Astrology: What do you think?

Augmerson

I thought I'd put to all of ye and ask what are your thoughts and opinions on Astrology and Horoscopes?

I'll go first, and say that once upon a time, I did put a lot of faith or at least some faith in Astrology. I'd look out for my Horoscope in whatever paper I happened to be reading (and when I was much younger, on Aertel!). When I read my sign, which is Aries, I felt that the description was very accurate and then therefore there must be something to it.

Nowadays, I'm not so sure. Maybe at one stage in time, there was something to Astrology, but the stuff you read in newspapers? I doubt it very much now. There are so many variables, so many things that make you YOU like the experiences you've had in your life, how can planets orbiting thousands and thousands and thousands of miles away have any effect on you?

I found the video below while looking things up on the Interweb during the week and I think it's pretty good and worth a watch too.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwjvhnIg60o

KamiKazeKitten

I read them every now and then for the laugh, but it's a load of bollix tbh.
Horoscopes seem very general, imo people read whatever they like into them.

But if people wanna read them, more power to them!

General Relativity

It's all 100% arse gravy. The sun and arbitrarliy defined constellations have NO impact on your personaility.

Random facts;

Never ever, EVER get astrology and astronomy mixed up. If you do;


There are 14 constellations of the Zodiac not 12

The apperent position of the constellations have changed since this was made up 4000 years ago by some babaloyon astronomer. So your 'sign' should be one ahead of what it is.

People can't accept that a lot of what happened to us is random, so in order to feel some sense of control over events horoscopes and the like were though up by the human brain It make no sense what so every, but if it make you happy go for it.

Defiler Of The Coffin

I'd be a bit scared of astrologers tbh, wasn't Zodiac a serial killer?

krudler

lump it in with the same nonsense as homeopathy, mediums and fortune tellers, hogwash.

stop animal cruelty

I read mine everyday on in the irish independent newspaper, lm a Libra..seems accurate 80% of the time

krudler

stop animal cruelty wrote: »

I read mine everyday on in the irish independent newspaper, lm a Libra..seems accurate 80% of the time

for the lulz read another sign for a week, bet it'll be just as accurate, you can fit any random observation into your life if you try hard enough.

Lucyfur

Can everyone please remember to be respectful of others opinions - even if you don't agree.

Thanks

General Relativity

Lucyfur wrote: »

Can everyone please remember to be respectful of others opinions - even if you don't agree.

Thanks

This isn't an opinion. It's science.

Augmerson

General Relativity wrote: »

This isn't an opinion. It's science.

Honestly not backseat modding or anything but I did ask for peoples thoughts and opinions.

riveratom

Horoscopes are the newspaper version of cold reading.

You see what's relevant to you, because a lot of the time, it will be relevant to you - simply because they are broad enough to be relevant to anyone.

When it doesn't seem relevant, you shrug it off, with the result that you then over-identify with the pieces that do seem surprisingly applicable to you.

A complete illusion.

endacl

Augmerson wrote: »

Honestly not backseat modding or anything but I did ask for peoples thoughts and opinions.

I think its all absolutely true and live my life by it. Oh, wait. Horoscopes? No they're a load of bunk. This is a thought I've just had, an opinion I hold, and is verifiable.

pom pom snaz peeler

complete cack!

Mars Bar

I always think of Dara O' Briain's gig in Galway last summer when I read/hear Astrology.

The way to remember what's Astronomy and what's Astrology is that when you hear the "log" in Astrology, you'll think of a log of sh*t.

It works to be honest!

Morag

Yup what is published as horrorscopes in newspapers and magazines is hogwash.

As for real Astrology rather then the hogwash, I've done enough research into it and keeping track of events that I can't dismiss it. Won't order my life due to what planet is in which house and what the conjunctions are but it's an interesting thing to keep track of.

stop animal cruelty

krudler wrote: »

for the lulz read another sign for a week, bet it'll be just as accurate, you can fit any random observation into your life if you try hard enough.

already done that before and they were no where near what was going on.

meeeeh

I never believed in horoscopes and now I just find them annoying and don't even read them for fun. Astrology is complete nonsense, all of it.

rainbow kirby

Complete and utter tosh.

endacl

rainbow kirby wrote: »

Complete and utter tosh.

And total. And absolute. 24 carat tosh.

Sorcha16

There is a world of difference between a horoscope hashed out by a tea-making media intern and a natal chart compiled by generations of research.

Sceptical as I am, I know far too many people with traits exclusive to their star sign to discredit it entirely.

I know it's nice to think we're all far too scientifically advanced to believe in something so positively prehistoric but if Lunar gravity can effect tides so profoundly, it can also impact on the human body which is 60% water. Our brains are composed of 70% water and our lungs 90%, which indicates a strong likelihood that we too, are affected to some extent by planetary activity

xDramaxQueenx

They're fun to read but I don't think they have much bearing on real life. I don't see how at any given time, there are 12 specific points relating to every single person in the whole entire world. That said, I do find it interesting that each star sign has its own "traits"; and once I had a friend who was mad into astrological stuff and had this thing where you put in info such as where you were born, exact date and exact time and it gave a pretty detailed personality description, which was super interesting. I personally thinks its more entertainment than fact.

WesternNight

As far as I'm concerned, astrology is complete nonsense. People see what they want to see, so horoscopes will always seem accurate when you're trying to make them fit.

I do, however, recommend The Onion's weekly horoscopes.

endacl

Sorcha16 wrote: »

There is a world of difference between a horoscope hashed out by a tea-making media intern and a natal chart compiled by generations of research.

Sceptical as I am, I know far too many people with traits exclusive to their star sign to discredit it entirely.

I know it's nice to think we're all far too scientifically advanced to believe in something so positively prehistoric but if Lunar gravity can effect tides so profoundly, it can also impact on the human body which is 60% water. Our brains are composed of 70% water and our lungs 90%, which indicates a strong likelihood that we too, are affected to some extent by planetary activity

Standard pseudo plausible argument. Lunar gravity doesn't actually effect water on the scale we imagine it to. Gravity is the weakest of the four fundamental forces (see here if interested in no longer using pseudoscience to explain bunk: http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/forces/funfor.html).

The relative weakness of gravity can be easily demonstrated by using a magnet and a paper clip. Place the paper clip on a table. Hold the magnet over it. Marvel as the magnetic force you hold in your mortal hand overcomes the gravitational power of an entire planet! Amaze your friends! If all the water in all the human bodies on earth, in fact all of the water in every living creature on earth, were combined into a single mass, then lunar gravity might have a negligible effect. But there'd be nobody around to measure it. Imagine, if you will, a lake. A large lake. Lake Superior for example (containing more water than all the water contained in every living creature on earth). Tidal effect by the moon's gravity? Zero. Effect of the moon's gravity on the water contained in your cells. Zero. Tomatoes are 99% water. Effect of the moon's gravity on a tomato? A really big one? Zero.

Now, if we consider the Solar System to extend to the heliosphere, or the limit of the Sun's influence, we're still nowhere near the next nearest star, let alone those stars deemed to affect our lives, depending on when we were born. And that's ignoring the fact that the zodiac has shifted since the well-meaning primitives who came up with the system, well.... came up with the system. They did their best with the knowledge available, bless their cotton socks. Even within the solar system, 99% of the mass is tied up in the Sun. A good proportion of the rest lies with Jupiter. Gravity being a coefficient of mass, we're pretty well screened from the negligible gravity of the moon, let alone any constellation you care to consider.

Now to add insult to injury.... The moon doesn't even treat you as an individual. Neither knows nor cares that you (nor I for that matter) exist. In physical terms, the moon (and the sun for that matter) treats the earth and everything on it as a single mass as far as gravity is concerned.

Given all this, how come those enlightened ancients didn't come up with a system codifying the effect of Jupiter's Magnetic field (incidentally, the largest structure in the solar system) on our lives and future prospects, depending on an arbitrary range of dates? They used dots in the sky, and a lot of imaginative polyfilla instead.

The moon's gravity has no effect on your brain, love live or holiday plans. None at all.

Would you like me to shoot your argument down some more? I'm here all week...

MrGeneric

Sorcha16 wrote: »

There is a world of difference between a horoscope hashed out by a tea-making media intern and a natal chart compiled by generations of research.

There is no credible research supporting Astrology. It has been debunked for centuries. You may as well believe in Alchemy or Humorism. Where is this research you claim exists?

Sceptical as I am, I know far too many people with traits exclusive to their star sign to discredit it entirely.

You claim to be sceptical, but haven't displayed anything but a willingness to believe unsupported claims. There's a whole section of the Wikipedia page on Astrology detailing why it's entirely unscientific. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astrology#Scientific_appraisal

I know it's nice to think we're all far too scientifically advanced to believe in something so positively prehistoric but if Lunar gravity can effect tides so profoundly, it can also impact on the human body which is 60% water. Our brains are composed of 70% water and our lungs 90%, which indicates a strong likelihood that we too, are affected to some extent by planetary activity

endacl already tackled this nonsense.

endacl

Sharrow wrote: »

Yup what is published as horrorscopes in newspapers and magazines is hogwash.

As for real Astrology rather then the hogwash, I've done enough research into it and keeping track of events that I can't dismiss it. Won't order my life due to what planet is in which house and what the conjunctions are but it's an interesting thing to keep track of.

Why not Cloudology? You could keep track of clouds?

Wouldn't make a blind bit more sense than astrology, but you'd get plenty of fresh air...

Havermeyer

Sharrow wrote: »

Yup what is published as horrorscopes in newspapers and magazines is hogwash.

As for real Astrology rather then the hogwash, I've done enough research into it and keeping track of events that I can't dismiss it. Won't order my life due to what planet is in which house and what the conjunctions are but it's an interesting thing to keep track of.

So you selectively choose which ones to believe in, and which ones not to? Why don't you believe the readings in the paper?

Personally, I believe it all to be BS - and have absolutely no doubts about that.

I'm just wondering what you'd consider to be real astrology, and what this 'research', you've done, is?

Das Kitty

No, I don't believe in astrology. I can't see the real harm in it though, I'd say very few people order their lives in accordance with their horoscope, and those that do would find something else to follow if they didn't have astrology.

I used to write the 'horoscopes' for the university newspaper.

Capricorn: This week you will realise that you lost something down the back of the sofa in the house you lived in when you were a fresher. You will mourn for a day and then go out on Thursday night. You won't get the shift.

Saggitarius: Yes, it's supposed to look like that. I know!

...

I also used to do a fakey "Diary of a commerce student," I wasn't a commerce student myself but I just put all the cliches in to the nth degree so it would be an obvious piss take. Some people still believed it was real...

Sorcha16

endacl wrote: »

Standard pseudo plausible argument.
Now to add insult to injury.... The moon doesn't even treat you as an individual. Neither knows nor cares that you (nor I for that matter) exist.
The moon's gravity has no effect on your brain, love live or holiday plans. None at all.
Would you like me to shoot your argument down some more? I'm here all week...

Imagine, the moon not caring that even you exist -who'd have thunk it? And no shooting down necessary thank you, I don't plan on engaging with so much ego-driven arrogance for too much longer but I appreciate the offer!

Why are you so aggressive? And as for the 'standard pseudo plausible argument' remark -according to whom, you?

Also, find where I mentioned anything about the moon treating anyone as an individual or it affecting 'love live or holiday plans'? Seriously, where are you taking this from?

Allow me to enlighten you with regard to what I actually wrote which was: a likelihood that we are affected to some extent so please stick to what I have actually said as opposed to pulling rubbish out of the sky to support your own aggressive agenda.

MrGeneric wrote: »

endacl already tackled this nonsense.

So Lunar gravity doesn't affect tides and our bodies aren't composed of circa 70% water?

Also, taken from the US Department of Justice Reference Service:

"IT IS ACCURATELY INDICATED THAT THE REPRESSION OF THE MOON'S GRAVITATIONAL INFLUENCE BRINGS ABOUT SOCIAL TENSION, DISHARMONY, AND BIZARRE RESULTS. EMPIRICAL OBSERVATIONS, RESEARCH, AND A SYNTHESIS OF FINDINGS IN PHYSICS, ASTRONOMY, BIOLOGY, AND PSYCHOLOGY MAY BE APPLIED TO A THEORY OF BIOLOGICAL TIDES. BY THIS THEORY, THE FORCE OF GRAVITY CAN BE SHOWN TO INTERACT WITH THE FORCES OF HUMAN EVOLUTION AND BEHAVIOR. GRAVITY DIRECTLY INFLUENCES THE HUMAN NERVOUS SYSTEM"

https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/Publications/abstract.aspx?ID=63700

--Kaiser--

For those who do believe in this bilge, I give you the Forer effect

Ickle Magoo

I find the idea of peddling that a 12th of the worlds population, regardless of socio-economic status, geographical location, gender or sexual orientation are living the same life/experiencing the same life events absolutely unbelievable - if not completely ridiculous.

Malari

Sorcha16 wrote: »

Allow me to enlighten you with regard to what I actually wrote which was: a likelihood that we are affected to some extent so please stick to what I have actually said as opposed to pulling rubbish out of the sky to support your own aggressive agenda.

So Lunar gravity doesn't affect tides and our bodies aren't composed of circa 70% water?

Lunar gravity does affect tides because of the relative size of a body of water (ocean) but not human bodies because the amount of water in each individual is too tiny to be significant. There's no likelihood because of a physical law. Ever wonder why you don't see tides in swimming pools? Same reason there's no affect of the moon on humans.

Sorcha16 wrote: »

Also, taken from the US Department of Justice Reference Service:

"IT IS ACCURATELY INDICATED THAT THE REPRESSION OF THE MOON'S GRAVITATIONAL INFLUENCE BRINGS ABOUT SOCIAL TENSION, DISHARMONY, AND BIZARRE RESULTS. EMPIRICAL OBSERVATIONS, RESEARCH, AND A SYNTHESIS OF FINDINGS IN PHYSICS, ASTRONOMY, BIOLOGY, AND PSYCHOLOGY MAY BE APPLIED TO A THEORY OF BIOLOGICAL TIDES. BY THIS THEORY, THE FORCE OF GRAVITY CAN BE SHOWN TO INTERACT WITH THE FORCES OF HUMAN EVOLUTION AND BEHAVIOR. GRAVITY DIRECTLY INFLUENCES THE HUMAN NERVOUS SYSTEM"

https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/Publications/abstract.aspx?ID=63700

Just because people report strange goings-on during the full moon does not mean they actually happen. It's a confirmation bias. Plus this guy also mentions the plausibility of the werewolf legend in his abstract. I'd love to see the peer reviews of this study.

Augmerson

endacl wrote: »

Standard pseudo plausible argument. Lunar gravity doesn't actually effect water on the scale we imagine it to. Gravity is the weakest of the four fundamental forces (see here if interested in no longer using pseudoscience to explain bunk: http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/forces/funfor.html).

The relative weakness of gravity can be easily demonstrated by using a magnet and a paper clip. Place the paper clip on a table. Hold the magnet over it. Marvel as the magnetic force you hold in your mortal hand overcomes the gravitational power of an entire planet! Amaze your friends! If all the water in all the human bodies on earth, in fact all of the water in every living creature on earth, were combined into a single mass, then lunar gravity might have a negligible effect. But there'd be nobody around to measure it. Imagine, if you will, a lake. A large lake. Lake Superior for example (containing more water than all the water contained in every living creature on earth). Tidal effect by the moon's gravity? Zero. Effect of the moon's gravity on the water contained in your cells. Zero. Tomatoes are 99% water. Effect of the moon's gravity on a tomato? A really big one? Zero.

Now, if we consider the Solar System to extend to the heliosphere, or the limit of the Sun's influence, we're still nowhere near the next nearest star, let alone those stars deemed to affect our lives, depending on when we were born. And that's ignoring the fact that the zodiac has shifted since the well-meaning primitives who came up with the system, well.... came up with the system. They did their best with the knowledge available, bless their cotton socks. Even within the solar system, 99% of the mass is tied up in the Sun. A good proportion of the rest lies with Jupiter. Gravity being a coefficient of mass, we're pretty well screened from the negligible gravity of the moon, let alone any constellation you care to consider.

Now to add insult to injury.... The moon doesn't even treat you as an individual. Neither knows nor cares that you (nor I for that matter) exist. In physical terms, the moon (and the sun for that matter) treats the earth and everything on it as a single mass as far as gravity is concerned.

Given all this, how come those enlightened ancients didn't come up with a system codifying the effect of Jupiter's Magnetic field (incidentally, the largest structure in the solar system) on our lives and future prospects, depending on an arbitrary range of dates? They used dots in the sky, and a lot of imaginative polyfilla instead.

The moon's gravity has no effect on your brain, love live or holiday plans. None at all.

Would you like me to shoot your argument down some more? I'm here all week...

Any mature adult will known or should know that Astrology is not a science or accurate. Fair enough, you've given your opinion and you have provided facts to back up your beliefs, but the tone of your response to other posters is distasteful, self-righteous and authoritarian. Well done, you know a bit more than someone else. There is no need to try argue or belittle someone.

If someone wants to believe in bunk, then let them. It doesn't effect you does it? They are obviously committed to believing and have their own reasons, whatever they may be. I'm not defending Astrology, if it wasn't clear in my original post, I am as much a skeptic as anyone.

My Mother, before she passed away, started using these Angel tarot card things. I thought then and now that it was a load of crap and I was surprised and saddened that my mother believed in any of it because I knew her to be a very intelligent woman, but I never said it to her. There are far worse things somebody could commit themselves to and if it makes someone happy or gives them a little piece of mind, then I don't mind so long as it doesn't hurt anybody else. They might have given her a tiny bit of comfort or reassurance.

I will say though, that I absolutely and 100% detest people who make money off of other people's worries and anxieties. Those lines you can call for Astrology readings and all that? I hate that crap. Go ahead and do your own Astrology I say, at least then you could see what it is all about and if any of it is worth it.

28064212

Sorcha16 wrote: »

Also, taken from the US Department of Justice Reference Service:

"IT IS ACCURATELY INDICATED THAT THE REPRESSION OF THE MOON'S GRAVITATIONAL INFLUENCE BRINGS ABOUT SOCIAL TENSION, DISHARMONY, AND BIZARRE RESULTS. EMPIRICAL OBSERVATIONS, RESEARCH, AND A SYNTHESIS OF FINDINGS IN PHYSICS, ASTRONOMY, BIOLOGY, AND PSYCHOLOGY MAY BE APPLIED TO A THEORY OF BIOLOGICAL TIDES. BY THIS THEORY, THE FORCE OF GRAVITY CAN BE SHOWN TO INTERACT WITH THE FORCES OF HUMAN EVOLUTION AND BEHAVIOR. GRAVITY DIRECTLY INFLUENCES THE HUMAN NERVOUS SYSTEM"

https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/Publications/abstract.aspx?ID=63700

Leiber's book has been widely discredited

Sorcha16

28064212 wrote: »

Leiber's book has been widely discredited

Discredited, yes. Disproven, no. The point is that there is very negligible, conclusive information in relation to this topic, hence I find the area interesting within that capacity alone.

Malari raised a good point about confirmation bias, which absolutely does exist and happens frequently but that's just a theory and subject to manipulation like most things.

Malari wrote: »

Lunar gravity does affect tides because of the relative size of a body of water (ocean) but not human bodies because the amount of water in each individual is too tiny to be significant. There's no likelihood because of a physical law. Ever wonder why you don't see tides in swimming pools?

Uh, no, I don't Malari, I'm quite up to speed with the relationship between gravitational pull, mass and distance. If you were too, you'd know that whereas, gravitational effects decrease with distance, they never go away and therefore do pose a likelihood based upon a physical law

28064212

Sorcha16 wrote: »

Discredited, yes. Disproven, no. The point is that there is very negligible, conclusive information in relation to this topic, hence I find the area interesting within that capacity alone.

You can say that about anything which is exceptionally unlikely. No-one's ever disproven the existence of invisible pink unicorns. But there's never been any credible evidence that they exist.

Malari

Sorcha16 wrote: »

Uh, no, I don't Malari, I'm quite up to speed with the relationship between gravitational pull, mass and distance. If you were too, you'd know that whereas, gravitational effects decrease with distance, they never go away and therefore do pose a likelihood based upon a physical law

Indeed? A likelihood of being affected in what way?

--Kaiser--

Sorcha16 wrote: »

Discredited, yes. Disproven, no. The point is that there is very negligible, conclusive information in relation to this topic, hence I find the area interesting within that capacity alone.

I give you Russel's Teapot

an analogy first coined by the philosopher Bertrand Russell to illustrate that the philosophic burden of proof lies upon a person making scientifically unfalsifiable claims rather than shifting the burden of proof to others, specifically in the case of religion. Russell wrote that if he claims that a teapot orbits the Sun somewhere in space between the Earth and Mars, it is nonsensical for him to expect others to believe him on the grounds that they cannot prove him wrong. Russell's teapot is still referred to in discussions concerning the existence of God.

28064212

Sorcha16 wrote: »

Uh, no, I don't Malari, I'm quite up to speed with the relationship between gravitational pull, mass and distance. If you were too, you'd know that whereas, gravitational effects decrease with distance, they never go away and therefore do pose a likelihood based upon a physical law

There is a greater gravitational force between a doctor of 70kg and a 3.5kg baby that is 1cm away, than there is between the moon and the same baby

Sorcha16

--Kaiser-- wrote: »

I give you Russel's Teapot

Good point Kaiser but I'm not making a claim that warrants a burden of proof because I'm not stating anything definitively. I'm undecided about an area because it's largely unchartered scientific territory when it comes to absolute conclusions and I find that quite interesting.

Using the pink unicorn example is just a typical red herring and has no relevance here

WesternNight

Sorcha16 wrote: »

Good point Kaiser but I'm not making a claim that warrants a burden of proof because I'm not stating anything definitively. I'm undecided about an area because it's largely unchartered scientific territory when it comes to absolute conclusions and I find that quite interesting.

Science doesn't tend to deal in absolutes.

Das Kitty

Sorcha16 wrote: »

Good point Kaiser but I'm not making a claim that warrants a burden of proof because I'm not stating anything definitively. I'm undecided about an area because it's largely unchartered scientific territory when it comes to absolute conclusions and I find that quite interesting.

Using the pink unicorn example is just a typical red herring and has no relevance here

It has every relevance, it's the same as the teapot.

The reason it's uncharted is becuase it would be a total waste of money to investigate something like this when the current scientific evidence we do have points very strongly at it having no basis in reality.

Sorcha16

Das Kitty wrote: »

The reason it's uncharted is becuase it would be a total waste of money to investigate something like this when the current scientific evidence we do have points very strongly at it having no basis in reality.

Lol, that's not how science works Das Kitty It requires long-term empirical observation to substantiate it. If we were to act on hypothesis and accept all our current scientific 'facts' as true, we'd still believe the world was flat!

Das Kitty

Sorcha16 wrote: »

Lol, that's not how science works Das Kitty It requires long-term empirical observation to substantiate it. If we were to act on hypothesis and accept all our current scientific 'facts' as true, we'd still believe the world was flat!

Off you go and look for some funding then.

I'm just going to go and palm my face.

28064212

Sorcha16 wrote: »

Lol, that's not how science works Das Kitty It requires long-term empirical observation to substantiate it. If we were to act on hypothesis and accept all our current scientific 'facts' as true, we'd still believe the world was flat!

Except Astrology is not new. It's not "uncharted". It's centuries old, in fact. It's been investigated many, many times. And every time, it's turned out to have no basis whatsoever. Everything you've said so far can be equally applied to mind-reading, psychics, mediums, fortune-tellers, ghosts, homeopathy... the list goes on

krudler

Sorcha16 wrote: »

Lol, that's not how science works Das Kitty It requires long-term empirical observation to substantiate it. If we were to act on hypothesis and accept all our current scientific 'facts' as true, we'd still believe the world was flat!

so what substantial long term evidence does astrology have?

General Relativity

Sorcha16 wrote: »

There is a world of difference between a horoscope hashed out by a tea-making media intern and a natal chart compiled by generations of research.

Sceptical as I am, I know far too many people with traits exclusive to their star sign to discredit it entirely.

I know it's nice to think we're all far too scientifically advanced to believe in something so positively prehistoric but if Lunar gravity can effect tides so profoundly, it can also impact on the human body which is 60% water. Our brains are composed of 70% water and our lungs 90%, which indicates a strong likelihood that we too, are affected to some extent by planetary activity

The moon doesn't have some mystical connection with water. At any given time it's closer to one 'side' of the planet then the other so it's stretches the planet out, causing the water on it's surface to displace.

endacl

28064212 wrote: »

There is a greater gravitational force between a doctor of 70kg and a 3.5kg baby that is 1cm away, than there is between the moon and the same baby

Unless both doctor and baby are on the moon.

endacl

krudler wrote: »

so what substantial long term evidence does astrology have?

Its evidence of the fact that no matter the advancements in science, technology and reason, and no matter the evidence that astrology is utter tripe, a statistically significant proportion of the population insist on remaining intentionally stupid?*








*this also explains people voting for Fianna Fail, and buying Coldplay albums

noddyone2

Here's my take on Astrology: My birthday is August 21st. So everyone in the world born on that date, no matter what year, will have the same things happening in their lives, because some nob getting paid to write stuff for gullible people says so! People need to catch onto themselves.

Sulla Felix

Sorcha16 wrote: »

Lol, that's not how science works Das Kitty It requires long-term empirical observation to substantiate it. If we were to act on hypothesis and accept all our current scientific 'facts' as true, we'd still believe the world was flat!

Astrology fails pretty much every empirical test it's been subjected to. Overwhelmingly, nearly every study has failed demonstrate its predictive power.