.

Your life possesses an aura of peculiar activities and studies realized in out-of-the-way places.

You will either live secretively or possess important secrets of another person. Your mind is greatly influenced by the sea of subconsciousness and there is an inborn love for occultism, mystery, and romantic adventures. On the other side, this position may give you a certain lack of stability and firmness in dealing with others.

Once again SUBJECTIVE. But yes is that me? sure, it is accurate. But I think it a coincidence. Sure I like romance, mystery and off the wall stuff but millions of others who have completely opposing charts do as well. Once again you be the judge, is that you?
Saturn in the Second House

Saturn is found in the second house at the time of your birth. This is not a very favorable astrological circumstance for the general course of financial matters in your life.

It might be difficult to maintain a relatively fair position because of financial losses. You might also take financial matters too serious, and burden yourself with worries about them.

Your arduous and dedicated work might produce little for you financially, but it does help to strengthen your self-worth and your appreciation of other values. Therefore, do not be discouraged. Saturn often grants a fairly normal financial status at an older age if one exerts oneself in this direction.

If you make an effort to acquire greater enthusiasm in business, coupled with more liberality, life will change by the same degree.

Mate, Saturn in the 2nd house applies to millions of people out there and they do not have a Saturn in Leo (in its detriment since Leo is the opposition sing of Auarius, which is a co-ruler of Saturn). Who doesn’t have money problems? See yourself here?

Sun in the Eighth House

The Sun was found in your eighth house at the time of birth. This inclines your individuality to be oriented, in one way or another, to the deeper sides of life. Your sexual feelings are long-lasting, intense, and vital. Your inner self seems attracted to unusual matters related to the termination of life-death and its mysteries.

Traditional astrology indicates that near your middle age a crisis will rear its head in your life. If this period is successfully spanned you can expect a prolonged life with a gradual heightening vitality.

Financially, there are definite chances for money inherited from either your partner or from another relative.

 

Venus in the Eighth House

Venus was found in your eighth house at the time of birth. This is a favorable position regarding the possibilities of financial gain through businesses owned by your partner or by associates.

Psychologically, you are going to find many harmonious conditions in your sexual relationships.

If your inner growth is such that your vital energies are oriented toward spiritual rather than material pleasures, then you will arrive at gratification and happiness through inquiry into the mysteries of life and death.

You should have some excellent opportunities for progress in your financial and social condition during your middle age or when you finally stabilize your life through marriage or any other type of close relationship.

 

Moon in the Twelfth House

The Moon was in your twelfth house at the time of birth. Secretly, you enjoy a love of romance and adventure that lends a bit of excitement to your daydreaming.

It is possible that the little popularity that you may enjoy in this life will be from some very reserved and secretive circles where your merits are recognized.

It can be expected that you will be successful in positions that call for solitude or remote locations.

It goes on and on. I would argue that this applies to millions of people out there who are not waterlogged or have their Venus and Mars in the 8th house. See what I am getting at.

Moon Conjunct Ascendant

The Moon conjunct the Ascendant shows that you have some emotional hangups. You want close, intimate contacts with others, but you tend to keep people at arm’s length because you are afraid you will become obligated to them.

You are a mass of contradictions - making demands on people but complaining when they do the same to you; expecting others to make overtures to you and withdrawing when they do. Although you are highly imaginative, you react to stimulating people in a generally negative and critical way.

On the surface you are independent, but you yearn for a quieter role in which you can enjoy the comfort of knowing that someone really cares for you. This can only happen when you lower your defensive barriers and learn to compromise by meeting people halfway.

 

Mars Conjunct Ascendant

Mars conjunct the Ascendant gives you an inexhaustible supply of energy. You are constantly in motion, but sometimes it is motion without meaning. Lacking self-discipline, you take daring and unnecessary risks when challenged. You want most of all for people to recognize your superiority.

The image you present hides a persistent inferiority complex. You probably win your arguments by making the most noise and wearing out your opponents with unceasing harassment. But you do not need to waste energy this way, because you have enormous creative ability that merely needs to be harnessed to an objective. When you do this, no one can succeed as easily as you can, and with energy to spare.

On the positive side, you are independent and self-confident. You know how to mobilize people and their resources to achieve your objectives.

Etc. Etc., Etc., Etc….

 

Astrological Data used for Short Report - Personal Portraitfor Dan (male)
born on 19 Feb 1978 local time 2:47 pm
in New York, NY (US) U.T. 19:47
74w00, 40n43 sid. time 00:48:36

Planetary positionsplanet sign degree motion
Sun Pisces 0°48’58 in house 8 direct
Moon Cancer 24°16’52 in house 12 direct
Mercury Aquarius 24°56’18 in house 8 direct
Venus Pisces 7°42’12 in house 8 direct
Mars Cancer 22°59’20 in house 12 retrograde
Jupiter Gemini 26°04’24 end of house 11 stationary (D)
Saturn Leo 26°50’12 in house 2 retrograde
Uranus Scorpio 16°24’26 in house 4 stationary (R)
Neptune Sagittarius 18°05’11 in house 5 direct
Pluto Libra 16°24’38 in house 4 retrograde
True Node Libra 6°25’39 in house 3 retrograde
Planets at the end of a house are interpreted in the next house.

House positions (Placidus)Ascendant Cancer 28°42’42
2nd House Leo 18°44’30
3rd House Virgo 12°45’30
Imum Coeli Libra 13°12’27
5th House Scorpio 19°55’04
6th House Sagittarius 27°00’07
Descendant Capricorn 28°42’42
8th House Aquarius 18°44’30
9th House Pisces 12°45’30
Medium Coeli Aries 13°12’27
11th House Taurus 19°55’04
12th House Gemini 27°00’07

Major aspectsSun Conjunction Mercury 5°53
Sun Conjunction Venus 6°53
Sun Trine Jupiter 4°45
Sun Opposition Saturn 3°59
Sun Quincunx Ascendant 2°06
Moon Quincunx Mercury 0°39
Moon Conjunction Mars 1°18
Moon Trine Uranus 7°52
Moon Square Pluto 7°52
Moon Conjunction Ascendant 4°26
Mercury Quincunx Mars 1°57
Mercury Trine Jupiter 1°08
Mercury Opposition Saturn 1°54
Mars Conjunction Ascendant 5°43
Jupiter Sextile Saturn 0°46
Neptune Sextile Pluto 1°41
Numbers indicate orb (deviation from the exact aspect angle).

Take this chart and show it to a thousand people and I reckon that well over half of them will find themselves in it. Statistically this amounts to absolutely zero evidence. I stand on my scepticism and my agnosticism towards astrology…by the way, Pluto is no longer a planet. Astrology is just a substitute for faith, people looking for a source of understanding and hope, which unfortunately not to be found there…best SD

 Signature 

Get with it. Millions of galaxies of hundreds of millions of stars, and a speck on one in a blink. That’s us, lost in space. The cop, you, me… Who notices?
-Vincent

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 September 2006 12:40 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 30 ]  
Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  985
Joined  2005-12-16

Stardusk,

Looks like you didn’t bother to read my previous post in full. I mentioned that Gauquelin’s studies proved that tradiotional astrology desn’t work; more specifically, astrological hypothesis based on astrological Sun signs, angles and houses always fails the test of statistics.

What Gauquelin demonstrated, however, is very interesting. He compiled a list of few thousand “best” athletes and studied how Mars is situated in the charts of those athletes with respect to ascendant and the culminating point (the highest point over the horizon). He demonstrated that in the population of “best” athletes the percentage of those whose Mars is in proximity of those special points is significantly higher than in control poulation of “average” people.

Interestingly, in the hot debate that followed nobody questioned the numerical results. Gauquelin was accused of not being objective in determining who is an “outstanding” athlete and number of similar “cheats”. Indeed, Gauquelin was guilty of confusing experiment with the process of formulating the hypothesis. However, in the end he was proven right.

It is also very interesting to note that the final definition of an “outstanding” athlete everybody accepted in the end was one based on how often the name of the athlte is quoted in sports related literature.

To me the most interesting aspect of the entire debate was the fact that Gauquelin was a statistician and astrologer who at some point started to doubt astrology and devoted his entire adult life to testing astrological premises. He was not sure about what test were going to say for a long time, which stands in sharp contrast not only to his astrological colleages ignorant in statistics but also in contrast to “scientists” who claimed that science disproves astrology but never had it in themselves to prove their statement with honest experiment.

Thomas Orr

Profile
 
 
   
2 of 2
2
 
RSS 2.0     Atom Feed