Can Physics Explain Astrology?

[sir-pinski]

Originally posted by quantumcarl
This is a thread which explores the possiblity of a type of Physics being inherent in the workings of Astrology.

However part of the discussion includes whether the scientific method can be used to investigate astrology. If not then IMO the disccusion is mute.

Originally posted by quantumcarl
If anyone can show the proof in favour of or against the theory that planetary and other celestial bodies have a measurable influence over human traits... then this is the place to present your data!

This is a good list of skeptical examinations of astrology:

http://www.astrosociety.org/education/resources/pseudobib.html#1

 

[Kerrie]

Excellent Boulderhead! You have done it again! I suggest everyone read this link BH provided before arguing for or against astrology any further...by the way, I added this page to my favorites~

 

[Kerrie]

Originally posted by sir-pinski
However part of the discussion includes whether the scientific method can be used to investigate astrology. If not then IMO the disccusion is mute.



This is a good list of skeptical examinations of astrology:

http://www.astrosociety.org/education/resources/pseudobib.html#1

i read your link, and all it had to say was:

Perhaps the best known of these fields is the ancient idea that the position of the Sun, Moon, and planets against the backdrop of stars at the moment we are born somehow affects our subsequent personality, career, or love-life

this is completely false according to a professional astrologist's approach-also proof that bias is getting in the way of the sceptic who authored this site...you can't believe everything you read, but you can believe what you know for yourself to be true, that's why i
QUESTION EVERYTHING

 

[sir-pinski]

Originally posted by Kerrie
this is completely false according to a professional astrologist's approach-also proof that bias is getting in the way of the sceptic who authored this site...you can't believe everything you read, but you can believe what you know for yourself to be true, that's why i
QUESTION EVERYTHING

I did point out that this was a good list of skeptical examinations of astrology. I agree that there is a bias to the site but everybody has biases whether they like to admit it or not.

Oh and I'm still wondering about astrology from the other side of the galaxy?

 

[LogicalAtheist]

Like I said. No one here has yet to address the issue that Astrology is a system mounted on a primary claim which is false.

Thus, the subsequent claims cannot be referred to as Astrology, but are only indidivudal claims.

Thus Astrology, as I said 3 times, has been ruined for quite a few centuries. And yet people continue to operate here under the assumption that Astrology is in an agnostic position of proof.

 

[sir-pinski]

may I ask what this primary claim specifically is. Could you also give me references for the evidence you claim exists. I agree though that each claim that astrology makes has to stand up on it's own merit's.

 

[LogicalAtheist]

Yes. there is indeed only one claim that, if true, defines this system someone called Astrology.

The subsequent claims that assume this one are merely applications of this claim assuming it's true.

They certianly can me considered astrology if and only if the primary claim is indeed true.

However, the primary claim of astrology (weather astrologists like it or not) is easily disproven. It was disproven when someone realized about rotation and revolution of bodies.

Many astrologists will say it isn't the primary claim. However, they're wrong. In there little astrological world they may see a different primary claim, but remember astrology is a claim (must be true) that one person, and one person only put forth.

Any subsequent changes are not astrology in the sense of speaking of it analytically.

Sure in modern life it can be generalized, but if we're going to use logic and science here, we need to choose the claim that the claiment put forth as Astrology.

Particularly, we find that since science disproved astrology in it's creators sense, many have branches outwards, trying to escape the reaches of science so as to save this emotional idea.

However, currently science has always caught up to the pseudo-paths and continued to disprove all the claims.

So, here you will find someone attempting to say astrology is some given thing that is currently beyond the knowledge of science. However, the "real" astrology is far past us, being disproven a few centuries ago, very quickly after celestial bodies began to be of a heightened scientific interest.

Perhaps Galileo was one who knowingly disproved astrology. I am not sure who specifically.

 

[kyle_soule]

Originally posted by BoulderHead
...the Moon on the women menstruation and on the vegetables metabolism for example.

Interesting you would point this out, I can use it *evil laugh*

I will assume the moon does indeed have an affect on menstruation, I say assume because honestly I don't know. Put a group of women in the same living quarters for a relatively short amount of time and you will notice their cycles synchronize, despite the moon! This is a good example, I think, of the reality of outside influences, such as the moon, having a minimal affect on people and their behaviour, or in this case menstrual cycle. This doesn't disprove astrology, it simply shows that it doesn't apply due to our social interactions as humans.

 

[Adam]

Originally posted by kyle_soule
Care to provide the proofs?

I already did: the bit about the noble metals.

Magnetic field isn't the same as gravitational field. Indeed he is saying that Jupiter's is tiny compared to the sun. [alpha] Centauri's gravity has an effect, very near zero though, if you believe you can feel that and it affects you then you should try finding aliens by their brain waves[:P]

The larger a mass, the more it is affected by the gravity of another large mass out there such as Alpha Centauri. Earth and our star are affacted. This gravitational influence, and those of all the other stars and other things out there, influence our course as we tumble through the galaxy. Such influences could drag us through a heavily populated area, increase our chances of collision, and wipe out the human race.

As for EM and gravity, I did not say they are the same thing.

The movement of our planet's, sun, and moon are constantly revolving, this doesn't mean that they affect us. I'm not sure, but I observe more than twelve 'patterns' of behavior.

Celestial movements DO affect us. Read up on Ultradian, Circadian, and Infradian cycles. Watch flowers. Watch birds. Listen to birds on the night of a full moon; often they are as loud and active as during the day.

 

[Adam]

Originally posted by LogicalAtheist
Like I said. No one here has yet to address the issue that Astrology is a system mounted on a primary claim which is false.

This is incorrect. Astrology is based on such simple matters as crop rotations and seasonal changes. The earliest records of astrology were based on these real, functioning systems.

 

[kyle_soule]

Originally posted by Adam
I already did: the bit about the noble metals.

My apoligise, I think, I don't want to go back and read it, I will just take your word for it

As for EM and gravity, I did not say they are the same thing.

Your response seemingly implied the comparing of the two. He described gravity and you responded with magnetism...

Celestial movements DO affect us. Read up on Ultradian, Circadian, and Infradian cycles. Watch flowers. Watch birds. Listen to birds on the night of a full moon; often they are as loud and active as during the day.

I'm not a flower, or a bird, I don't see how those apply to human behavior. As for the cycles, when it is dark I'm tired...the primary mechanism of event timing is sensory based. Most of the time these rhythmic behaviours are genetically predetermined.

Circadian, simply the rotation of the earth, this is sensory as we wouldn't know the rotation if we couldn't observe the night and day cycle.

I'm no expert on ultradian, circadion, or infradian, nor do I care to delve in deeply, but they appear to be mainly sensory based or genetically determined, not influenced primarily by astrology.

 

[Adam]

Originally posted by kyle_soule

I'm no expert on ultradian, circadion, or infradian, nor do I care to delve in deeply, but they appear to be mainly sensory based or genetically determined, not influenced primarily by astrology.

The point was that things affecting our senses and therefore our biological cycles DO involve celestial movements, such as our axial rotation and the position of the moon and more. I don't see any reasonable way to deny this.

 

[kyle_soule]

Originally posted by Kerrie
astrology is a study of cycles of how the particular aspects of the planets in relation to the Earth affect people on a psychological level when it comes to tendencies-both weak and strong...what people misunderstand frequently is that the free will of life is in direct control of the actions people will make...the natal chart is a blueprint of someone's tendencies, but ultimately as free humans who have the power to choose, our consciousness, is in direct control of our lives...

logicalatheist~you are again approaching astrology in the science form---do not hold scientific standards for it...to study something does not require science, just like studying a language...i study people in relation to their charts and this amount of knowledge has taken me 12 years to accumulate, a substantial amount of time in relation to what you think you know...so, in order for you to understand this objectively and not make a biased claim, you should study it objectively yourself, otherwise your claim of astrology being false is not an objective statement...

this is exactly correct...many people have the belief that science is absolute...it too is a means of understanding the physics of our world...

I forgot you studied, or were interested in (or something ) astrology! You should post more in here, as you probably know more than all of us.

I do like your point, you cannot take astrology as a science and use scientific reasoning with it. I'm stuck here though, does this mean that you must not think of it as false because you would use reasoning, based on science, because this is the only way to disprove it? Without using science to debate its validity, how can you debate it at all? In language you are not making any claims or predictions, this is only for theories, and theories as this point to science.

Let me see if I understand you correctly, you say we should study astrology as it is, without thinking truth or false is in it, simply take it in? And then do we formulate a response, if so, on what bases?

WAIT! You mean study it like mythology? More like studying to study it, perhaps gain insight into their way of thinking, not necessarily taking it as factual? Basically study it in its own context on its own terms?

 

[quantumcarl]

Originally posted by Adam
The point was that things affecting our senses and therefore our biological cycles DO involve celestial movements, such as our axial rotation and the position of the moon and more. I don't see any reasonable way to deny this.

Adam, this is what I'm trying to point out.

It seems obvious to me that the sheer size and force of our celestial environment... with all its components... would effect our method of existing... surviving and interacting.

I really have no claim to an understanding of astrology... other than what I've heard from practicing astrologers. What I've heard sounds as though there are specific times in ones bio rythm... including birth... that are duely affected by the motion and presence of the planets and other systems in the immediate vicinity.

What does not jive with my understanding of life or biological existence is the idea of "past lives" or "reincarnation". I do think these traditions which are associated with astrology are a reflection of an understanding of genetic progression within a blood-line... thus, revealing certain traits that have been handed down or up over the course of many milenia of generations.

 

[LogicalAtheist]

***CONCLUSION TO THIS ENTIRE THREAD***

Quantum made a mistake in using the word astrology, when he in fact meant to say astronomy, or perhaps cosmology.

You see, now he finally tells us! that he meant that weather or not celestial bodies have any affect on "us".

Well, that's as much astrology as it is football.

CONCLUSIVE CLAIM: All mass has gravitation towards all other mass. Thus, indeed the mass that is "us" has gravitation from and to all other masses, namely planets. If you were looking for some physics relations, I think I'd say that since most celestial bodies don't have much gravitational affect on us (because we're beyond the midpoint of their and Earths gravitational fields) there isn't much to say other than indeed the smallest amounts of gravitation on us certainly do affect things. But the overwhelming amount of gravitation from Earth really trumps the concept.

So you see, Quantuam, it was a mistake in wording that caused this entire thing! Amazing the chaos of a mistake, man...

Good Day!

 

[Alexander]

Neither selestial "motion", nor location of Moon, nor planets, nor conception date (nor bith date) affects anything but fantasy of poorly educated about nature people.

By the way, zodiac constellations (which astrologists so love to use), are out of alignment today (due to Earth axis precession) - no more in selestial equator.

But so what? There are people who WANT to buy a horoscope. What to do then? Demand creates supply. By the way, as everybody knows, we have a professional astrologist - right here, in PF. She is even PF mentor (Kerry). Ask her, she will make a wonderfull horoscope for anyone here, and at a very reasonable prics (also look at her webpage which she advertises on her profile page for selection of horoscopes and other pseudo science products and services). There are variety of horoscopes there - from quick "free" one to fancy luxury $59 (and up). All you have to do is to subscribe or to pay one lump sum (major credit cards accepted).

So, it is just all about money: if there is a demand, there always will be a supply.

Order your horoscope here today! Dont just discuss, but support mystics and pseudoscience! (By the way, do members of PF forum get 10% discount?)

 

[LogicalAtheist]

Response based on Alexander's post above.

He said: "Neither selestial "motion", nor location of Moon, nor planets, nor conception date (nor bith date) affects anything but fantasy of poorly educated about nature people."

My response: You said it. You said!

He said: "By the way, zodiac constellations (which astrologists so love to use), are out of alignment today (due to Earth axis precession) - no more in selestial equator."

My response: This is the basic idea of the proof that astrology is a falitiy. I never mentioned it because like he also states, people who want to believe in falsities do so because they're so emotionally attached to them. They won't listen to proof, it threatens their being.

But here it is anyways. When astrology was concepted, the point was that at certain times during the year (the path of the sun) a given set of stars (which were, before this, picked out as a "set" only because to some drunk guy they looked like shapes - an insight into how people try to find patterns in patternless views) were in the path of the sun (celestial equator) at a certain time during the year.

The conclusion - out of freakin' nowhere - was that this set of stars, because it was on the path at a certain time, caused people to be a certain behavioral type, when born.

Uknowingly to people then, and the claim that ruins this to all hell, was that they didn't know that those stars follow a cycle themselves of about 1,400 years I believe it is.

In other words, I'm a "Libra". But on my birthday LIBRA is nowhere to be seen in the sun's path, except at a small point in time in that 1,400 year pattern.

The easiest claim that could botch up this like a cocked up neurosurgeon, would be for "astrologers" (yes it's an insult to be one) to claim that, yes indeed a given star pattern affects people, but we need to adjust the symbols to follow the pattern, so libras might now be born in july, and the libra qualities would also need to move to july.

Still and idiotic claim, but let's face it, that moves it to VERY IDIOTIC, from previously being JAWDROPPINGLY IDIOTIC. Am I right> heh.


Anyhow. Here we see an insight into a few problems with human application

1. People see patterns when there are none. I could explain these in a long neurological sense, I'll keep it short for everyone to understand. Our brains literally hate seeing new material. Now, often we "like" to see something new, a new movie verse an old one, etc... but in situations where emotions are involve, fear, paranoia etc... new material hurts our brains.

Our brains must do a lot more work to process new materal than known material, take more glucose.

Our brains then try to immediately see anything familiar in what we're seeing.

Thus we have people seeing "fish" and "weighing scales" in stars at random points. Strange yes, but it's not their fault, their brain did it.

Also, we see people looking for patterns in behavior. Again their brains like to find patterns.

It's like "getting a brain off" when it happens. When someone meets someone who is a particular symbol, and they find it out AFTER knowing them, and it makes sense, it deepens the belief that it's correct.

When someone meets someone, and laters gets their symbol and they DONT match - the person starts to try to see how it could match. They choose the idea that the similiarities MUST be there, because my brain loves the pattern so much I must prove to it the pattern is there.

See how deeply patterns are loved by brains?? It takes less work, less glucose. Brains love being lazy.

 

[kyle_soule]

Originally posted by LogicalAtheist
My response: This is the basic idea of the proof that astrology is a falitiy. I never mentioned it because like he also states, people who want to believe in falsities do so because they're so emotionally attached to them. They won't listen to proof, it threatens their being.

I did mention it, and it didn't matter, it was in my first post.

 

[LogicalAtheist]

Originally posted by kyle_soule
I did mention it, and it didn't matter, it was in my first post.

You are correct! You did. And I did not see it! And yet, the nonsense continues eh? It's amazing is it not? It's also sickening!

 

[Adam]

Originally posted by Alexander
Neither selestial "motion", nor location of Moon, nor planets, nor conception date (nor bith date) affects anything but fantasy of poorly educated about nature people.

This is where actual education comes in handy:
http://www.1upinfo.com/encyclopedia/B/biorhyth.html
http://www.nimh.nih.gov/publicat/bioclock.cfm
http://www.cbt.virginia.edu/tutorial/TUTORIALMAIN.html
http://users.rcn.com/jkimball.ma.ultranet/BiologyPages/C/Circadian.html

 

[LogicalAtheist]

Adam - you missed his point because of the scattered nature of his comments.

Unless I am mistaken, he meant that it doesn't affect overall concepts of a person, like behavior etc...

I believe it was him (among others including myself) who indeed are aware that the gravity of such large masses does have a graviational affect on our atoms. And yes there are biological (the atom level is physical) factors which ultimately these affect.

I believe he meant the other options above.

Because of the flawed nature of the very origin of this post, it's outcome can't very well be of high quality.

This is why I have what I do in my signature, and the recent addition to my sig I will add now.

Please follow the guidelines, they're not something I made up.

 

[Kerrie]

Originally posted by kyle_soule
I forgot you studied, or were interested in (or something ) astrology! You should post more in here, as you probably know more than all of us.

i am choosing not to reply to this thread anymore because it has gone to a bashing instead of an objective discussion of the subject...it's too bad because i think there are a few open minded people here interested in knowing more...

 

[Adam]

Facts:

• People are affected by movements of celestial bodies.
• People sense and interact with both gravity and electromagnetic radiation.
• The earliest recorded uses of astrology involve real-world, useful, functioning practices, such as giving farmers ideas of when to harvest crops and such.
• Practices from the past are sometimes found to have a basis in fact which science stumbles upon later, such as the reasons for people using gold, silver, and copper coins.
• The position of our star has changed in relation to others over the millennia.

Fiction:

• You will win the lottery today.

 

[LogicalAtheist]

Kerrie - I see know bashing going on here, except bashing pseudo-science. Furthermore, nothing can be learned from a pseudo-science, except that it is a pseudo-science, and has no basis in reality.

If you haven't read the many people who have posted the easy one sentence falsity of the primary claim that identifies astrology, and you're still interest in studying, what's to say?

If one doesn't heed to an undesputable fact, what's the purpose of being here?

Discussion can work, but not when one takes something that exists not in reality, and superimposes into reality.

I sense that you're a bit to emotionally involved in astrology to realize the claim made here perhaps 5 times by 5 people.

If one is only emotionally attached to the truth of a claim, one will never feel bad!

As for Kyle's statement that Kerrie knows more than us about astrology. Id' say that one who adheres to this pseudo-science by it's very choice knows not even enough to know the primary basis for it is false!

Beyond that point, and when proven false as has been done, astrology does indeed NOT exist. It is pseudo-reality.

Thus all secondary claims based on the assumption that primary claim is true, are individual claims, and are nolonger part of this falsified astrology.

It's all very simple peeps, it's nothing new, and nothing brash. It's the easiest pseudo-science to disprove ever!

So accept it's empirical proof, and feel good about it.

If one isn't truly embracing the truth, one will never know it!

Kerrie - I understand how you dislike how easy it is to disprove something you "believe" in, and something you are attached to. I understand how in your view, a one sentence statement which disproves secondary claims so populated they exist in every yellow pages, in every bookstore and every llibrary, could look like bashing. But it's not. It's logic and science disproving a pseudo-science. Please realize this, it's how one becomes more knowledgeable about the REAL world.

 

[kyle_soule]

Originally posted by Kerrie
i am choosing not to reply to this thread anymore because it has gone to a bashing instead of an objective discussion of the subject...it's too bad because i think there are a few open minded people here interested in knowing more...

You are correct, I think Alexander crossed the line, I see why you aren't going to post anymore. It is a shame that so often discussions like this come down to personal insults. I don't know if anybody currently active in the discussion is in it to learn, there is no actual discussion because everybody keeps making claims independent of other statements, both sides using very little to no facts.

Furthermore, nothing can be learned from a pseudo-science, except that it is a pseudo-science, and has no basis in reality.

Plenty can be learned, just not in the factual sense. There is no science to learn in it, I agree with you, but there is a lot to learn about how the people think that created astrology.

Is it possible that astrology came from the worship of the sun, moon, and stars?

 

[quantumcarl]

We've lost one of the only people who knows something about Astrology (Kerrie) due to the egomaniacal bantering and posturing of a few posters.

Anyone who is not interested in pursuing a constructive exploration of this topic could please put me and this thread on their ignore list (as Logical Aethiest promised to do... obviously he is not a man of his word ).

 

[Artman]

Originally posted by LogicalAtheist
...And is thus completely false. Astrology is a myth of ancient times, like all myths.

Incorrect statement based on partial information and lack of even a basic education on the subject.

Our human ancesters' survival depended on astrology.
Astrology was very important for knowing when and where to hunt, for the development of calendrics and essential to the success of early agriculture. Archaeological evidence shows that Neanderthal man camped next to salmon runs and yet did not eat the fish (no bones were found). Cro-magnon man did eat the fish and they may have used Astrology as a calendar to tell them when to return to the salmon streams. Early cavemen knew not to hunt for deer the day after a full moon because the night of the full moon the deer could eat at night and then hide during the next day. The Maya and Egyptians created accurate calenders and based much of their achitecture on astronomical data developed from their astrological research.

Astrology was very much a science in its beginning. Astronomy began as a subscience of Astrology. Astronomers were merely astrologers apprentices.

What you are railing at is the way that our present society interprets this subject, which, if you had listened to kerry you would know, is not a full and correct interpretation.

Originally posted by Alexander
...By the way, as everybody knows, we have a professional astrologist - right here, in PF. She is even PF mentor (Kerry). Ask her, she will make a wonderfull horoscope for anyone here, and at a very reasonable prics (also look at her webpage which she advertises on her profile page for selection of horoscopes and other pseudo science products and services). There are variety of horoscopes there - from quick "free" one to fancy luxury $59 (and up). All you have to do is to subscribe or to pay one lump sum (major credit cards accepted).

Uncool. Just because you make money at a subject does not mean that is has no validity. It has no bearing on the subject whatsoever and adds nothing to the discussion. Alexander, you get paid to do Chemistry, don't you? Does that make it any less of a science?

quantumcarl, Interesting question. I doubt there is a physical link to the planets, however I wonder if there is a biological link between personality and the seasons of conception, pregnancy and birth? The effects of such things as the mother's emotional condition during the seasons of pregnancy (enduring a third trimester during a hot summer) etc.?

There is always something that can be learned from asking questions.

 

[LogicalAtheist]

Artman - No, you're wrong. What you describe is ASTRONOMY not ASTROLOGY. You need to scroll up to read the fundemantal claim of astrology. Because it's false, there's no way one could apply astrology to reality and get a correct answer. Scroll up and read it.

I see now why Kerrie isn't willing to listen to the scientific proof that astrology is false, because she makes money off of it! Well, I'll let it go, but I urged here before to exam it from a scientific POV, but likely this will not take place. No further comments...

Originally posted by Artman
Incorrect statement based on partial information and lack of even a basic education on the subject.

Our human ancesters' survival depended on astrology.
Astrology was very important for knowing when and where to hunt, for the development of calendrics and essential to the success of early agriculture. Archaeological evidence shows that Neanderthal man camped next to salmon runs and yet did not eat the fish (no bones were found). Cro-magnon man did eat the fish and they may have used Astrology as a calendar to tell them when to return to the salmon streams. Early cavemen knew not to hunt for deer the day after a full moon because the night of the full moon the deer could eat at night and then hide during the next day. The Maya and Egyptians created accurate calenders and based much of their achitecture on astronomical data developed from their astrological research.

Astrology was very much a science in its beginning. Astronomy began as a subscience of Astrology. Astronomers were merely astrologers apprentices.

What you are railing at is the way that our present society interprets this subject, which, if you had listened to kerry you would know, is not a full and correct interpretation.



Uncool. Just because you make money at a subject does not mean that is has no validity. It has no bearing on the subject whatsoever and adds nothing to the discussion. Alexander, you get paid to do Chemistry, don't you? Does that make it any less of a science?

quantumcarl, Interesting question. I doubt there is a physical link to the planets, however I wonder if there is a biological link between personality and the seasons of conception, pregnancy and birth? The effects of such things as the mother's emotional condition during the seasons of pregnancy (enduring a third trimester during a hot summer) etc.?

There is always something that can be learned from asking questions.

 

[quantumcarl]

Originally posted by Artman
Incorrect statement based on partial information and lack of even a basic education on the subject.

Our human ancesters' survival depended on astrology.
Astrology was very important for knowing when and where to hunt, for the development of calendrics and essential to the success of early agriculture. Archaeological evidence shows that Neanderthal man camped next to salmon runs and yet did not eat the fish (no bones were found). Cro-magnon man did eat the fish and they may have used Astrology as a calendar to tell them when to return to the salmon streams. Early cavemen knew not to hunt for deer the day after a full moon because the night of the full moon the deer could eat at night and then hide during the next day. The Maya and Egyptians created accurate calenders and based much of their achitecture on astronomical data developed from their astrological research.

Astrology was very much a science in its beginning. Astronomy began as a subscience of Astrology. Astronomers were merely astrologers apprentices.

What you are railing at is the way that our present society interprets this subject, which, if you had listened to kerry you would know, is not a full and correct interpretation.



Uncool. Just because you make money at a subject does not mean that is has no validity. It has no bearing on the subject whatsoever and adds nothing to the discussion. Alexander, you get paid to do Chemistry, don't you? Does that make it any less of a science?

quantumcarl, Interesting question. I doubt there is a physical link to the planets, however I wonder if there is a biological link between personality and the seasons of conception, pregnancy and birth? The effects of such things as the mother's emotional condition during the seasons of pregnancy (enduring a third trimester during a hot summer) etc.?

There is always something that can be learned from asking questions.

Why do you doubt, Artman? What premise do you have that makes you doubt the validity of the claims of astrology that "heavenly bodies" have an effect on the alignment and arrangment of DNA... thusly affecting the glands and hormones of an individual?... and thusly the interaction and personality of same individual?

Guess what... on this new forum I have invested in me the power to delete this thread!

So... I'm coming back here once more and if its looking like Dickweed and Blunderpuss are still effing with their frickin' egos all over it... I'm taking it out to the trash. OK? OK.

Cheers.

 

[Artman]

Originally posted by LogicalAtheist
Artman - No, you're wrong. What you describe is ASTRONOMY not ASTROLOGY.

The astrology that is a myth (and I am not disputing that it is also a myth) is after the Greeks got hold of it and personified it. Astrology was the mother science of astronomy, not the other way around.

What do you think about my other thought on the subject?

Originally posted by me...I wonder if there is a biological link between personality and the seasons of conception, pregnancy and birth? The effects of such things as the mother's emotional condition during the seasons of pregnancy (enduring a third trimester during a hot summer) etc.?"

Just a thought. You know a lot more about biology than I do. Any possibility?

 

[LogicalAtheist]

Art - I think your second comment, the answer would, sure it has some affect, but it's unbelievably miniscule. Similiar to the fact that, because Earth for us has such a grav pull, the moons and suns pull isn't sucking us up. There are some major factors that just overrule it.

 

[kyle_soule]

Astrology is so deeply rooted in human's that it is virtually impossible to prove wrong, it, like religion, comes down to faith in the unknown. Indeed one can always find falsity's in systems of faith, but they wouldn't be faith if there are possible wrongs in it, these are simply said to be questionable points (to the believer) and obvious disproofs (to the skeptic).

The debate will rage, but nobody will ever be convinced.

Examples of how deeply astrology is rooted:

Monday - Moon day
Tuesday - Mars' day
Wednesday - Mercury's day
Thursday - Jupiter's day
Friday - Venus' day
Saturday - Saturn's day
Sunday - Sun day

It is common practice for large companies to have an astrologer and graphologist to aid in hiring, firing, etc. You will find this occult art of divination has been applied to many subjects like pets, children, babies, gambling, cooking, medicine, criminology, dating, marriage, biochemistry, meditation, sex, politics, economics, psychology, feminism, and the Bible (quoted from Dr. John Weldon), everywhere you look you can find astrology.

Many have mentioned an ignorance of the basic concepts of astrology, here is a short introductory, if anybody wants to read it:

Despite its popularity, astrology is confusing to the average person because of its complexity and many unfamiliar words.
The zodiac is an imaginary “belt” of sky comprising the 12 astrological signs that the ancients illustrated by mythological figures, both human and animal. In other words, the mythological “signs” of the zodiac are overlaid upon the actual clusters, or constellations, of stars. And importantly, the “signs” exist irrespective of the actual positions of the constellations to which they are said to refer.
The signs are the 12 “signs of the zodiac,” also known as “sun signs.” Everyone is said to be born under one of these 12 signs (Pisces the fish, Leo the lion, Gemini the twins, Taurus the bull, and so on). Astrologers often group the signs according to psychological aspects or types.
The houses are the 12 divisions of the zodiac that are said to correspond symbolically to every area of life. The houses are also imaginary, and the planets are said to travel through the houses, influencing each area of life as they do.
The horoscope is a “map” of the heavens for the time of birth, or for any time thereafter.
On the horoscope, or chart, an astrologer plots the positions of the planets, signs, and houses, and then from this “map,” after interpreting numerous complex rules, many of which vary greatly from one astrologer to another, the astrologer gives a “reading.”
Technically, delineation is the name given to an astrological “reading.” This is an interpretation resulting from the combination of two or more astrological principles. Analysis or synthesis is the “complete” interpretation of the whole chart.
There is also the concept of rulership. Astrologers believe that each planet “rules” a sign of the Zodiac. For example, Mercury rules, or influences, Gemini and Virgo; Venus is said to rule Taurus and Libra; Saturn Capricorn; Neptune Pisces; and so on. In addition, the signs and their ruling planets are related to certain houses.
Another important term is aspect, which refers to the angles between the planets as plotted on a horoscope chart. Certain angles are interpreted as “good” and other angles are “bad,” while still others are “neutral” and acquire their “goodness” or “badness” from other astrological indicators. For example, two planets angled at 90 degrees to each other (called a “square”) is considered a bad influence. However, two planets angled at 120 degrees to each other (called a “trine”) is considered a good influence.
In addition to “good” or “bad” angles, astrological delineations must also take into consideration whether or not the planets are “good” or “bad.” Saturn and Mars, for example, are considered “bad”; Venus and Jupiter, “good.” But what is the basis for these angles and planets being defined as “good” or “bad”? The astrologers don’t know; they simply accept these definitions as they have been handed down. Some astrologers say that these definitions result from thousands of years of observing human experience. Others no longer use the “good” or “bad” designations. They have substituted milder descriptions, such as “externalization” and “internalization,” “active” and “passive,” “hard” and “soft”’ “difficult” and “easy.” Still, there is no one final, authoritative tradition that has come down through history that all astrologers follow. This is why there are many conflicting astrological theories. Transits are another essential concept. By determining when a planet crosses, or transits, a specific point on the horoscope chart, the astrologer feels he can advise a client as to “favorable” or “unfavorable” conditions. Just as there are good and bad planets and angles, there are good and bad times for undertaking activities. This was why Hitler planned his war strategy by the stars and why other world leaders throughout history have leaned on advice of the stars.
It is evident from all of this that astrological interpretations are not only complicated but highly subjective. How does the astrologer know that Venus or a trine is good, that Mars or a square is bad? How does he know that the first house represents personality, the second house money, the third house communication, the eighth house death, the tenth house occupation? On what factual basis do astrologers make their assertions?
Some astrologers claim their definitions are derived from numerology, from the meanings allegedly inherent in numbers, which are then related to astrological theory. But if so, where is a factual basis for the numerological meanings? Why don’t all astrologers agree on this? There is also disagreement concerning how to divide the 12 houses. A given house for one astrologer may be a different house for another; therefore, entirely different influences would be suggested. Astrological interpretations also rest on other questionable foundations. An astrologer can choose from up to 30 different zodiacs, 28 different signs, and ten different house systems. Even after wading through all this, the astrologer’s headache has still not ended. He must choose whether to use the concepts of nodes, triplicities, and quadruplicities. The moon’s nodes relate to the intersection of the moon’s orbit with the apparent path of the sun among the stars (the ecliptic). These supposed “intersections” are said to exert certain influences. And there are also the influences from the nodes of the planets, the points at which the orbits of the planets intersect the ecliptic. Triplicities refer to how the four astrological elements of fire, earth, air, and water each relate to three signs. For example, Libra, Gemini, and Aquarius are “air” signs. Quadruplicities refer to how the three astrological characteristics called “cardinal,” “fixed,” and “mutable” each relate to four signs. For example, Leo, Scorpio, Aquarius, and Taurus are “fixed” signs. And, as you may suspect by now, the concepts of nodes, triplicities, and quadruplicities, like all other astrological principles, have many diverse meanings and interpretations. If all this is not enough mental gymnastics, the astrologer can also consider dignities and debilities; that is, how the influence of a planet is increased (dignity) or decreased (debility) by its placement on the chart. There are dozens of such conditions. He also determines whether the signs are positive (active) or negative (passive). And each astrologer must pay special attention to a client’s moon sign, and to the rising, or ascending, sign. And after all this, the astrologer still must choose which method of prediction he will use. There are three common methods: 1) the previously mentioned transits, 2) primary directions, and 3) secondary progressions. And, “No phase of astrology is subject to such differences of opinion” as the means of prediction. Even with all of this, consider that Noel Tyl wrote a 12-volume series, The Principles and Practices of Astrology, which is considered introductory material! No wonder there is no one final astrological tradition that all astrologers follow. It is understandable why there are so many conflicting astrological theories. Yet, millions of people still commit their lives to following these unproven assumptions.

 

[LogicalAtheist]

^^^^^ Yeah, what he said. ^^^^^

 

[Zero]

Originally posted by Artman


quantumcarl, Interesting question. I doubt there is a physical link to the planets, however I wonder if there is a biological link between personality and the seasons of conception, pregnancy and birth? The effects of such things as the mother's emotional condition during the seasons of pregnancy (enduring a third trimester during a hot summer) etc.?

There is always something that can be learned from asking questions.

*Note to aspiring skeptics*

Thiese are the sorts of questions you should be posing, rather than simply rejecting something out of hand. When a new explanation arises, we have a duty to explore it, if for no other reason than to eliminate it. To simply say 'it is nonsense' and move on is to commit the same sort of dogmatic thinking which you accuse others of partaking in.

 

[Adam]

Originally posted by kyle_soule

Monday - Moon day
Tuesday - Mars' day
Wednesday - Mercury's day
Thursday - Jupiter's day
Friday - Venus' day
Saturday - Saturn's day
Sunday - Sun day

We adopted Germanic/Norse names:
Sunday - Sun day.
Monday - Moon day.
Tuesday - Tiw's day
Wednesday - Woden's (Odin's) day.
Thursday - Thor's day.
Friday - Frigg's day.
Saturday - remained Saturn's day.