33 replies to this topic

[markdohle]

eight bits, on 20 January 2013 - 10:35 AM, said:

That's nice that you think more highly of him now, it really is. And thank you for the like, too. But the title of your thread is "Michael Shermer debunked..."

Debunked? Shermer openly advocates an opinion, and in whatever of his I've read, he has always included a discussion of the evidence upon which his opinion rests. In this case, he helps somebody else, the producer of that show, to present facts contrary to Shermer's own opinion.

Shermer's not a bunco artist in the first place; how can he be debunked?

(I know, it's the Youtuber's title originally, but you aren't stuck with that when you link to it for discussion here. My issue is not "skeptic versus believer," but fairness to a specific person who has been called out by name.)

LOL point taken, but glad I posted it....Like I said, Michael showed real class in the video.

Peace
Mark

[Paracelse]

Rlyeh, on 20 January 2013 - 01:22 PM, said:

If you don't understand "When and where does astrology employ the scientific method?", you've got more problems than just speaking aussie.

This is why I said read and re- read the ancient Chinese astrology.  Their methods was observation and notes.  You might not like what they say because in your opinion the ancient couldn't be as truthful as you are, doesn't change the facts.

And I always found fascinating how certain people start to use insults when out of any forms of argument.

Edited by Paracelse, 21 January 2013 - 12:45 PM.

[Rlyeh]

Paracelse, on 21 January 2013 - 12:44 PM, said:

This is why I said read and re- read the ancient Chinese astrology.  Their methods was observation and notes.  You might not like what they say because in your opinion the ancient couldn't be as truthful as you are, doesn't change the facts.

Pay attention, I asked "When and where does astrology employ the scientific method?". Your response didn't answer the question, in fact your response had nothing to do with the scientific method.

Quote

And I always found fascinating how certain people start to use insults when out of any forms of argument.

You wouldn't have to worry about that, the only argument you've presented is your own ignorance.

Edited by Rlyeh, 21 January 2013 - 01:47 PM.

[Emma_Acid]

Simbi Laveau, on 19 January 2013 - 06:22 PM, said:

Astrology is actually a science ,which involves mathematics ,and planetary influences . It's not like someone holding your hand and saying,I see the letter L name...Larry ,Lenny ...blah blah .
It's very different in reality ,which peop le do not always realize ...
And I'm realizing i owe a thread a reading......oh my slothful ways....

Simply saying "it involves mathematics, its is actually science" doesn't make it so.

Show your working out. Show how the process works. Don't just tell me it does and advise me to read up on Chinese mysticism.

Detail how astrology works, and I'll believe you.

[Chrlzs]

Yes, ASTRONOMY is indeed science.  But astroLOGY is something that attempts to tie all that astronomy in to human behavior, predictions, etc.

Now, please show me the science for that.  I sometimes read the astrology fluff in papers and magazines, and I can get most of it to apply to me...  Who'da thort!

Wki says:

Quote

Scientific testing of astrology has been conducted, and no evidence has been found to support any of the premises or purported effects outlined in astrological traditions. There is no proposed mechanism of action by which the positions and motions of stars and planets could affect people and events on Earth that does not contradict well understood, basic aspects of biology and physics.

Ouch..
Now we all know Wiki isn't always right, so could the astrology supporters please provide some citations for scientific testing / evidence that does unequivocally support astrological effects,  AND then tell us what the proposed mechanism is, and how that mechanism could/should be tested?

[Simbi Laveau]

Emma_Acid, on 23 January 2013 - 01:04 PM, said:

Simply saying "it involves mathematics, its is actually science" doesn't make it so.

Show your working out. Show how the process works. Don't just tell me it does and advise me to read up on Chinese mysticism.

Detail how astrology works, and I'll believe you.

Listen,if you cannot see the difference between something that involves actual sciences,compared to a psychic reading,or automatic writing,or a tarot card reading ,I cannot explain it to you ,if you do not have the proper cognitive functions to get it .It's as simple as that .
You people PURPOSELY nit pick at everything I say,jjuusssttt to seem oh so cool and intelligent .
It's tiresome ,to me,and I assume most people with a brain  ,so forgive me if I just blow you all off ...
Thanks

[Emma_Acid]

Simbi Laveau, on 23 January 2013 - 01:49 PM, said:

Listen,if you cannot see the difference between something that involves actual sciences,compared to a psychic reading,or automatic writing,or a tarot card reading ,I cannot explain it to you ,if you do not have the proper cognitive functions to get it .It's as simple as that .
You people PURPOSELY nit pick at everything I say,jjuusssttt to seem oh so cool and intelligent .
It's tiresome ,to me,and I assume most people with a brain  ,so forgive me if I just blow you all off ...
Thanks

I understand science pretty well thank you. I asked you to explain to me how astrology works scientifically.

I'm not calling BS. I'm not having a go at anyone's lifestyle or beliefs. I'm not trying to be "cool and intelligent" (definitely not the former, the latter is up for debate).

I am a skeptic - if the evidence is there, I will concede that astrology is reality; just as I have with evolution, quantum physics - hell, any area of any science. I want to know that the universe is amazing, but this should always require evidence.

So, again: what is the scientific evidence for astrology, and through what process does it work?

[Frank Merton]

Simbi Laveau, on 23 January 2013 - 01:49 PM, said:

Listen,if you cannot see the difference between something that involves actual sciences,compared to a psychic reading,or automatic writing,or a tarot card reading ,I cannot explain it to you ,if you do not have the proper cognitive functions to get it .It's as simple as that .

Astrology is generally seen as a pseudo-science, not as an actual science.  Surely you know that.  For this reason you can't react like that.

[HerNibs]

Very direct answer by Phil Plait (awesome guy)

Quote

Summing Up

I had a lot to say here! So just to make it easier on you, here are the main points of this page:

• There is no force, known or unknown, that could possibly affect us here on Earth the way astrologers claim. Known forces weaken too fast, letting one source utterly dominate (the Moon for gravity, the Sun for electromagnetism). An unknown force would allow asteroids and extrasolar planets to totally overwhelm the nearby planets.
  
• Astrologers tend to rely on our ability to remember hits and forget misses. Even an accurate prediction may be simple chance.
  
• Study after study has shown that claims and predictions made by astrologers have no merit. They are indistinguishable from chance, which means astrologers cannot claim to have some ability to predict your life's path.
  
• There is harm, real harm, in astrology. It weakens further people's ability to rationally look at the world, an ability we need now more than ever.

Entire article is great.

Nibs

[Frank Merton]

I've often wondered why astrologers make their living doing horoscopes.  Why don't they make it from the stock market by casting the horoscopes of public companies?

Of course I'm sure there is a rationalization they provide for this.

[Odin11]

Simbi Laveau, on 23 January 2013 - 01:49 PM, said:

Listen,if you cannot see the difference between something that involves actual sciences,compared to a psychic reading,or automatic writing,or a tarot card reading ,I cannot explain it to you ,if you do not have the proper cognitive functions to get it .It's as simple as that .
You people PURPOSELY nit pick at everything I say,jjuusssttt to seem oh so cool and intelligent .
It's tiresome ,to me,and I assume most people with a brain  ,so forgive me if I just blow you all off ...
Thanks

Translation: I have no scientific evidence for astrology, so I must now play the victim, in hope that people will stop asking me for it.

Edited by Odin11, 23 January 2013 - 06:56 PM.

[Frank Merton]

The point was made that astrology does active harm.  While I think astrology is undemonstrated and almost certainly working the same way palmistry and other such things work (through the skill of the astrologer in "reading" the astrologee), I'm not sure it actually does harm, nor am I so sure that astrology has the entire burden of proving itself.

There are times when particularly gullible people can gain a lot from readings, of whatever sort, when a compassionate reader (and not one just out to bilk money) sees ways to help the person.  It can be a way to relieve guilt, grief, irrational fears, and so on.

It is for sure that were the entire world to come to practice astrology, that a lot of stupid things would happen, but, then, a lot of stupid things happen anyway.  It even appears that Hitler's belief in such things may have helped the allies defeat him, so astrology here ironically did a great deal of good.

As for burden of proof, the standard "scientific" line is, "I don't believe anything without good evidence."   We know, however, that the universe is bound to have true properties in it that we cannot prove.  Goedel's theorems show us that.  Now how to maintain balance.  Things for which there is no mechanism and where genuinely objective tests produce negative results can be safely disregarded, but not completely.  The mechanism may not be needed or may be unknown; the tests may or may not have been complete enough or maybe the tests were biased.

I think belief in astrology, then, is certainly incorrect, but disbelief also goes too far.  In this case my opinion is that it is all hooey, but I leave that as an opinion, not a belief.

[Emma_Acid]

So I'm assuming no-one can offer a scientific explanation for astrology then?

[ExpandMyMind]

Simbi Laveau, on 19 January 2013 - 06:22 PM, said:

Astrology is actually a science ,which involves mathematics ,and planetary influences . It's not like someone holding your hand and saying,I see the letter L name...Larry ,Lenny ...blah blah .
It's very different in reality ,which peop le do not always realize ...
And I'm realizing i owe a thread a reading......oh my slothful ways....

Astrology is a religion.

Just because astrology uses numbers in some way does not make it a science. The Bible uses numbers to estimate the ages of all the people combined, giving us a total number for the age of earth. Is that scientific? Or, rather, does that make it a science? The Three Wise Men also followed a star. Was that then scientific?

Astrology is the absurd notion that our lives are somehow predestined due to the day of the year we are born; that our moods and luck and misfortune are all somehow tied to the alignment of stars. Of course it is a religion and most definitely not a science.

Edited by ExpandMyMind, 24 January 2013 - 09:42 PM.

[Frank Merton]

ExpandMyMind, on 24 January 2013 - 09:36 PM, said:

Astrology is the absurd notion that our lives are somehow predestined due to the day of the year we are born; that our moods and luck and misfortune are all somehow tied to the alignment of stars.

Augustine of Hippo spends a huge amount of space attacking astrology, and I've always tended to recommend him on this subject.  One of his arguments was why is it that the astrologer makes such a big deal out of the date of birth?  Is not the date of conception the real beginning?  The reason, of course, is that the date of conception is hard to know, so using a more precise number helps with the illusion of precision.

And, when you think about it, that is really what all the charts and graphs are about -- an illusion that all is very precise -- but then the end product is always vague and subject to interpretation.  I have seen charts carry things out to umpteen decimal points, when in fact any engineer knows that a calculation is never more accurate than your least accurate input measurement.

I think a similar phenomenon occurs with stock market prestidigitators.  These people study sales patterns and parking lot fullness and supplier statistics and employment trends and all sorts of such things, and as a result develop considerable confidence as to how well or poorly a given company is doing, and end up with nothing better than throwing darts.  It is an illusion of confidence brought on by doing mathematics with lots of inputs in an essentially chaotic situation.