Bogosity Ep. 1: Astrology (Part 2)

[fomalhauto]

As for time twins. Just because a person born with the same birthdate,birthtime,birthplace doesn't mean that their lives will be exactly the same. There are factors like sociocultural, upbringing/nurturing, and most of alfree will. Other factors are the people that are being interacted with. People can different biological interactions with other people and that can strongly influence outcomes in people's lives. Biological interaction in Astrology is known as synastry.

[fomalhauto]

@fomalhauto

furthermore, the astrologers will look at a 3rd chart devised from the midpoints of the two charts to see the potentials of a relationship itself. It's called composite chart.

[shanedk]

@fomalhauto "Just because a person born with the same birthdate,birthtime,birthplace doesn't mean that their lives will be exactly the same."

They weren't even CLOSE!!! They were no more similar than people born months apart!

[fomalhauto]

Most Western Astrologers use a tropical zodiac. It's based on the seasons. That's what the astrologer was referring too. Sun in 00'00 Aries is vernal equinox. Sun in 00'00 Cancer is summer solstice. Sun in 00'00 Libra is autumnal equinox. Sun in 00'00 Capricorn is winter solstice.

[maximusTLP]

do you think that there is a reason why the mayans based their calendar on the number 13?? i believe what the guy in this video is saying is true. i believe astrology has been tampered with.

[AmateurAtheist]

Great intelligent video and very entertaining.

[WAMill3R]

It's great fun to watch the Astrology-tards come on to defend their bunk ideas.

[danirol35]

mmmhh, man, what a lack of everything, not valuable information, not enough research, a bit offensive, a really poor performance and not funny at all.

[SpiralOut11235]

Uh oh, someone's fragile sense of reality was shaken....

[WAMill3R]

Oh, dear, did the Astrology-tard get asshurt by the video?

[Crbsee]

There have been several famous psychologists that have come up with multiple systems in the sense of naming personality types most have seven "signs" or characters. the cosmic zodiac is technically six signs. I would recommend to everyone especially the guy in the video to look into Edgar Cayce.

[Nark15]

Got a fun story: When I switched to another HS after 11th grade, I wrote a horoscope(separate for class standing and teachers) for the schoolpaper (as a joke, of course)-I did NOT use any planets/signs/ constellation/etc and I knew no one at the school really. When it was printed, people came to me and told me how I got everything right (I recommended the most hated teacher move to antarctica, anticipated peoples struggles,etc) and everyone wanted to know how I did it... :)

[erasmus389912915]

Oh before I forget. There is a new kind of astrology which is heliocentric or sun-centered. It is still in its experimental stage but has been proven to be effective. Only a few astrologers know how to use this technique. Now you can be sure that it is the real position of the constellation around the sun that are used and it is another form of astrology. Refute that!

[shanedk]

Time Twins Study. Refuted!

[erasmus389912915]

No it does not refute anything. Read the comments on the Time Twins Study in the first video.

[erasmus389912915]

I just have a question. Why are you bothering with the 13th sign of the zodiac if it's the zodiac itself that you claim to be non-existent. Isn't that contradicting?

[erasmus389912915]

I'm sorry but I can't help it. I exceeded the limit of posting. This is my last post. I suggest that you study the subject first before you open your mouth on tape. You're bigoted arrogant foul-mouthed and above all IGNORANT! I can't believe you're a professor. You talk about professionalism and I haven't seen anything professional in your behavior. I seem to be more mature and brainier than you and I'm perhaps just half your age!

[erasmus389912915]

Your "documentary" clearly defines the limitations of science hence I challenge you to discover that unknown force before you post anything like this again! Not working on it would mean you refuse. By the way are you projecting that empty brain onto astrologers to hide the fact that maybe it's YOUR brain that has been leaking out of your ears (no one survives without a brain! As "scientist" you should know that)

[erasmus389912915]

That means that it applies to personality. That's what Shermer did. Do you know that astrology and psychology are closely related. The only difference of astrological sessions and psychotherapy is the involvement of a natal chart! It enables us to delve into the mind of a person to see what's going on. Based on your argument on astrology would it not be logical to condemn psychology as well?

[erasmus389912915]

(cont'd) what's the similarity with astrology? Yes it's also an assumption that the planets have influence. A chart can be made out of calculations which verify it and we also adopt it because it seems useful. I asked whether magnetism or gravity can be proven aside from observation. No. You can't see it but you know it's there because it has an effect on objects (falling etc). Now people undoubtedly recognize themselves with astrology. It cannot be proven that it does except by observing it.

[erasmus389912915]

(cont'd) admire Dr. Shermer and NOT YOU! You made a good point on your ideas on action at a distance but how do you know that it's these forces that are operational here? Can you prove that magnetism or gravity exists aside from observation eg. using a magnet or dropping an object? That gravity locks planets in orbit is an ASSUMPTION which can be verified mathematically. It's not adopted because it's true but rather because it seems useful. It is not just not proven but it's not provable. Now

[erasmus389912915]

Why is Ophiuchus not being considered the 13th sign of the zodiac? Because it has been mistakenly considered to be. However Ophiuchus has his own interpretation nevertheless. What about Orion? He is near Taurus and why does he also have meaning in astrology? Due to simplification of modern astrology it is not being used anymore today. Whether there is a zodiac or not out of the question! What IS important is whether astrology is applicable and hence practical to people. One of the reasons why I

[erasmus389912915]

Yes it is true that there is precession. You claim that astrologers are not using it. If you have studied Vedic astrology you would know that they make use of precession which they call ayanamsha which they subtract from the sign's position hence the sidereal zodiac is different from the tropical. BTW zodiac exists in astrology not in science just like "pelvis" can be found in anatomy and zoology but not in botany or astronomy.

[erasmus389912915]

It would truly make it science as you put it but I think the main reason why astrological columns do not appear in scientific magazines is because they will be rejected by the editor. If the editor would accept the column, then that would quickly lead to loss of readership in the scientific community. You should have taken that into consideration. If Shermer's experiment proved the accuracy of astrology what keeps you thinking that it is not working?

[erasmus389912915]

Have you seen the video of Dr. Michael Shermer conducting an experiment with astrologer Jeffrey Armstrong to test the accuracy of Vedic astrology? It's on youtube. The results were in favor of astrology. The experiment was conducted scientifically therefore how would you explain that astrology is not accurate and therefore inapplicable in any way?

[erasmus389912915]

A piece-by-piece interpretation is rather vague because it applies to anyone. It's like a car that's not assembled. In his chart he has Mercury in the fourth house. Many people have that. Also Mercury opposed Uranus is shared by many. But less have Mercury in the fourth opposed Uranus in the tenth while trining Saturn conjunct the ascendant in Virgo. The key is to combine those interpretations for a specific outcome.

[erasmus389912915]

Please provide more information as to whether the astrologer's interpretation was a piece-by-piece computerized analysis of the chart or a synthesized one in which the chart is taken as a whole because the latter blends interpretations of different patterns to produce a more specific result that fits the killer on a narrower scope. Also please provide information as to the percentage of accuracy of the chart for the students.

[bakisbek]

dude i feel pitty for you...

[Perceiveall]

Wow, are you ever immature? And rude. Most children show more maturity, when they have a right to be immature by their very age. Mocking and ridiculing? I'm so happy I disagree with you. The only time I was 'wrong' with astrology was because I looked at the wrong line of an ephermeris, it 'felt' wrong and was stated so, so I double checked and found 'it' was right, I made the error. I saved lives with the aid of astrology. You debunk yourself.

[shanedk]

Blah blah blah.

Explain the Time Twins Study.

[Perceiveall]

Case and point. Have a wonderful day.

[shanedk]

So, you CAN'T explain the Time Twins Study, then.

Typical.

[graduatefuckuation]

when a test proves astrology skeptics require tougher tests, but they readily accept a vague test that disproves astrology,like randys tes

[shanedk]

What tests have proved astrology?

Randi's tests have been the ASTROLOGERS' tests. THEY have said what they could do, and they WEREN'T ABLE TO DO IT.

There's a reason for scientific controls. When those are in place, things that are bogus fail. Including astrology.

[Eldxale]

Despite the fact that I have read Mostly Harmless, I never wondered what Pluto not being a planet would do to astrology.

[woodwater1000]

shane youre an idiot. we have all the signs to some extent but sun,moon and rising sign prevail. learn before making silly comments. I bet you dont even know your rising sign

[shanedk]

Explain the Time Twins Study.

[corndogers564]

Sir, where can I find that astrology program you downloaded?

[shanedk]

It's an ASTRONOMY program, not an astrology program. stellarium dot org, as it says in the credits.

[corndogers564]

Ooops lol. Didn't watch the video all the way to the credits. I would like to check out the current positions of the constellation. Thanks!

[shanedk]

Actually, it's a lot of fun. It's like Google Earth for the sky.

[corndogers564]

Yeah, it's actually pretty cool. Right now it shows the sun is in Virgo, even though the tropical zodiac says sept. 23-oct. 19 is the house of the Libra. lol.

[farvision]

NOT!  LOL!

[spartacus6839]

A computerised print out is not astrology.

[shanedk]

What computerized printout? Where?

[SelektaStjarna]

No wonder you don't believe astrology is valid, you don't truly understand it. Maybe you should learn real astrology before you make a video trying to debunk it. You are just making yourself look ignorant.

[shanedk]

Every single thing in that video is based on what ASTROLOGERS have said. What they say is bunk. Plain and simple.

[SelektaStjarna]

What professional astrologers say is bunk, but real astrology isn't.

[shanedk]

Who does real astrology if not professional astrologers? Professional astronomers do real astronomy; professional medical doctors practice real medicine. Who does "real" astrology?

[SelektaStjarna]

Professional astrologers aren't really like professional astronomers or professional medical doctors. They usually don't go to college and get a certification in astrology. Just about anyone can be a professional astrologer if they want. Imagine if there were lots of professional doctors practicing medecine who didn't have to achieve certifications to practice legally. There would be a whole lot of quacks. That's what's going on in astrology, in my opinion.

[shanedk]

So, then, who does "real" astrology?

[DaWi12345]

hello MultiSteveB: perhaps i can help you. force F=GMm/r^2. M mass of person or jupiter. r the distance, G a constant. we want to know F_Jup./F_Hum.=1. so 1=M_J*x^2/(M_H*r_J^2)-> x=sqrt(M_H*r_J^2/M_J)=0.11m (M_H=70kg). so the person have to be closer than that (phil's right). but take a house/hill. the distance will be 1000m. and the earth ist much stronger than that

[DaWi12345]

btw. to say the force coused by a human is stronger/weaker ist senseless. you have to consider the distance. the force F~1/r^2. so if you double the distance, the force is 4times weaker. if you half the distance the force will be 4times stronger. but that's all irrelevant. the force of the earth on earth is MUCH stronger. the effects of a hit by a fly are MUCH bigger...

[MultiSteveB]

Mr. Killian, I found one bit of data where you and Phil Plait contradict. Specifically, the gravitational force from Jupiter vs that from another person. You state that the latter is greater, but in Phil's video (watch?v=GOmqza3Y6Wc) he asserts that Jupiter would be 3x greater. Phil did used 70 kg for the mass of the person. Perhaps you used a bigger number? :)

[shanedk]

Phil's probably right; he's the professional.

[DaWi12345]

if the real position of the stars and planets have nothing to do with astrology (only the stupid zodiac), why use stars/planets? it's only time that matters. it is senseless then to look at the stars/planets.

who believes in this?

[shanedk]

Yeah, really...they've reduced it down to where it's an extremely complex and unnecessarily confusing calendar, and nothing more.

[bwt66]

As I read over this conversation, part of me is convinced more than ever that sceptics are just speaking out of a vacuum. It would be unkind to label it ignorance, but it is certainly "absence of facts". Part of me wants to say "go read a book and then come back when we can have a conversation", except that we are having a dialogue and it is not half bad.

[shanedk]

Go read WHICH book, though? No two books on astrology say the same thing, and no two astrologers agree on what it is, as we've seen.

Geez, in one case we can't even get the SAME astrologer to agree on whether or not it's a science!

[bwt66]

The practice of Astrology is not a science, but astrology has foundations in science. Many universities will offer both BSc and BA degrees in Psychology -- it can be studied as either a science or social science. If you use monkeys to study "risk reward" systems or "group dynamics", that's science. If you do Jungian dream analysis, that's an art. But it is ALL psychology. Same with astrology -- horary, electional, mundane are on the side of science, while natals and synastry are arts.

[UncleFeedle]

Can you please clarify precisely what astrology is? Definitions I have been given by natal and verdic astrologers so far include: an art, a science, a philosophy, a religion, a technique, a way of thinking, a use of the imagination, various combinations of the above, all of the above and none of the above.

[shanedk]

Young and Chadborne were both very clear: The Zodiac is NOT the constellations, and has NOTHING TO DO with the constellations.

According to you, this "frame of reference" just ends up being months of the year, markers for seasons, a calendar, nothing more. So what's so special about the Zodiac? Why not use the Gregorian calendar, or the seasonal markers like the solstices and equinoxes? That's what actual scientists do. Why bring in all of these "houses" with their "meanings"?

[bwt66]

Astrology DOES use the solstices & equinocti. The reason the Zodiac has become spearated from the constellations is because of the stronger desire to preserve the connection with the seasonal markers. By the way, astrologers were the "actual scientists" who developed the calendar in the first place. Also geometry.

[bwt66]

Well, I cannot truly speak for Young or Chadborne, but I would say that the correct answer is that the Zodiac *used to be* the constellations and, in many senses, still is. The tropical zodiac and most sidereal zodiacs (when they use only an Ayanamsha for correction) are standardised zodiacs with idealised constellations. The real star groups are not 30° apiece. But, likewise, a "month" means "a moon" but a REAL "moon month" is 29.5 days, not 30 and never 31 -- it is standardised.

[bwt66]

3: WHY THE HELL DOES ITS SHIFT MATCH AXIAL PRECESSION???

A: Because the cumulative precession since the schism *IS* the shift -- 1 degree per 72 years. The shift of 24 degrees off congruent alignment signifies the 1700+yrs since the schism. Sort of like the "lost time" when the Julian and Gregorian calendars shifted. Which is why Russian Christmas is in January.

[bwt66]

2: WHY THE HELL DOES IT MATCH WHERE THE CONSTELLATIONS WERE???

A: In the sidereal method, they still DO align; only in tropical have they diverged. The gap represents the time elapsed since the schism. If precession had been discovered earlier, the gap would now be bigger.

[bwt66]

1: WHAT THE HELL IS THE ZODIAC???

A: The Zodiac refers to the names of 12 constellations (out of the dozens in the sky) which are special because they lie along the path of the ecliptic (as viewed from Earth). They provide a frame of reference for all astronomy & astrology.

[bwt66]

Or: the Moon's orbital plane intersects Earth's orbital plane at two opposing points on the ecliptic -- the lunar nodes. We use them in astrology. Not every full or new moon causes an eclipse. Only the conjunctions and oppositions of the Sun and Moon near the nodes can cause eclipses. Because of gravitational wobbles, these nodes precess backwards through the Zodiac and make a circuit every 18-19yrs. In a kindred fashion, the solar equinocti & solstices precess through the zodiac over 26000+yrs.

[shanedk]

Again, basic astronomy that a third-grader knows. It tells us nothing about astrology. Answer the questions.

[bwt66]

Okay -- my turn to play dumb. Since none of my answers seem to satisfy your question, obviously either I do not understand what your real question is or you do not fully understand what you are asking and thus cannot see how my answer addresses that. So let's have a freshly minted and crisp rephrasing of your question, please -- what are you really asking that I don't see?

[shanedk]

1: WHAT THE HELL IS THE ZODIAC???

2: WHY THE HELL DOES IT MATCH WHERE THE CONSTELLATIONS WERE???

3: WHY THE HELL DOES ITS SHIFT MATCH AXIAL PRECESSION???

These aren't tough questions.

[bwt66]

No these aren't tough questions. Obviously I was aiming my answers too high ....

[bwt66]

Let's try this: the sidereal and synodic periods of the Moon are not equal; why? because by the time of the next conjunction with the Sun (New Moon), the Sun has moved another nearly 30 degrees along the ecliptic, so the Moon must make more than one full orbit to reach the Sun on the next pass. It's not a perfect match, even though the Moon is tidally locked to the Earth. Precession is similar, but on a grander scale.

[shanedk]

Yes, yes, astronomers know all about that. What does that have to do with the mysterious Zodiac?

[bwt66]

Technically, the constellations have changed over 5000yrs because the "fixed stars" are not fixed -- they each have "proper motion" within space and can shift subtly over time. Also, you say "what changed was the precession of Earth's axis" which is also not correct -- the motion did not change its nature or speed (as far as anyone knows); the perception of precession is a cumulative effect of an ongoing motion, so the precession did not change, but rather the precession IS the change.

[shanedk]

VERY subtly. Carl Sagan's COSMOS has simulations of just how long it takes for noticeable differences to show.

Yes, the precession is the change, and the Zodiac changed at exactly the same rate. Stop with the babbling and answer why.

[bwt66]

Because the Zodiac lies along the ecliptic & became the yardstick against which precession is measured. The physical stars are merely markers. Think of land surveyors out in the field with scopes & sticks. A distant tree or rocky outcrop allows a visual fix & triangulation of distance in an otherwise featureless landscape. Stars serve the same function.

[shanedk]

That still doesn't answer the question. You haven't explained what the Zodiac is, why it matched the constellations, and why it got off at the same rate as the precession.

[bwt66]

What answer are you looking for? All my answers have been correct, but you don't like them. Is there some "put your foot in it" answer you're hoping to hear??

[shanedk]

While all answers are replies, not all replies are answers. I want useful information. I want direct answers that give the information requested in the questions.

[bwt66]

The split between star constellations & zodiac signs began 2000+yrs ago when precession was noticed. The rate of shift (1°/72yrs) was greater than human lifespans. Vedic & Sidereal astrologers DO follow stars & you are Cancer for them. But tropicalists anchor Zero Aries to the Vernal Equinox & let the stars roll by. Only in the tropical zodiac are you a Leo. The names derive from the ancient stars, but Time as experienced on Earth is more important than "star time".

[shanedk]

Yeah, well, astronomers don't differ about matters like orbital periods etc. If astrology can't agree on this very basic thing then how can there be any validity to it?

[bwt66]

But all astronomers do agree on one thing -- they use Zero Aries for measuring out the sky, same as the astrologers who invented it for them. And astrology invented the calendar and geometry too.

[shanedk]

They also say "sunrise" and "sunset;" that doesn't mean the geocentric model has any validity whatsoever.

[bwt66]

Young did not explain the zodiac distinction very well and you went for the jugular on it, but that was also intellectual dishonesty because, as a person striving to be an educator, you should also know better.

[shanedk]

I didn't explain it very well because THEY don't explain it very well. It's just an excuse made up after the fact. They can't tell you what the Zodiac is, why it just so happens to match where the constellations were 2,000 years ago, or why it just so happens to move at the same rate as Earth's axial precession.

It's BOGUS.

[bwt66]

I just did explain it, very well (for a comment limited to 500 characters).

[shanedk]

No, you didn't, and you didn't explain the blatant coincidences that make the whole thing scream bogosity.

[bwt66]

What coincidences? That the constellations and the zodiac signs have the same names? Well of course they do - they were once upon a time one and the same thing. But they haven't been for 2000ys now, since precession was discovered and they parted ways.

[shanedk]

"they were once upon a time one and the same thing." WHY were they once upon a time the same thing? That's the question!

[bwt66]

No -- the question is why are they no longer one and the same thing. And I answered that. They did not grow together; they grew apart. They were *always* the same thing, from time immemorial, until they were no longer the same thing. You need to point Time's arrow the other way.

[shanedk]

"They did not grow together; they grew apart."

That makes absolutely no sense. The constellations did not change in any appreciable way. What changed was the precession of Earth's axis. You still need to answer why they were the same to begin with, and why they "grew apart" at exactly the same rate as Earth's axial precession.

[bwt66]

Uhhh .... Why is this so difficult for you? They grew apart at the rate of Earth's axial precession because this is all one and the same phenomenon viewed from opposing perspectives -- sort of like sunrise and sunset versus Earthspin and more Earthspin .... I don't understand why you are getting hung up on this. It's pretty basic astronomy.

[shanedk]

There's no such thing as the "Zodiac" in astronomy. Earth's axial precession causes a shift in the direction we look at the universe at a particular time of the year. I want to know why this mysterious "Zodiac" just happens to change along with it so that Leo in the Zodiac no longer matches up with Leo the constellations but with Cancer.

[bwt66]

You understand Darwinian speciation, yes? Like the finches of Galapagos. Okay, there was once just a single unified definition of zodiac in the Eastern Mediterranean region and this speciated over time -- disagreements led to splits. There are other zodiacs in other cultures which went extinct altogether. But the discovery of precession caused a schism.

[bwt66]

Go back 5000yrs, when astrology first comes into history, and you will find 15 Taurus at the equinox (now shifted to about 5-6 Pisces). Aldebaran marked the Vernal equinox and Antares marked the Autumnal, while Regulus marked the Summer solstice and Fomalhaut marked the Winter.

[bwt66]

Further to my Aldebaran comment: when this bright star marked the equinox, then Regulus in Leo marked the solstice. By this measurement, you Shane would be a Virgo (b. 31 July) and your exacting critical uncompromising persnickety rationalism shines through in your videos. And your ex-wife would then be perhaps a Libra (August) but more likely a Scorpio and Scorpios DO get labelled as lying abusers sometimes. :-)

[spartacus6839]

You have to be educated to criticise astrology. Yes. Everyone is everything. But people are more so if its in there chart. If your car breaks down and you know nothing about cars or mechaincs. Then you can argue that the car never worked in the first place and all mechanics is false and only for the gulliable.YOU NEED EDUCATION.....

[shanedk]

But even without an education in auto mechanics, you can easily see that cars work. You can easily test the hypothesis. You don't even need to know about internal combustion or anything else about the inner workings. You can see that the car works; you can do it yourself.

[thisisaproxy]

shanedk:

LOL!

Anyways, I live with a ton of people who believe in astrology. Although I admit that it's a good "mirror" to deal with your psychological issues, I really am rubbed a bad way when people claim that it has any bearing on reality beyond their belief system. Thank you for giving the world a little more reason- and humor!

[shanedk]

That's how I feel about the I Ching. I played around with it in college. It's a wonderful system of lines moving to lines and it does a good job of helping you see your problem from a different angle, which can be very useful. But, of course, it doesn't matter WHICH hexagram you rolled; they all were equally useful.

Shame, really. If they'd focused less on the mysticism and more on the psychology they could have come up with something unrivaled throughout the ages. Oh well, hindsight and all...

[guitaoist]

what is scientific about psychology? doesn't recquire the inexplicable?

[shanedk]

Psychology takes a very scientific approach. Just because they're studying something complex and difficult to predict doesn't mean it's not a science. The weather is complex and extremely difficult to predict yet we still have the science of meteorology.

[guitaoist]

which is why the weather men are frequnetly wrong. the number one rule of psychology is that correlation doesn't equal causation- from that point on we can say that its approach is scientific, but it is not in itself.

[shanedk]

But meteorology PREDICTS that they will be frequently wrong. Of all the times they say 65% chance of rain, 35% of those times it won't rain. Duh.

[JohnPaulNoah]

Astrology is occult.

[Megasroxlol]

This is AWESOME. You rock! Yay science!

[ve666999]

Chadow and Young are G@y partners. When ever Neptune is in ascendence, these 2 suck each others cock. LMFAO!!!

[torgamus2]

Awesome. Wish more people could just THINK about things...

[AquaOceanWave]

Bravo! 5 Stars!

[smaakjeks]

These videos are very well put together, and highly entertaining! Can't wait for the evolution vs. fairy tail creationism thing!

[Eyedunno]

BURRRRN! hahaha

[marquisdejolie]

Can you do the false constructs of evolution next?

[shanedk]

Way ahead of you. ;^) The next one is indeed about evolution and creationism; I already have the script written.

[thredd55]

Wonderful! I love it! Particularly the nuts in the bowl analogy. Very good job and I hope you do this for all of the mystic arts.

[chadow723]

Thredd, oh now he has a puppet . .. did you ask Randi's permission?

[thredd55]

Geez chadow, why don't you tell me? Can you divine from the stars whether I had Randi's permission? I don't understand why you're bothering to waste your time on youtube when you and your idiot, mystified friends could be consulting your arcane knowledge for the winning lottery numbers. Let's see, chart says it could be a 2, or any number between 1-9.....You're such a blowhard.

[shanedk]

Randi's permission for what?

[chadow723]

Hey schnookums, False premises lead to false conclusions, something you seem very gifted with..

funny video, Oh, your eyebrow is still funny

[chadow723]

Plagiarized you mean. . . right?