Do You Think Astrology Works?

[+ouija ouija]

11 hours ago, Likely Guy said:

 no one has taken you up on. 

He's done a reading for me.

[JKS Astrology]

On 9/25/2016 at 9:44 PM, Nuclear Wessel said:

Can you explain to me as to how astrology is similar to forecasting the weather? You did mention that they both rely on observations and patterns... can you elaborate? What observations and patterns is astrology based on?

Hello,

Yes you are right, I did say that.  I will try my best to explain this.

I remember an article I read in the paper last year.  It is about the most popular month for births of new born babies in England and Wales.  This is the link

Apparently they measured a higher average of births during late September / early October.  I do not think anyone knows why, its just an observation someone has made, based on the average number of births between 1995 - 2014. 

All astrology does is try to link the position of the Sun, Moon and planets to events which happen on Earth.  

In astrology terms this would mean there are more births of new born babies (in England and Wales) when the Sun is in the zodiac sign Libra.

Astrology has been around for about 5000 years.  Many observations like this have been made, they are then recorded.  Astrology interpretations are based on statistical data.

I know people will say this data would not have been collected scientifically.  And yes your probably right.  Astrology has been inherited by our ancestors, it is their observations.  Modern astrologers have also contributed towards this data too.    

Astrologers do not have access to ultra high tech computers which could try and analyse links between planetary positions and other events on Earth (like the birth article).   

Zodiac sign descriptions are also based on observations.  For example our ancestors would link the position of the Sun, Moon and planets to certain birth months.  This is why we have these generic descriptions of each zodiac sign.  Then astrologers started to link the position of the Moon and planets to events in a similar way.
 

If you unaware of what an zodiac sign is, here is a short explanation:

If the Sun is in Libra:  This means that the Sun was in the constellation Libra (a particular arrangement of stars in the sky) as seen from Earth.  The zodiac is the path the Sun travels in the sky, as seen from Earth.  

Astrology has also evolved over the years into many different branches.  

There is western astrology (which I study), based on the solar year.

There is Vedic astrology which is used in India, and very different to western astrology.  There system is based on the position of the stars.  This means there is a shift in the zodiac using there system, So an Aries may be classed as a Pisces for example.

There are also many other types of astrology.

I hate the fact there are many different astrology systems.  The problem is every astrologer will believe there system is right.  Each astrologer has there own preferred method.  Then their is the argument about the Earths recession.

I have tried all the other astrology systems.  I simply studied the astrology birth chartr of many friends and family using different system, then come to the conclusion that the western astrology descriptions match the most.  I am not saying this is the correct one, it is what seems to work for me.

Let me describe what I mean about the weather forecasts, and why astrology is similar.

People many years ago would not have thought weather prediction to be possible to the accuracy we have now.  We have come to realize there is some kind of order within the weather system.  Patterns in weather systems are now easier to analyse due to advances in computer technology.   

A popular way of viewing astrology is going by the famous astrological saying ‘as above, so below’.  This saying implies that the wider macrocosmic universe (outside Earth) is reflected in the smaller microcosmic world (being life on Earth).  Basically this theory assumes a clockwork universe, that everything is linked together.  Any changes in the universe (such as the positions of celestial bodies) can influence life on Earth.    

Then there is astrology prediction.  

Can we control our own luck? Yes I believe you can with enough knowledge.  The outcome of a dice roll is determined by the dice starting position, speed, rotation and trajectory.  If we knew all of these factors then our ‘luck’ of predicting the outcome would be increased.  We would know that the dice is more likely to land on a particular number.  Therefore ask yourself, is a dice roll completely random?

I have already said astrology tries to link the positions of the Sun, Moon and planets to events.  Lets assume there was a correlation, then would this not improve the chances of a prediction, just like that dice roll?

I believe some people gamble because they see a predictable pattern in an event such as roulette, horse racing and fruit machines.  In fact humans in general are rather good at noticing patterns, mathematics could not exist without it! Patterns can even be found in some random number generators using special computer software.  Making numbers truly random using computers is very challenging, after all a computer just follows instructions.  Randomness is the opposite to following instructions.

Here is another example of how life outside our planet directly effects life on earth:

Take the life of a plant seed.  The main events in a seeds life is affected by the sun.  In fact you could predict the life of a seed only by the suns celestial position.  To get more information about a seeds life we could also take into account how the suns position will affect the weather where the seed is.  This pattern is easy to notice due to the simplicity of a plants life.

As an astrologer I believe this concept is true for human life.  I believe patterns made by the sun, moon and planets are linked with certain human life events and traits.  Although the universe appears chaotic, there is a beautiful order to it defined by mathematical equations.  

 

I hope this helps..

 

 

 

Edited October 29, 2016 by Daughter of the Nine Moons
Removed commercial link

[+ouija ouija]

On ‎23‎/‎09‎/‎2016 at 2:03 PM, Clair said:

Hi Ouija, there are many myths attached to the moon and its effect on our planet, including animals and ourselves, but as you state, it does have some impact. You might find the following article interesting as it examines this very subject, and separates the myths from the real stuff:

http://www.livescience.com/7899-moon-myths-truth-lunar-effects.html

I'm still not convinced that the planets shape our individual personalities, and believe that the so-called accuracy of astrology has more to do with subjective validation. Are you familiar with Michel Gauquelin? He was a well known French psychologist, statistician and 'neo-atrologist' who once offered free horoscopes in exchange for feedback on their accuracy. Instead of giving each of the participants an individual analysis, however, he sent them copies of the exact same horoscope. Thousands participated and 94% replied that his reading was very accurate and insightful.

You might find Gauquelin interesting, however as he was very much interested in the correlations between the position of certain planets at birth, Although he ultimately rejected common natal astrology, he went on to develop a type of neo-astrology which included, among other hings, the Mars-effect. Still more pseudoscience in my opinion, but interesting nonetheless.The following is a brief information article on him, but there's more detailed info out there if you're interested.

http://wiki.astro.com/astrowiki/en/Michel_Gauquelin

Sorry to take so long to reply. The first link: a lot of the Moon 'myths' seem to be directly linked to the extra light reflected at the time of the full Moon. Before electricity was discovered and harnessed,  the light of the moon would be very important to both humans and animals. Still is in the depths of the countryside, I guess. In city centres the exact opposite is true to the point where I bet people are largely unaware of the Moon's effect.

The second link: Wikipedia states: 'Michel Gauquelin was born 13.11.1928 at 22.15 in Paris, and died there 20.5.1991.
His interest in astrology began quite early. In schooldays his chart readings were so successful that his schoolmates called him Nostradamus'! What a shame he didn't stick with it and develop it further. Astrology will never be anything close to an exact science because it is dealing with individual lives.

Thanks for posting

[Claire.]

16 minutes ago, ouija ouija said:

The second link: Wikipedia states: 'Michel Gauquelin was born 13.11.1928 at 22.15 in Paris, and died there 20.5.1991.
His interest in astrology began quite early. In schooldays his chart readings were so successful that his schoolmates called him Nostradamus'! What a shame he didn't stick with it and develop it further. Astrology will never be anything close to an exact science because it is dealing with individual lives.

The reason he stopped is because he ended up rejecting natal astrology and realized that subjective validation was the reason people thought his readings were so accurate. He then went on to become more of a neo-astrologer, known more today for the Mars Effect where he purported a "statistical correlation between athletic eminence and the position of the planet Mars relative to the horizon at time and place of birth."

Source: Wikipedia

 

 

Edited September 26, 2016 by Clair
Added source link.

[toast]

6 hours ago, Jamie Slack said:

Apparently they measured a higher average of births during late September / early October.  I do not think anyone knows why, its just an observation someone has made, based on the average number of births between 1995 - 2014. All astrology does is try to link the position of the Sun, Moon and planets to events which happen on Earth.  

Holy Moly!!! This one takes the cake! Logic seems not to be an astrologers advanced skill. If the most babies are born September/early October, it must be investigated for what reason the most couples decide to take "action" in December/January. Such study would provide the real facts for the reasons but these facts are not linked to planetary constellations. To claim so, is very very stupid.

 

[Thorvir]

Do You Think Astrology Works?

No.  It does not work.

[Thorvir]

On 9/24/2016 at 3:43 AM, Jamie Slack said:

It surprises me that a bunch of people who hate anything that is scientifically unproven would join a forum dedicated to unexplained mysteries.

This site is dedicated to unexplained mysteries....astrology and readings and the closed-mined nature of such things are not unexplained mysteries, they're unproven hooey

On 9/24/2016 at 3:43 AM, Jamie Slack said:

What exactly are you here for?

To read about actual unexplained mysteries.

On 9/24/2016 at 3:43 AM, Jamie Slack said:

Not everything has to be 100% about science you know.

Yes, it actually does.

On 9/24/2016 at 3:43 AM, Jamie Slack said:

I have already given my theory of how astrology works (which you probably have not even read).  I am not saying my theory I right, its just my opinion. 

And you are most welcome to share that opinion.  Respect the opinions of others, even if they do disagree with you.

On 9/24/2016 at 3:43 AM, Jamie Slack said:

I do not think skeptics are out to get me.  I have already said I respect your opinions.  I like science myself, so can see your point of view.  Its a shame you cant see mine.

I had a poster do a reading once.  Failed hilariously.  Twice.  I'm not going to fall for that bit of crap again.

[psyche101]

2 hours ago, toast said:

Holy Moly!!! This one takes the cake! Logic seems not to be an astrologers advanced skill. If the most babies are born September/early October, it must be investigated for what reason the most couples decide to take "action" in December/January. Such study would provide the real facts for the reasons but these facts are not linked to planetary constellations. To claim so, is very very stupid.

Validity seems to be proportional to the defence of the notion

LINK - Did you recently hear that NASA changed the zodiac signs? Nope, we definitely didn’t…

But even according to the Babylonians’ own ancient stories, there were 13 constellations in the zodiac. So they picked one, Ophiuchus, to leave out. Even then, some of the chosen 12 didn’t fit neatly into their assigned slice of the pie and crossed over into the next one.

When the Babylonians first invented the 12 signs of zodiac, a birthday between about July 23 and August 22 meant being born under the constellation Leo. Now, 3,000 years later, the sky has shifted because Earth’s axis (North Pole) doesn’t point in quite the same direction.

The constellations are different sizes and shapes, so the sun spends different lengths of time lined up with each one. The line from Earth through the sun points to Virgo for 45 days, but it points to Scorpius for only 7 days.  To make a tidy match with their 12-month calendar, the Babylonians ignored the fact that the sun actually moves through 13 constellations, not 12. Then they assigned each of those 12 constellations equal amounts of time.

So, we didn’t change any zodiac signs…we just did the math.

[psyche101]

On 9/22/2016 at 9:41 PM, Jamie Slack said:

What would happen if we removed one planet from our solar system, for example the planet Mars.  I would guess this would disrupt the order of our solar system.  Everything in the solar system would be forced to change.  This is a good example that everything in our solar system is connected in-directly.  Our Earth is part of the system, so we must also be connected in some way.

It seemed to get along just fine when Dr Who did it, the real danger was where the planet went. Line up 27 of them just the right size and they automatically gravitationally rearrange themselves into a reality bomb that destroys every thing that ever was and will be.

When the Earth was towed back into place by the TARDIS, the solar system seemed just fine. So there you go, nothing happens, Even if you drag the Lost Moon of Poosh into the big picture. 

 

 

[Likely Guy]

Well, Jamie did mine and I have to admit that it was 90 to 95% accurate.

I dunno.

[psyche101]

31 minutes ago, Likely Guy said:

Well, Jamie did mine and I have to admit that it was 90 to 95% accurate.

I dunno.

Do you have any perhaps younger, or older relatives that are "offline" so to speak? Ones that have not ever touched the Internet? Perhaps they might make a better subject case? You did mention that much information about you exists in the forum, could that explain your reading, or do you feel it offered deeper insights than that could? 

[Likely Guy]

6 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

Do you have any perhaps younger, or older relatives that are "offline" so to speak? Ones that have not ever touched the Internet? Perhaps they might make a better subject case? You did mention that much information about you exists in the forum, could that explain your reading, or do you feel it offered deeper insights than that could? 

The reading he sent me was quite lengthy and detailed but I feel that only a couple of things could have been gleaned from reading my posts. As a general rule I almost never speak about myself and rarely post status updates.

I get what you're suggesting but I'm sure he didn't have the time to read enough of my posts to get that much of a sense of who I am.

[psyche101]

21 minutes ago, Likely Guy said:

The reading he sent me was quite lengthy and detailed but I feel that only a couple of things could have been gleaned from reading my posts. As a general rule I almost never speak about myself and rarely post status updates.

I just know how easy it can be to get detail of the net, some information can be easy to get, but surely not all. In the past, I have even seen posters turn up personal details about me on the forum, and I do not spend much time on the net other than here, or NEWS dot com. I do not really like people snooping through my details, but once they are out there, they are public domain. Not much I can do about it really.

Quote

I get what you're suggesting but I'm sure he didn't have the time to read enough of my posts to get that much of a sense of who I am.

Would you consider it rather personal and detailed, or general? Agin, I refer to Dawkins evaluation of a typical Horoscope in an average newspaper his picked up in a Coffee Shop. It just seemed nothing but stereotypes, which is how I find Horoscopes to read. Most of them, as per the experiment he did on passersby read very much like that to me. 

In enemies of reason, his analgy is as follows:

. "Amusingly, it falls afoul of our modern taboo against lazy stereotyping. How would we react if a newspaper published a daily column that read something like this: 'Germans - It is in your nature to be hardworking and methodical, which should serve you well at work today. In your personal relationships, especially this evening, you'll need to curb your natural tendency obey orders. Chinese - Inscrutability has many advantages but it may be your undoing today. British - Your stiff upper lip may serve you well in business dealings, but try to relax and let yourself go in your social life'. And so on through 12 national stereotypes. Of course, the astrology columns aren't as offensive as that, but we should ask ourselves exactly where the difference lies."

As I say, my sister used to write them for a local newspaper, and not for one second was she at all serious, or thought there was actually anything to it, she got paid, she did her job. which is what I suspect 95% of Astrology claims subsist of. But she sometimes would attempt to make them seem accurate, and I have no doubt many did feel that was the case. 

Thanks for the answers by the way. Rather decent of you. We skeptics just get ignored by these so called open minded people, who only find positive reactions worthy of discussion. Which says nothing for credibility either. There is a lot of smoke and mirrors involved with Astrology. And reasonable objection will be ignored, not rationalised. Imagine if science worked like that!

I do not suppose you watched the experiment Richard Dawkins tested passersby on the previous page? The entire clip runs for just over 9 minutes, but if you skip to 5:51 that is roughly where the experiment starts, so only a few minutes from there - if you are interested. I honestly thought Jamie would be and might be able to offer a rebuttal to those results, but it would seem not. They are just average people of the street.

Edited September 27, 2016 by psyche101

[+Noteverythingisaconspiracy]

If astrology was a real thing shouldn't all horoscopes be the same, since they use the same planets and stars ? 

 

 

[JKS Astrology]

6 hours ago, psyche101 said:

I just know how easy it can be to get detail of the net, some information can be easy to get, but surely not all. In the past, I have even seen posters turn up personal details about me on the forum, and I do not spend much time on the net other than here, or NEWS dot com. I do not really like people snooping through my details, but once they are out there, they are public domain. Not much I can do about it really.

Would you consider it rather personal and detailed, or general? Agin, I refer to Dawkins evaluation of a typical Horoscope in an average newspaper his picked up in a Coffee Shop. It just seemed nothing but stereotypes, which is how I find Horoscopes to read. Most of them, as per the experiment he did on passersby read very much like that to me. 

In enemies of reason, his analgy is as follows:

. "Amusingly, it falls afoul of our modern taboo against lazy stereotyping. How would we react if a newspaper published a daily column that read something like this: 'Germans - It is in your nature to be hardworking and methodical, which should serve you well at work today. In your personal relationships, especially this evening, you'll need to curb your natural tendency obey orders. Chinese - Inscrutability has many advantages but it may be your undoing today. British - Your stiff upper lip may serve you well in business dealings, but try to relax and let yourself go in your social life'. And so on through 12 national stereotypes. Of course, the astrology columns aren't as offensive as that, but we should ask ourselves exactly where the difference lies."

As I say, my sister used to write them for a local newspaper, and not for one second was she at all serious, or thought there was actually anything to it, she got paid, she did her job. which is what I suspect 95% of Astrology claims subsist of. But she sometimes would attempt to make them seem accurate, and I have no doubt many did feel that was the case. 

Thanks for the answers by the way. Rather decent of you. We skeptics just get ignored by these so called open minded people, who only find positive reactions worthy of discussion. Which says nothing for credibility either. There is a lot of smoke and mirrors involved with Astrology. And reasonable objection will be ignored, not rationalised. Imagine if science worked like that!

I do not suppose you watched the experiment Richard Dawkins tested passersby on the previous page? The entire clip runs for just over 9 minutes, but if you skip to 5:51 that is roughly where the experiment starts, so only a few minutes from there - if you are interested. I honestly thought Jamie would be and might be able to offer a rebuttal to those results, but it would seem not. They are just average people of the street.

Hello Psyche,

I have never ignored anyone on this forum.

I appreciate Likely guys honest feedback to the forum. 

I am not always available to respond straight away, sorry about this.

Some people have mentioned I may get personal details from this forum.  I promise that I never use information from the forum or any other personal details.  The only information I use is a persons date of birth, time of birth and location of birth.

Unfortunately I cant prove that I never look through the forum (if you know a method of proving it please tell me).  But I have just sent an explanation to Likely Guy of how his reading was done.  

I did not want to share this with the forum yet, as I have to talk about Likely Guys personal details.  And I know he may dislike this.

I have provided reasons to Likely Guy why I interpreted his personality the way I did.

 

   

Edited September 27, 2016 by Jamie Slack

[Claire.]

More on why the astrological calendar is now out of whack, for those of you who are interested:

 

[JKS Astrology]

5 hours ago, Noteverythingisaconspiracy said:

If astrology was a real thing shouldn't all horoscopes be the same, since they use the same planets and stars ? 

 

 

Hello,

This is a very good point.  Let me just clarify a few things.

I will tell you the difference between zodiac signs and personal astrology readings.

What are zodiac sign readings? 

Your zodiac sign is determined by what constellation the sun was in at the time of your birth.  For example if you were born on July 3rd, you zodiac (or star) sign would be Leo.

Of course, not everyone who is a Leo would be the same.  The interpretation for Leo is very generalized for a group of people, born within that period of time.  A typical horoscope (forecast type reading) in the newspaper is based on these types of readings.  Therefore these types of horoscope readings will also be generalized.   

However, personal astrology readings work slightly different.

What are personal astrology readings? 

Personal astrology readings are more unique to the person, because it takes into account the positions of the Moon and planets, as well as the Sun.

An astrologer uses your date of birth, time of birth and location of birth to construct something called a birth chart (as seen below).  The sun, moon and planets fall into certain zodiac signs and house within the chart.  

The astrologer would then interpret that chart for your reading (this is the method is used for Likely Guy).  Every person would have a unique configuration of planets within the chart, as the chart is constructed for different times, dates and locations.  It represents how the planets look in the sky, from the point of view of the person being born.  All planet celestial position are calculated using something called an ephemeris (which is basically a database of planetary positions for different times and dates) 

Because this chart is unique for every individual, it also means they receive a unique reading. 

[psyche101]

1 hour ago, Jamie Slack said:

Hello Psyche,

1 hour ago, Jamie Slack said:

I have never ignored anyone on this forum.

I appreciate Likely guys honest feedback to the forum. 

I am not always available to respond straight away, sorry about this.

That is fine, I may have been impatient, not often people who specialise in debated subject like this are willing to speak to a skeptic, which is a crying shame, as it is a good indicator of credibility I find. 

I appreciate Likely Guy's feedback too. I am interested in honest results and have no reason at all to question LG's integrity, I have discussed subjects with him before, we may not alway agree, but I can say he seems a rather fair an unbiased poster. 

I will endeavour to be more patient, skeptic are going to take the back of the line, I am fine with that, but did not actually expect you to respond so you're one up so far on my expectations. 

Or did the Lost Moon of Poosh finally tick you off? LOL

1 hour ago, Jamie Slack said:

Some people have mentioned I may get personal details from this forum.  I promise that I never use information from the forum or any other personal details.  The only information I use is a persons date of birth, time of birth and location of birth.

Unfortunately I cant prove that I never look through the forum (if you know a method of proving it please tell me).  But I have just sent an explanation to Likely Guy of how his reading was done.  

I did not want to share this with the forum yet, as I have to talk about Likely Guys personal details.  And I know he may dislike this.

Unfortunately, we remain at an impasse. As you say, there is no honest way to deduce that the no snooping rule is enforced, otherwise I would have asked for a personal demonstration myself, my birth details are on this site, but am more concerned I would be biased myself, and it would not be fair to ask you to "read" a biased person, as I would be looking for mundane solutions, however, if you are willing, we might try if you are game, I am sure my twisted existence has a few curve balls in it. 

1 hour ago, Jamie Slack said:

I have provided reasons to Likely Guy why I interpreted his personality the way I did.   

I will await further discussion from him, but anyway, thanks for acknowledging my views. 

[JKS Astrology]

4 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

That is fine, I may have been impatient, not often people who specialise in debated subject like this are willing to speak to a skeptic, which is a crying shame, as it is a good indicator of credibility I find. 

I appreciate Likely Guy's feedback too. I am interested in honest results and have no reason at all to question LG's integrity, I have discussed subjects with him before, we may not alway agree, but I can say he seems a rather fair an unbiased poster. 

I will endeavour to be more patient, skeptic are going to take the back of the line, I am fine with that, but did not actually expect you to respond so you're one up so far on my expectations. 

Or did the Lost Moon of Poosh finally tick you off? LOL

Unfortunately, we remain at an impasse. As you say, there is no honest way to deduce that the no snooping rule is enforced, otherwise I would have asked for a personal demonstration myself, my birth details are on this site, but am more concerned I would be biased myself, and it would not be fair to ask you to "read" a biased person, as I would be looking for mundane solutions, however, if you are willing, we might try if you are game, I am sure my twisted existence has a few curve balls in it. 

I will await further discussion from him, but anyway, thanks for acknowledging my views. 

Thank you.

I am interested in honest results too, which is why I appreciate the honest feedback.

And I will always give my honest opinion about what astrology can and cannot do.

And yes I am willing.  Just private message me.

 

 

 

 

  

 

[back to earth]

On 9/22/2016 at 6:38 PM, Jamie Slack said:

What Is Your Opinion On Astrology?

Hello Everyone.

My name is Jamie Slack.  I am new to this forum (joined today)

I have been interested in astrology for many years.  I wanted to know people's general opinion of astrology, positive or negative.  

 ( Hmmmm , quite function not working properly, so I will answer in blue  ) 

Hi Jamie, in general, I find astrology a fascinating subject, BUT , across the board,  through time and location,including 'archaeo-astrology / astronomy' .  I have little time though, for modern pop western tropical astrology ; ' newspaper astrology '  or phone in stuff.  I also have known astrologers to charge a lot of money for a computer program print out .

I dont use it at all for predictions but for insight onto the psyche .   I suppose I am more interested in  ' mythic /  psychological astrology  ( Liz Greene etc . )   But I have gone a bit further and have developed my own  method influenced by Kabbalah and modern psychology. It all just slotted in together nicely after I made a basic realization. 

On the other hand, there is the external side; how celestial movements mark weather , animal  migrations and plant cycles .  I live in Australia and here there is a wealth of such knowledge to be gleaned - the indigenous practicing such knowledge over 40, 000 years , to great advantage and success. 

Also I have noticed some similarities between Australian indigenous systems and western systems - that fascinates me  as there was no contact (that we know of ) between these two systems  - unless we postulate   a very early shared knowledge .   

Also, on this level, I have worked a bit extensively .  I worked for  BAA  ( Bio-dynamic Agricukture Australia )  for a while. BA utalizes about 6 different  moon cycles in agriculture, notes how  cow active  grazing / inactive cud chewing  works on a Moon cycle . Also any good fisherman knows the fish are active and feeding when the Moon is at IC ( 'underfoot ' )  , Even the fish in my tank in the lounge room do that , when Moon is at a 1/4 position you can dangle food in their face - nope !  At IC they will fight for food !   Even inside, in  atank at night or day - they 'know ' . 

... and heaps of other stuff .... that I cant write now ( be too long anyway

 

Although I have a passion for the mystical sides of life such as astrology, I also have an engineering background and a keen interest in science.  Despite my scientific background, I still appreciate astrology.  I even wrote an article on how I think Astrology Works.    

One of the biggest helps to me was not to try and nut out how it works via modern scientific 'mind set'. Astrology comes from another world and another mind set - pre 'scientific revolution'  .  I highly recommend.   .....   ( damn ! the book title has eluded me - it will come later  ) , that explains it , what the old  ideas were, what caused them to change and  what they changed onto . Its available free on line without registering and even just the first chapter will be worth reading , its about the development of modern science ..... someone .... Bloomfield  ?  ( I cant get anything on line today, but this site , all the links are out and I cant do a google search  - weird  - just tried again 'there is no internet connection' ???  but it works for this site , strange .... anyway ....  I hope to post that later . 

 

I believe people are fed too much inaccurate information related to astrology.

Oh .... quote is working again    !     ^ Indeed  !        Or even too much modern oversimplified pop new age generalized sun biased astrology , many people dont realize that modern pop astrology is a poor representation of what it used to be .  ' Mr Leo ' sure made it more popular, but .... urrrgggh  ! 

On 9/22/2016 at 6:38 PM, Jamie Slack said:

 I especially dislike readings in the newspaper, they talk a lot of rubbish.  These readings in particular give astrology a bad name.

Indeed !     But the parody ones are good laugh !   

On 9/22/2016 at 6:38 PM, Jamie Slack said:

Most people are unaware there is more to astrology.  People need to see astrology as a forecasting tool, just like the weather.  Both rely on observations, patterns and cycles.

You have heard my opinion on astrology.  Please share your thoughts about astrology, I would appreciate it.

 

I will try again later after I hopefully sort out this connectivity issue ,  I cant even get uo Wiki at the moment , but there is an entry that covers a bit of what I speak about, I think if you type in  Australian Aboriginal Astrology or Astronomy, you will get the page, in it is a reference to the similarities I mentioned with other systems .  Also  type that in and do a pic search ... have a look at the "big emu in the sky' , the night sky photography and the related rock carvings .

[back to earth]

On 9/22/2016 at 8:20 PM, Clair said:

Astrology is hooey in my opinion, ancient nonsense with no scientific basis to it whatsoever. It's long been establish that the planets are too far away to have any effect on us, yet give a person a horoscope and they will read whatever they want into it.

Another Taurus !          

[back to earth]

On 9/23/2016 at 3:24 PM, philly said:

Whatever I know about astrology is from the newspapers and they are pretty much crab.

yes ... but there are also 11 other signs to read about . 

 

... ba  dum  tissshhhh ! 

 

( did you like that one folks ?  ) 

On 9/23/2016 at 3:24 PM, philly said:

 

And so far I have not seen any detailed, spot on astrology readings. Thus, I am think it is really ancient nonsense created for fun.

Not at all , its modern nonsense , ancient astrology was entirely different . 

[back to earth]

On 9/23/2016 at 4:18 PM, psyche101 said:

Richard Dawkins did an interesting experiment with Astrology. He took random people of the street and took that days Capricorn Astrology from the local source - he then removed the title "Capricorn" and gave the information to every sign in the Zodiac.

The only Capricorn to participate said it did not relate to her life in any way. Yet many people of other zodiac signs who were told it was "their" sign, agreed that it did connect to the current state of their lives.  

So, Capricorn suited every sign, but Capricorn! 

My sister used to write horoscopes in a local newspaper, she used to use it to prompt family and friends, like her boyfriend at the time would often get the advice of "One who is close to you should be spoiled, make a special effort to get away this weekend with the special person in your life" or if she wanted me to call her, she would leave a message like "Family members are thinking of you, call them". 

 

I follow the evidence, the evidence does not support Astrology.

 

 I can see into your stars P101 ...... you will gain great advantage by continually sending random amounts of money to a certain  dingo - headed thinker

( paypal account number is in my profile ) 

[back to earth]

On 9/23/2016 at 7:09 PM, Jamie Slack said:

Here is a question to everyone:

Do you think crime can be predicted before it happens?

Most certainly ! I have done it myself and been proved right , but I did not use tarot or astrology or goat entrails , I used me noos and keen observation and instincts , to an extent ......  if I had been smarter  and just taken the guy out at the beginning, when I first had the ;indication' , he would not have been able to later   slash that poor bouncer across his face with a knife .  One look, thats what it took ... and the way he 'danced ' .  Nothing to do with astrology .... but I sure tagged his 'type '  !  

On 9/23/2016 at 7:09 PM, Jamie Slack said:

As computers become more advanced, we are able to collect more data.  It seems like we are approaching a big data revolution.   

Read the article below to get an idea of what I mean.  By collecting huge amounts of data, special software could 'in theory' forecast crime.  

https://www.scienceabc.com/innovation/future-of-policing-predicting-a-criminal-activity-before-it-happens.html

I believe astrology works in the same way.  Data of people's personality have been collected over a long time, in relation to the position of planets in the sky.

I get your 'very loose theory' about this , it is an idea, very generally, but doesnt really explain anything . 

If I were you, I would totally drop this modern explanation  thingo ,   it will do you in .  Astrology was developed from old school pre-scientific revolution .ideas.  .... you know what happened to people that tried to introduce astronomy into that world  !

The same applies now but in reverse  ... you may have noticed a member or two here of scientific inquisition ?      

[+ouija ouija]

14 minutes ago, back to earth said:

yes ... but there are also 11 other signs to read about . 

 

... ba  dum  tissshhhh ! 

 

( did you like that one folks ?  ) 

 

Personally, speaking as a Crab, I think you'll find the other eleven signs are pretty insignificant