that's why i always read the whole horoscope section. some of the times other zodiac signs' horoscopes apply to me better than my actual one. i guess it has to do with the fact that we are all nothing but vibrations on cosmic strings and there can often be subtle interference
@TheRogueMonk - these people have different astrology signs and birth dates and most of them think they got their own personal reading. The scored it high when it was all bogus. One of the many demonstrations that shows astrology is bogus.
no all of them did not get high scores... did they? that could only mean that most of htem had the same birth month that is why it got high score.. if you know what i mean...
the video does not make it clear ... how many got what month or not...
@TheRogueMonk - I think you're missing the point. There is one reading given to all of them and if you look at the show of hands most of them rated it highly. It just shows that astrology readings are generalized and apply to anyone.
You can do this test yourself. Get a few people to get readings done then swap the results and ask those people to find their own. In these sorts of test the results come out the same as guesswork.
Astrology thrives on people not questioning the results.
@TheRogueMonk - there is so much bogus stuff out there. Unless the education system warns people about all these scams/cons/belief systems then folks will fall for them. I guess people are desperate to believe in anything other than the mundane worldly stuff. What I don't understand is the complete lack of solid evidence for it all yet people still believe the anecdotes spun by the purveyors. I enjoying posting on these sites to warn people but it doesn't seem to do much good. Oh well.
@ZoeMarks people have to learn that just because something can not be seen it does not mean its not real.. but dont you agree if its real it should have results in reality that actually prove reality and nature and not defies it? .. i believe in god .. god does not defy nature nor does he give me super natural powers although he gives me hope and hapiness and some insight in why somethings are the way they are.. its pure real effect on me as if my dad was to give me kindness.. it does not defy
THEY HAD COMPASSION. THEY WILL BE REMEMBERED FOR THIS.
I THINK YOU WILL BE REMEMBERED FOR YOUR STUBBORNESS, YOUR 'FIXED IN OPINION NATURE' AND YOUR ARGUMENTATIVENESS.
I HOPE SO, AS THEY ARE NOT NICE QUALITIES.
THEY WERE FAMOUS, YOU ARE NOT. HOWEVER, IF YOU REMEMER THAT YOU WILL REEP WHAT YOU SOW, THEN BE NICE AND PEOPLE WHO DO NOT KNOW YOU WILL FEEL KINDLY TOWARD YOU.
@zzytrewq I NEED CAPITAL LETTERS. MY EYESIGHT IS NOT AS GOOD.
YOU DIDN'T THINK OF THAT, SO ONCE AGAIN YOU ASSUMED YOU WERE CORRECT, UNAWARE YOU HAVE A TUNNEL VISION MENTALITY, JUDGING THE WORLD AND EVERYTHING BY WHAT YOU PERSONALLY THINK.
EXAMPLE. IF YOU SEE A MAN WEARING A WIG, YOU MAY LAUGH, TOTALLY UNAWARE THAT HE SUFFERED SEVERE HEAD BURNS WHEN HE HEROICALLY RESCUED TWO CHILDREN FROM A BURNING ROOM FILLED WITH SMOKE AND FLAMES. YOU KNOW FUCK ALL ! AND YOU DON'T KNOW IT !
@zzytrewq Most skeptics would even agree that the odds are very much in my favour on this particular subject, What are the chances of a very elderly and religious Indian lady having even heard of underwater electric ark welding? However, I'm sure she could lecture and speak with some knowledge on her religion beliefs.
@Z1Z121 - so you have polled skeptics and found this all to be true? Amazing. As for her religious beliefs she spoke with knowledge? How do you know? She known for having very curious views on pain and suffering by the poor, much of the money she collected was not directed to the poor but for opening new convents. Spread the word by let the poor suffer. How very Christian of her. Best not to use Teresa for analogies. She doesn't stack up.
@Z1Z121 - Mother Teresa would have been curious about ark welding as the ark was made of wood. She's think you're silly for thinking wood can be welded, at least she would know that.
You do know how to turn the "caps lock" key off? Even Mother Teresa would know that.
My good wishes to the very few polite, intelligent and open minded skeptics who air their
opinions on You Tube.
Fuck all the rude, ignorant, narrow minded, fixed in opinion prats, who assume their words are worthy of world wide exposure.
.
Mother Theresa had no knowledge of underwater electric ark welding, but she had the wisdom not to say anything about it, least of all, anything detrimental.
@Z1Z121 - there is no evidence Mother Teresa was at all interested in arc welding. Plus I'm sure if she was she could have asked a professional to explain how it works including the physics/chemistry and the answers would have been able to verified in the field. Now if she was to ask an astrologer how astrology works she'd be told to fuck off and go learn it for herself and to stop asking stupid questions ("how does it work?") and just accept that because it's old it must work. LOL
randi has found a loop hole for manking money. He starts out with a video on youtube dealing with any contraversal subject palmistry, telepathy, etc. He then tells you he wants proof and holds a $1,000,000 carrot under the donkey our noses. Then hundreds of donkeys argue with each other about it and to do so they have to log into his video. He gets thousands of 'hits' night and day from all over the world earning him royalties on youtube, the more we argue the more he gets. He Haw, He Haw.enjoy
YouTube monitor all videos and any that they think will take off' with a million or more views are then contacted and the creator gets a percentage deal set up. The boring video which you can watch entitled 'Charlie Bit My Finger' has had over 400 million hits and has earned £100,000 pounds for the parents. This was big news in the media a couple of weeks ago.
So your rude and big mouth assumptions can be wrong. Imagine now what millions of 'hits' nasty rude old randi gets.
Astrology is a very complicated subject It takes years of study and cannot be dismissed because you ASSUME it's nonsense.Newspaper astrology is just a rough guide,
The skeptics no nothing.about it. It's like saying airplanes are no good because some crash.The airplane is not dangerous the maintenance man missing something causes a problem.
Professor Hans Eysenke, Univ.of London studied for 5 years to expose it as nonsense and then wrote a full page of support in Evening Standard, stop assuming.
We are Hiring Astrologers/ Psychics / Clairvoyants / Tarot Readers / Fortune Tellers / Dream Interpreters / Palmistry and other related esoteric experts to provide services for our customers across the world.
Although I love James Randi and I think astrology is bullshit, I have to be fair, and say that this experiment is flawed.
I'm sure a social setting like this discourages people from criticizing someone presenting work to them. People are more likely to answer "4" or "5" just to fit in and go with the flow, and be courteous, when they're all in a room like this.
Again, not saying the conclusion is wrong, just the method.
@terracottapie - there would be some bias due to herd mentality but I'm sure if they ticked a box on a form and could remain anonymous the results would be similar. Even if the testing was done under stricter conditions all the astrological believers would still argue it was a flawed test.
I'm fairly sure Randi is familiar with proper research methodology, but being a small high school classroom, with limited time and funding, I don't think academic rigour was what Mr. Randi was trying to achieve.
@mastersausagemaker I don't disagree with any of that, but that renders this into essentially another social engineering magic trick that doesn't demonstrate anything scientifically.
It demonstrates a valid point and although the method is not comprehensive, it is acceptable.
There is nothing wrong in principle with social engineering, and using this to at least reduce some tendencies of incredulity is fine. Try to remember that this is a simple high school classroom demonstration whose results are not going to be published in a journal.
@mastersausagemaker That's what I was getting at, it doesn't "demonstrate" anything, if you socially engineered them into making a response you want.
If you "engineered" the response, then it doesn't prove anything. There's better ways to get the point across that astrology is bullshit (and it is bullshit).
I think that you are somewhat confused. All demonstrations are engineered in that they are designed for the explicit purpose of demonstrating a specific concept. Also, to socially engineer someone, they must first be effected by a process. Your statement assumes that they have been already engineered making your point moot
Randi's demonstration demonstrates that people have a tendency to agree with overly general horoscopes and place undue meaning into it by processes of eisegesis
Oh, Jesus on a stick! Can't you see you are making a big deal over nothing? Would you have preferred a randomised double-blind experiment? This is a high school class filled with ignorant kids who generally have no concept on experimental methods where the primary objective was to demonstrate the concept of eisegesis as it pertains to horoscopes. In this scope and situation, there is nothing incorrect about the methodology employed you are using arbitrary delimiters.
And I responded with a little comment that you were incorrect that Randi ought to have chosen a more rigourous test. I suggest you refer to bounded rationality to understand better my critique. Your absurd notion that a high school demonstration needs to be rigourous in conformity to an ideal case, ignoring the capricious nature of degree, is arbitrary, without normative basis, and impractical.
Methodology only matters in method of science, the rest is pragmatic necessity.
@terracottapie Have you seen the show "10 years younger."? They put a woman in a glass box and ask members of the public what age they think she is. Then they give her a makeover which is supposed to make her look at least ten years younger. They ask members of the public what age they think she is, again. But this time, there's no glass box. The people guessing have to tell her to her face what age they think she is.
Liam, Watch 'randi psychic investigator part 5 of 15' and you will see my friend Dr Nias. who says:-
"However, we found some VERY CONVINCING EVIDENCE."
Now remember, that's what randi is supposed to be looking for, so at that point randi should have said:- "Really? Please TELL us about that" but of course he wouldn't because it would ruin his show. Chapman is arrogant, pompous and narrow minded, fry is NOT a gentleman to say 'bullshit' on T.V., he's small fry while Dr Seymour is a gentleman.
I already know that your reply is likely to be negative.
I know you sincerely believe your own opinions, but they are fixed,
because, like other skeptics, you've already made up your mind.
Imagine the horrifying scenario where as an innocent victim, I stand in court before a prosecution lawyer or a judge like you, accused of killing skeptics and then I learn you've dismissed the evidence of Eysenke and Nias without even reading it.
That's what a genuine psychic person is up against, Prejudice.
LIam, You were not diplomatic, but at least your reply wasn't obscene.
Look at the skeptic comments and see how negative and prejudiced they are,
I know if you were my brother or friend you'd be surprised at psychic things that happen to me, abstract phenomena over which I have no control and is unavailable on demand.
It's fantastic but not fantasy. It's not nice to say I forgot the details, that's your assumption again. Please note Prof Eynsenke and Dr.Nias are more famous than you.
@Z1Z121 - the ill-informed and statistically inept see every mere coincidence as proof of "powers at work". Casinos make their millions from people who believe in luck. Astrological websites make huge $ from who see their readings as accurate. Religious fruits see every disaster as a sign from God. People interpret events to support the outcomes they seek. Superstitious folks would seem to be incapable of seeing reality.
Liam, My comment can be verified by Dr. David Nias, an eminent psychologist whom I met when he worked with Prof Eysenke in1977- (we've been in touch and friends ever since).
Dr Nias was once treating Lady Diana for depression. The people I've mentioned are highly respected in their profession and the world of science.
Goodbye and have a great paranormal year, where you learn about things you thought were either nonsense, fake, lies, coincidences or delusions. But if you have no ESP. forget it.
Liam. In 1977 - before you were born ? I was challenged by the late world famous Scientist, Prof. Hans Eysenke, Univ.of London to name the birth signs of 10 of his scientists, I got 8 right.
In1972, he thought he'd expose astrology as nonsense, being a scientist, he had to do research first until he knew the meaning of "Having Mars in Leo in the 2nd house" etc.,
AFTER 5 YEARS, he wrote a FULL PAGE in the EVENING STANDARD saying how astonished he was to find so much TRUTH in the subject..
@Z1Z121 - no astrologer under controlled conditions has ever done better than guess work to name a person's birth sign out of a group. Your memory of what you think you did is clouded by blind belief. No genuine scientist sets out to prove something is nonsense (you are now using hyperbole as your arguments are so weak) - Prof. Hans Eysenke did not produce any evidence that supported the claims of astrologers; being astounded by anecdotes is one thing, facts is another.
The year is 1531, My intelligent friend is dragged off and burned at the stake by ignorant skeptics for saying that one day doors may open as you approach them and music and voices may come out of little boxes. Today's skeptics have the same mentality, so thank God it's 2011,
@Z1Z121 - your friend would have been the skeptic that was dragged off by religious loonies; if you can't make up an analogy to make your point then you're screwed.
If skeptics are wrong about astrology never having been demonstrated to work then no doubt an aspiring astrologer will provide evidence to the contrary. Mind you in the hundreads of years since astrology stuff was made up not one of them has come up with anything like a theory or a proof. Mind you they're good at slagging critics.
If skeptics make up their minds that something is impossible, then, armed with that as a starting point, they want to destroy any claims of the paranormal as nonsense.
If they did several years research with an open mind, they would have found among all the nonsense, convincing evidence, but sadly, they are prejudiced, from day one, NO ESP? NO HOPE !
@Z1Z121 - so Randi being gay is somehow related to what? Astrology is true by default? If you spent more time trying to prove astrology and less time taking pot-shots at its critics you might uncover the reason why rational people think it is nonsense.
"Looking to the heavens to study people makes as much sense as looking at people to study the stars." Adam Peenum
I am puzzled that skeptics who have no knowledge or experience of the subjects they rudely denounce, still do so, surely it is unwise.
It's just their opinion, which is an assumption, a prejudgement - prejudice.
It would be so nice if a skeptic said:-
"Personally, I am unable to believe that there is any truth in astrology, telepathy, palmistry , psychic ability or the paranormal" but as I've never studied or experienced those subjects, WHO AM I ridicule or insult those who claim they have"
@Z1Z121 -Personally, I am unable to believe that there is any truth in astrology, telepathy, palmistry , psychic ability or the paranormal because I have never seen any studies or research that confirms any of the claims of them. Sure I have seen lots of anecdotal information but nothing done under controlled conditions. So on that basis I will still believe there is nothing to support their claims despite believers refusing to accept this view in a similar vein.
There are none so deaf as skeptics who will not listen.
WATCH PROFESSOR VICTOR ZAMMIT'S VIDEOS ON YOU TUBE especially 'VICTOR ZAMMIT EXPOSES JIM RANDI' He explains why randi's challenge doesn't hold water and how a successful applicant may never get the million dollars anyway.
@Z1Z121 - "Lawyer Victor Zammit offers 1 million dollars to any afterlife researcher who can rebut the existing evidence for the Afterlife" - that says it all. It is not up to people to disprove something. Obviously Zammit doesn't have a clue. How about he disproves there are fairies living in my garden? He hasn't proven there is an afterlife, he claims there is one, so what sort of idiot is he to challenge Randi?
The late world famous Prof. Hans Eysenke of the Univ. of London decided astrology was nonsense and set out to expose it..
Knowing nothing of astrology, a phrase like" Jupiter in Sagittarius in the 2nd house meant absolutely nothing to him and being a scientist, he could not say something was nonsense until he checked and proved it, so for FIVE YEARS he studied astrology and then published a full page in the Evening Standard saying he was astonished at the truth he'd found in the subject.
@Z1Z121 even if it works, doest it help us?no, its not helping us at anything. why should we bother and loose our valuable life time with something of no value? would you stake your moms life on hypothesis astrology is true, would you make calculations for rockets to space based on this? its just some pseudo sociology and imho some types of "deviant sociology" are not so important either, youre kidding so much, because youre just trying to maintain your life pillars,dont try to persuade yourself
Fakes don't apply to randi for fear of losing their business by being ridiculed. GENUINE psychics hope to belittle randi. because they know they've made contact with the paranormal before, but it's a risk, because the paranormal is not available on demand, it comes at random.
Please see Professor Victor Zammit's You Tube put down on randi explaining how his challenge doesn't hold water and can never be paid anyway, as it's not legally acceptable. Prof Zammit is a barrister and gentleman,
@Z1Z121 - so you and Zammit et al spend all your time trying to attack Randi. When all you and the Zammits of this world would have to do is provide unequivocal proof. And why has that never happened? Can proof only be provided in astrological terms that only can be understood by astrologers? That is just about the biggest laugh there is. Get off your backside and tell the world in unambiguous words where there is proof of the claims of any of these superstitious/paranormal practises.
I'm astonished that skeptics want to give their opinion on subjects they have not experienced and know nothing about, surely that is unwise. How can they do that?
It would be so nice if someone who thought stories of the paranormal was nonsense said :-
"Personally, I find it impossible to believe there is any truth in psychic ability, telepathy, astrology or the paranormal, but then, I have no knowledge or experience of those subjects, so WHO AM I to say it's nonsense and insult those who have?
@Z1Z121 - you are no better than religious fundamentalists. Their whole world of creationism and God relies on word of mouth stories handed down over years with absolutely no scientific proof of any of the claims for the magical aspects (world created in 6 days about 6000 years ago). It is all based on faith (belief without proof) and that seems to be how all these other paranormal claims survive. What people genuinely believe and what is truth for the rest of us aren't the same.
@ZoeMarks So where is the proof in science of experiential phenomena which in itself is self evident - of which you and all of us are a part of ? Got any laws, theories? There's only us to refer to. Astrology connects us with our universe - our origin - and in all ways. Science does not and denies us this connection. Randi wants proof of something that science types cannot even provide proof of - what a crock. Astrology deals totally with that stuff.
It's unwise to listen to anyone who speaks on a subject they no nothing about.
randi has smugly stated that 700 people had failed his test. Something puzzled me about that. because I know if I threw 700 darts at a dartboard I'd hit the bullseye more than once and If 700 horses were running in a race, surely one jockey would reach the winning post.
I'd now like to throw 700 darts at randi, hoping one would pierce his thick skin.
Best wishes to all genuine psychics,keep up the good work.
@Z1Z121 your analogies are pathetically flawed. 700 horses in a race - someone has to win. 700 darts thrown at a dartboard, good chance some will hit. How about measuring 700 people who are 5 foot tall & awarding a prize to those over 6 foot. If you were to test 700 astrologers and depending on the type of testing several passed it would support the notion they use guesswork. If 700 astrologers all scored better than say 70% there might be something in astrology, but that has never happened.
You're so dumb it's almost incomprehensible. Oh, and I like how you spend all your time commenting on James Randi videos. You'd think someone who seemingly hated him wouldn't spend so much time talking about him. Debunking a debunker with no evidence or reason.
Best wishes to all genuine psychics...oh wait, there aren't any. LOL!
liamxaoh, You are someone who speaks without research and unaware that you have already made up your mind. Try 5 years of genuine study, it will enable you to learn BOTH SIDES of the argument.
Like all the others skeptics, you've already decided your assumptions are correct.
You've been eagerly following the skeptic's views as they support your beliefs.
It's birds of a feather, like different religions. There are convincing experiments you wouldn't like as they contradict your views. .
@Z1Z121 - I did my research. I have never been able to get anything sound to convince me it works. All I ever get is anecdotes & fluff. Sceptics don't don't assume their assumptions are correct, you assume too much. We ask to see evidence that has been thoroughly tested, that is something astrologers don't provide. They are the ones with all the assumptions, they assume because it is ancient & many believe in it, it must be true. What're the experiments that will convince me?
Regarding astrology, the sun comes up over the horizon and the flowers open their petals. The sunspots interfere with radio transmissions. The moon pulls the ocean's tidal waves. Birds, fish and animals fly, swim or travel THOUSANDS of miles to mate on the NIGHT of the full moon - (How do they know WHEN to start their journey?) Other creatures go there as well to eat them, so it's clear that nothing out in space affects life on earth. Have a nice day.
YOU SEE, BEFORE OPENING YOUR MOUTHS, IT'S BEST NOT TO SAY ANYTHING IF YOU HAVEN'T DONE ANY RESEARCH.
HOW MANY OF YOU 'EAGER TO CONDEMN' OUTSPOKEN RUDE SKEPTICS HAVE EVEN HEARD OF PROFESSOR EYSENKE OR HIS RESEARCH INTO THE PARANORMAL?, YOU SIMPLY VOICE YOUR ASSUMPTIONS, HOW FOOLISH.
NARROW MINDED, ALREADY DECIDED, SILLY OLD SKEPTIC RANDI DOES NOT WANT YOUR ATTENTION BROUGHT TO THE 5 YEARS OF RESEARCH DONE BY THE LATE WORLD FAMOUS PROFESSOR HANS EYSENKE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF LONDON, WHO ANNOUNCED IN A FULL PAGE ARTICLE IN THE EVENING STANDARD IN 1977, HOW SHOCKED HE WAS TO FIND SO MUCH TRUTH IN ASTROLOGY, THAT IT ACTUALLY UNDERMINED HIS FAITH IN SCIENCE.
WOW! A HIGHLY QUALIFIED WIDELY RESPECTED SCIENTIST DISCLOSING HIS FINDINGS. RANDI WOULDN'T LIKE THAT, HE'S ONLY A CONJUROR.
@Z1Z121 Find your fuckin caps lock button and press it once. After that stop spamming every james randi video with nonsense. "Faith in science". Are you handicapped?
@Z1Z121 - Quote: Eysenck ... able to point to that much of the acceptance of astrological readings was explained by the Barnum effect. Eysenck: "If the most basic tenets of astrology are true, they should be detectable in their own right . . . If astrology is true, it must pass that kind of test."
As you say, wow, a highly respected scientist stating the obvious. When is astrology going to pass the test? Never.
@Z1Z121- A paper by Mayo, White & Eysenck (1978) detailed EPI results for 2324 subjects, in the same journal by a paper by Smithers & Cooper (1978) with results for 559 more. In each case the result was a zig-zag pattern in agreement with astrology. The Eysenck paper was hailed by astrologers as "possibly the most important development for astrology in this century" (Phenomena 1977, 1, 1).Eysenck later discovered the effect disappeared when people unfamiliar with sun-signs were tested. Doh
It may seem very obvious that astrology is a scam, but experiments like this reminds us that nothing is obvious and we must always ask questions. Like this, mankind makes big steps forward!
watch?v=g1DjUtQLMko please spread the word. super crucial project and super nice after a safety break! Enlightenment through remembering your original face!! All original music fully conscious hip hop & devotional music with visual 3D animation.
I hate astrology more than religion. It gives astronomy and cosmology a terrible name, even though they aren't related at all. Anyone who believes in astrology is a fucking moron.
This bias is imposed by a supposition that mankind and the universe can be understood through the investigation of matter and energy (inherent therein). Where has physics or math or biology or chemistry ever created a predicate for experiential phenomena? Empirical data for astrology is lacking for the very same reason. Soullessness will get you nowhere.
Astrology is probably the biggest crock there is. Basing everything on the alignment of the stars when the alignment of the stars has no effect on a damn thing except navigation.
i remember me once i was really so stupid i really wanted to visit numerologist to help me set best date for my serious surgery. i now can only laugh at it.
Astrologers are convinced their readings are accurately done. From this test the clients consider any reading to be accurate. Therefore the astrologers are almost guaranteed to consider it to work based on client feedback. A random reading generator would be just as successful.
@ZoeMarks The clients are adolescents. Lots of self awareness there hey? - as in most Forer studies claimed by Robert Carroll of the Skeptics Assoc USA - all done on college students. Proves nothing. Should give him the million dollars for that one. Mighty magician.
College students are often used for behavioural studies. I presume it's for two reasons:
1) physiologically they are adults, which is the largest group to sample from.
2) because they are involved in a continuous process of learning, typically they are more receptive to new ideas.
Adults who are set in their dogma will go to ridiculous lengths to defend their beliefs - like the position that ANY religious belief is worth subjugating or harming someone over.
What is the difference between scientific belief and any other belief? Your presumption being that if you can understand matter and energy then you will understand mankind and the universe. Which to me is a load of crock because you cannot intelectualise everything. Consciousness for example has no scientific theory attached toi it even though it remains the basis for your being.
@camij79 Questions are welcome in science. Real questions help us better understand the universe around us which is precisely what science is all about. Plugging in the supernatural into areas where science has yet to prove anything, only serves to slow down our understanding of the world around us. For example: believing that the world is flat will keep you from going out to sea for fear of falling off of the edge, while knowing that the world is round has given us a greater understanding.
A scientific answer doesn't help when there's a dearth of data because there's nothing to study. We have so few ontological answers that we are currently building the data set...
If we develop an innate knowledge of consciousness (for example) it will be through the use of science and not by inventing answers with implausible explanations.
Isn't a rational, proven approach likely to provide a better answer than an ad hoc fiction like astrology ?
@DeadeyeLefty - you realise you're trying to reason with a believer in astrology. I can send you a rock and you can try to reason with it, you'll get a better response.
@DeadeyeLefty Once again experiential phenomena cannot be explained through the study of matter. Astrology - and there is no god mindset involved - relies on the belief that ALL of nature permeates ALL of nature which of course includes us and our relationship with the cycles of nature experienced by us and is inclusive of consciousness. Understanding the relevence of the cycles of nature is imperative in understanding ourselves - the connection is obvious. Ever heard of life cycles?
@DeadeyeLefty Don't bother arguing with the fool. Astrologists don't base their beliefs on scientific evidence, they base it on fairy dust. With such closed minded thinking you can't expect them to see reason, like arguing with a brick wall.
Hehe...I do see your point but this is just for fun. My argument isn't an earnest one, I'm simply trying to help someone realize that their position doesn't really stand up. We 'cherish' our beliefs because they don't weather any kind of serious scrutiny. ("You can't intellectualize consciousness...") That's why, if you look at Christianity as an example of a widely-held belief, blasphemy is even worse than priests buggering little kids: it's the only sin that cannot be forgiven.
@DeadeyeLefty The seasons are the basis for the signs of the zodiac. In this modern world where else can you find a subject that clearly attempts to fully incorporate nature with mankind. Modern science has almost successfully de-anthropomorphized cognition. Human self aggrandizement. Every part of our being has emerged from the cosmos and yet the modern world view has severed that connection and relocated it to the autonomous human self. There have to be some who keep the fabric intact.
@camij79___You said:"...a subject that clearly attempts to fully incorporate nature with mankind.". Do you see the problem with that ? A truly inquiring and unbiased mind doesn't try to impose ANY connections (sentimental or not) because it instantly introduces a bias. Is it not more true to study a subject based strictly on its empirical merits ? A connection found in such a way will stand up to scrutiny or will be revised and retested. It's a simple test that astrology always fails abysmally.
I see that you have trouble with some relationships. I also see if you try hard to improve your relationship with your best friend, everything will work out. You are always worried about other people, but you need to let others live their own lives and make their own mistakes. I see you have money problems as well. You should spend less and save more. Also stop eating so much you fat slob. And exercise once in a while or you will drop dead in 5 days, on Friday, at 4:16 and 37 seconds (PM).
@greyeyed123 - I see you have done Astrology 101. Your predictions are very accurate. You should consider a future at scamming, err, I mean doing readings.
@LiamXaoh There are so many people out there, as Mulder's poster said, who "want to believe", that they will allow themselves to be scammed by people who see just how vulnerable gullible people are. They'll even get on fora like this and proclaim Randi a "pseudo-skeptic", as if that term makes any sense...as if the experiment in this video doesn't show conclusively that (for this random group, at least) Astrology doesn't work at all. It's just confirmation bias in action!
@MarritJolanda People who are gullible enough to believe in astrological signs will start to behave according to this sign so that other people believing in astrological signs will be able to tell from this behavior.
I knew this girl who could tell anyones astrological sign without knowing when they were born:) She always seemed to be a no-nonsense girl but she got it right every time!
@MarritJolanda - I bet you she didn't....no one has ever demonstrated that ability under controlled conditions anywhere in the world, if they had it would be published and the person would be oh so rich.
@LiamXaoh Well, she did every-time I was around, maybe she got it wrong a few times when I wasn't. I just thought it was cool, but wouldn't try to make some scientific point with it. With that, people who don't believe in astrology wouldn't believe it even if it's true. But that's okay, everybody it's own believes(or not):)
@MarritJolanda - astrologers have had hundreds of years to come up with evidence that it works. If they do and the evidence stands scrutiny I'll become a believer. Until then I see it for what it is. A long running lie and scam.
@LiamXaoh As long as people find truth in it, or feel supported, it's not that bad I think. We also get told that we will feel happy when buying the newest phone on the market. People believe that, although I don't believe buying stuff contributes to happiness. Same with people lying to others about seeing dead relatives, but sometimes it gives people peace of mind in a hard mourning process. Or religion. There are very few things proven in live, scamming is common business. Just be happy:)
@LiamXaoh Can you please explain how you would demonstrate the protocol for these controlled conditions? Astrology attempts to explain experiential phenomena in our innate connection to the natural cycles of nature. Physics and math have no predicate for experiential phenomena at all. None nothing zilch.
This was not a test of astrology, but a test of self knowledge and self deception. They all failed. Few people bother or even dare to know the truth about themselves. For most people, looking in the mirror is scary or at least uncomfortable. Many create a false self to protect the real one and start to believe in it themselves. Many take the opinions of others and think, "OK, that's me then, inferior to all". Verdict: Colossal fail.
It is very easy to fool people who are not well versed in astrology and if they are a sheeple type - they will believe ANYTHING they are given without question. Some people don't know themselves well either. But that is how society is supposed to be - robots that one can easily program. This is hardly a debunking - more like a mind game.
So now that ZoeMarks and others refuse to do a test valid for astrology as I understand it (but still 100 % scientifical) for what reasons ever, I can only repeat my offer for anyone who likes test my astrological skills.
I did a cursory inquiry on astrology. So far I have heard believers in astrology talk about the use of star constellations and where they get the information to make a horoscope. Problem is, they don't explain the "how it works" part. See, that is what you need to gain acceptance of this theory. Without the "how it works" part, you have really nothing at all. All the belief and philosophy in the world does not prove the idea or theory in ANY way. Scientific explanation anyone ??
I was always under the impression that horoscopes were just for entertainment purposes due to obvious reasons. People actually "believe" that horoscope reading is real !!?!??? C'mon people, what year is this...1641 !!??
@orangemod No one has replied to this response yet so i'll try you. Astrology as the primal world view believes that intelligence and soul pervade all of nature and the cosmos and the human self directly participates in that larger matrix of meaning and purpose within which it is fully imbedded. The modern world view - all qualities associated with purposeful intelligence and soul are exclusive to humans, radically distinct from the objective non human world. Response would be nice.
@orangemod Thanks for that. Comforting to know science types generally don't have a philosophical bone in their collective bodies. Philosophy investigates the causes and laws underlying reality, amongst other things, as science pretends to.
@camij79 Well Camij, I worked with what I had. What philosophy do I need to go over? Do I "believe" in things that aren't backed-up by empirical evidence?...well..no, sorry I don't. If I was explained the mechanism that astrology works on, maybe I could accept the concept. It's not that it is not "possible", it is only that there is not enough evidence for me to accept the concept as fact. Same as bigfoot, possible but requires more than philosophy. Cheers.
As well Camij.... I am not part of any "collective" I have my own understanding of science that is separate from other people's idea(s) If you can explain, in mechanical or scientific terms, how it works then we have something to explore. "Beliefs" or "philosophy's" are a waste of time when trying to gain acceptance of any given theory. May not be what you want, but it is necessary to further explore this subject and how it supposedly works. Cheers.
"Astrology is a science in itself and contains an illuminating body of knowledge. It taught me many things, and I am greatly indebted to it. Geophysical evidence reveals the power of the stars and the planets in relation to the terrestrial. In turn, astrology reinforces this power to some extent. This is why astrology is like a life-giving elixir to mankind" Albert Einstein.
This is a quote I have found on many astrology websites. Nice eh? Trouble is it is he didn't say. Bad astrologers!
"This assessment, which is valid at least for psychological astrology, would claim, that quantitative studies are condemned to failure inherently, because they REDUCE AND DETERMINE ASTROLOGY TO CONDITIONS, WHICH DON'T DO JUSTICE TO ASTROLOGY ITSELF."
Translation from the qoute of "Kocku von Stuckrad", appeared in the german book "Geschichte der Astrologie".
I think it sums this whole "independent testing" - issue up nicely
"An objektive, on consensus based survey, which could prove the "working" of astrology clearly, is not present...
On the one hand, you could argue that, because of astrology beeing an symbol system, which can not be determined on concrete manifestations of the symbols, an excact clause of prognoses and readings, which is necessary for quantitative elicitations, is OUT OF QUESTION A PRIORI."
"The single fact that astrologers contradict each other at about every point, and the firm convictions of their own correctness supported by their experience, must call up doubts about the reliability of [their] methods. ... Not a single classical astrological element is shown to be able to resist statistical research." (Ronnie Martens and Tim Trachet, Making Sense of Astrology 1998, a review of astrological claims.)
@ZoeMarks An objective, on consensus based survey, which could prove the "working" of astrology clearly, is not present.
On the one hand, you could argue that, because of astrology beeing an symbol system, which can not be determined on concrete manifestations of the symbols, an exact clause of prognoses and readings, which is necessary for quantitative elicitations, is out of question a priori. (citation follows)
@ZoeMarks This assessment, which is valid at least for psychological astrology would claim, that quantitative studies are condemned to failure inherently, because they reduce an determine astrology to conditions, WHICH DONT'T DO JUSTICE TO ASTROLOGY ITSELF.
Translation from the quote of "Kocku von Stuckrad", appeared in the german book "Geschichte der Astrologie"
This sums up the whole "testing" issue quite nicely ;)
@constructivecritism - "...because they reduce an determine astrology to conditions, WHICH DONT'T DO JUSTICE TO ASTROLOGY ITSELF. " That is a typical response on the subject. The words mean nothing & are merely a pathetic attempt to hide behind gibberish. Explain how an astrologer or client decides if a reading is accurate. Defenders of astrology are tragic in their denial. If a client can't pick another client's reading from his own that is enough testing to confirm astrology is a lie.
@ZoeMarks Who are you to judge which conditions are appropriate to "test" or research astrology? Who are to say that if a client can't distinguish between his and other readings, to say that would prove astrology was false? You admitted on another occasion you never studied astrology.
To estimate which conditions are appropriate to the testing issue its mandatory to know about the shape of it. You obviously don't know about the shape, and whats worse, you DON'T EVEN WANT TO FIND OUT.
@constructivecritism - There have been several studies which have found clients couldn't pick their readings from a random set. I don't have to have studied anything to read studies by other people. Study scientific method % realise these studies don't prove astrology to be false as you stated. Science doesn't work that way. They merely demonstrate there is nothing to support the claims that readings are client unique.
Exactly what is the "shape" of astrology? I'd say it is fluid. LOL
Your quote: "Study scientific method % realise these studies don't prove astrology to be false as you stated."
I didn't state any studies disproved astrology. I stated YOU claim that "If a client can't pick another client's reading from his own that is enough testing to confirm astrology is a lie".
So the studies and "tests" you are taking into consideration "don't prove astrology to be false" as you say, but on the other hand for YOU one test is enough to say so?
@constructivecritism -at last count there are something like 35 studies that have failed to find astrological readings to be any better than guess work. There was one involving over 10 million people (the video has been removed from YT which is annoying). If there were that many studies that found my belief system was flawed I think I'd study something else - but then again I'm not blindly stubborn.
Let me ask you this - are creationists right about the earth being about 6000 years old?
@ZoeMarks Nice, give a link to those 35 studies please.
The 10 million one was a quantitative study.
The claim the world was 6000 years old is in contrary to scientifical research saying the world is about 4,5 billion years old. That way the claim contradicts scinetidic research. The claim of astrology, that people are born with certain dispositions, is supported by scientific disciplines like genetics, epigenetics, psychology etc. so the claim is in accord with scientific research.
@constructivecritism - people are born with certain dispositions - but no one has ever demonstrated any relationship between them and the heavens. So to imply otherwise is an untruth.
@constructivecritism "Who are to say that if a client can't distinguish between his & other readings, to say that would prove astrology was false?" That is the basis of many studies. Some of the testing involved astrologers who couldn't match a reading to a client. Then what use is the reading? It may give comfort to the client until you tell him "oops,I gave you the wrong one". Do 10 readings on 10 clients and mix them up & see how many notice. Oops, can't do that, not a valid test. LOL
@constructivecritism -I have given you answers but you don't like them. At the risk of repeating myself, I devise the test and choose the rules and you choose to participate. I can't imagine any study where the lab rat gets a say. Live with it.
@ZoeMarks Lol thats laughable. But on the other hand it sums up your whole approach to the issue.
The type of scientist I imagine as "ideal" is willing to find out and learn new things. He approaches issues of interest with an open attitude and deals with fields of knowledge respectfully, especially when not knowing much of the certain issue.
That way he gets in contact with other people on the basis of a dialogue. He asks questions rather then giving rash answers.
that's why i always read the whole horoscope section. some of the times other zodiac signs' horoscopes apply to me better than my actual one. i guess it has to do with the fact that we are all nothing but vibrations on cosmic strings and there can often be subtle interference
Diosukekun 2 weeks ago
@Diosukekun Some people will ignore the truth no matter how hard it hits them. *facepalm*
koantin 1 week ago
Randi for President!
hromi 3 weeks ago
this do not prove anything ot me as many people are similar so theyhave simlar score... what does that prove ?
it only proves that people are similar.... and some are different.... id do
TheRogueMonk 4 weeks ago
i dont see what this proves?
TheRogueMonk 4 weeks ago
@TheRogueMonk - these people have different astrology signs and birth dates and most of them think they got their own personal reading. The scored it high when it was all bogus. One of the many demonstrations that shows astrology is bogus.
ZoeMarks 3 weeks ago
no all of them did not get high scores... did they? that could only mean that most of htem had the same birth month that is why it got high score.. if you know what i mean...
the video does not make it clear ... how many got what month or not...
there is some inconsistency in this test.
TheRogueMonk 3 weeks ago
@TheRogueMonk - I think you're missing the point. There is one reading given to all of them and if you look at the show of hands most of them rated it highly. It just shows that astrology readings are generalized and apply to anyone.
You can do this test yourself. Get a few people to get readings done then swap the results and ask those people to find their own. In these sorts of test the results come out the same as guesswork.
Astrology thrives on people not questioning the results.
ZoeMarks 3 weeks ago
@ZoeMarks i wish they would do tests and bust some myths like kundalini and enlightenment stuff... i am so tired of hearing those things
TheRogueMonk 3 weeks ago
@TheRogueMonk - there is so much bogus stuff out there. Unless the education system warns people about all these scams/cons/belief systems then folks will fall for them. I guess people are desperate to believe in anything other than the mundane worldly stuff. What I don't understand is the complete lack of solid evidence for it all yet people still believe the anecdotes spun by the purveyors. I enjoying posting on these sites to warn people but it doesn't seem to do much good. Oh well.
ZoeMarks 3 weeks ago
@ZoeMarks people have to learn that just because something can not be seen it does not mean its not real.. but dont you agree if its real it should have results in reality that actually prove reality and nature and not defies it? .. i believe in god .. god does not defy nature nor does he give me super natural powers although he gives me hope and hapiness and some insight in why somethings are the way they are.. its pure real effect on me as if my dad was to give me kindness.. it does not defy
TheRogueMonk 3 weeks ago
@TheRogueMonk "god does not defy nature" Say what? Gods are by definition supernatural. That is why they don't exist.
LiamXaoh 1 week ago
Comment removed
TheRogueMonk 3 weeks ago
IT IS SAID 'BIRDS OF A FEATHER FLOCK TOGETHER'
LADY DIANA AND MOTHER THERESA WERE LOVED,
THEY CARED ABOUT UNFORTUNATE PEOPLE.
THEY HAD COMPASSION. THEY WILL BE REMEMBERED FOR THIS.
I THINK YOU WILL BE REMEMBERED FOR YOUR STUBBORNESS, YOUR 'FIXED IN OPINION NATURE' AND YOUR ARGUMENTATIVENESS.
I HOPE SO, AS THEY ARE NOT NICE QUALITIES.
THEY WERE FAMOUS, YOU ARE NOT. HOWEVER, IF YOU REMEMER THAT YOU WILL REEP WHAT YOU SOW, THEN BE NICE AND PEOPLE WHO DO NOT KNOW YOU WILL FEEL KINDLY TOWARD YOU.
Z1Z121 1 month ago
@Z1Z121 - you're stubborn and the use of upper case indicates you're shouting which is not nice, so by you own argument you won't be remembered. LOL
zzytrewq 1 month ago
@zzytrewq I NEED CAPITAL LETTERS. MY EYESIGHT IS NOT AS GOOD.
YOU DIDN'T THINK OF THAT, SO ONCE AGAIN YOU ASSUMED YOU WERE CORRECT, UNAWARE YOU HAVE A TUNNEL VISION MENTALITY, JUDGING THE WORLD AND EVERYTHING BY WHAT YOU PERSONALLY THINK.
EXAMPLE. IF YOU SEE A MAN WEARING A WIG, YOU MAY LAUGH, TOTALLY UNAWARE THAT HE SUFFERED SEVERE HEAD BURNS WHEN HE HEROICALLY RESCUED TWO CHILDREN FROM A BURNING ROOM FILLED WITH SMOKE AND FLAMES. YOU KNOW FUCK ALL ! AND YOU DON'T KNOW IT !
Z1Z121 1 month ago
@Z1Z121 - you only started using upper case when you started to get cranky so your eyesight argument is like most things you say .ie. bullshit.
I use 'ctrl' + scroll to make the fonts larger on my screen and thus don't appear an angry prat like you.
Perhaps your eyesight is affected by going off your meds....
zzytrewq 1 month ago
IN YOUR EAGERNESS TO ARGUE, YOU HAVE MISUNDERSTOOD MY COMMENT.
I NEVER SAID MOTHER THERESA HAD ANY INTEREST IN UNDERWATER ELECTRIC ARK WELDING. IT WAS ONLY A LOVELY EXAMPLE.
SKEPTICS FORM AN OPINION, THEN THEY THINK THEIR ASSUMPTION IS CORRECT.
BUT TO HAVE KNOWLEDGE OF A SUBJECT YOU NEED TO STUDY IT & AFTER A FEW YEARS YOU MAY BE QUALIFIED TO COMMENT.
I SAID MOTHER THERESA KNEW NOTHING OF UNDERWATER ELECTRIC ARK WELDING AND WAS WISE ENOUGH NOT TO COMMENT ON A SUBJECT SHE KNEW NOTHING ABOUT.
Z1Z121 1 month ago
@Z1Z121 - how do you know Mother Teresa didn't comment on things she knew nothing about? Aren't you assuming? Lousy analogy there buddy.
zzytrewq 1 month ago
@zzytrewq Most skeptics would even agree that the odds are very much in my favour on this particular subject, What are the chances of a very elderly and religious Indian lady having even heard of underwater electric ark welding? However, I'm sure she could lecture and speak with some knowledge on her religion beliefs.
Z1Z121 1 month ago
@Z1Z121 - so you have polled skeptics and found this all to be true? Amazing. As for her religious beliefs she spoke with knowledge? How do you know? She known for having very curious views on pain and suffering by the poor, much of the money she collected was not directed to the poor but for opening new convents. Spread the word by let the poor suffer. How very Christian of her. Best not to use Teresa for analogies. She doesn't stack up.
zzytrewq 1 month ago
@Z1Z121 - Mother Teresa would have been curious about ark welding as the ark was made of wood. She's think you're silly for thinking wood can be welded, at least she would know that.
You do know how to turn the "caps lock" key off? Even Mother Teresa would know that.
zzytrewq 1 month ago
@zzytrewq THANK YOU, I LIKE IT, THAT'S GOOD THINKING,
I'VE NOW CHANGED MY (ASSUMED) OPINION OF YOU FOR THAT AND I'M SORRY FOR MY PREVIOUS RUDE REPLY.
Z1Z121 1 month ago
My good wishes to the very few polite, intelligent and open minded skeptics who air their
opinions on You Tube.
Fuck all the rude, ignorant, narrow minded, fixed in opinion prats, who assume their words are worthy of world wide exposure.
.
Mother Theresa had no knowledge of underwater electric ark welding, but she had the wisdom not to say anything about it, least of all, anything detrimental.
Z1Z121 1 month ago
@Z1Z121 - there is no evidence Mother Teresa was at all interested in arc welding. Plus I'm sure if she was she could have asked a professional to explain how it works including the physics/chemistry and the answers would have been able to verified in the field. Now if she was to ask an astrologer how astrology works she'd be told to fuck off and go learn it for herself and to stop asking stupid questions ("how does it work?") and just accept that because it's old it must work. LOL
LiamXaoh 1 month ago
randi has found a loop hole for manking money. He starts out with a video on youtube dealing with any contraversal subject palmistry, telepathy, etc. He then tells you he wants proof and holds a $1,000,000 carrot under the donkey our noses. Then hundreds of donkeys argue with each other about it and to do so they have to log into his video. He gets thousands of 'hits' night and day from all over the world earning him royalties on youtube, the more we argue the more he gets. He Haw, He Haw.enjoy
Z1Z121 1 month ago
@Z1Z121 Please ecplain exactly how can you get "royalties" when someone hits your youtube video. That´s just nonsense. maybe you read it on the stars
ebrobaru 1 month ago
@ebrobaru
YouTube monitor all videos and any that they think will take off' with a million or more views are then contacted and the creator gets a percentage deal set up. The boring video which you can watch entitled 'Charlie Bit My Finger' has had over 400 million hits and has earned £100,000 pounds for the parents. This was big news in the media a couple of weeks ago.
So your rude and big mouth assumptions can be wrong. Imagine now what millions of 'hits' nasty rude old randi gets.
Z1Z121 1 month ago
Astrology is a very complicated subject It takes years of study and cannot be dismissed because you ASSUME it's nonsense.Newspaper astrology is just a rough guide,
The skeptics no nothing.about it. It's like saying airplanes are no good because some crash.The airplane is not dangerous the maintenance man missing something causes a problem.
Professor Hans Eysenke, Univ.of London studied for 5 years to expose it as nonsense and then wrote a full page of support in Evening Standard, stop assuming.
Z1Z121 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
We are Hiring Astrologers/ Psychics / Clairvoyants / Tarot Readers / Fortune Tellers / Dream Interpreters / Palmistry and other related esoteric experts to provide services for our customers across the world.
Please check the link on my video ....
All payment in USD to Wire/Check/Payoneer.
If interested please have a look. Thank you.
machopavel 1 month ago
Although I love James Randi and I think astrology is bullshit, I have to be fair, and say that this experiment is flawed.
I'm sure a social setting like this discourages people from criticizing someone presenting work to them. People are more likely to answer "4" or "5" just to fit in and go with the flow, and be courteous, when they're all in a room like this.
Again, not saying the conclusion is wrong, just the method.
terracottapie 2 months ago
@terracottapie - there would be some bias due to herd mentality but I'm sure if they ticked a box on a form and could remain anonymous the results would be similar. Even if the testing was done under stricter conditions all the astrological believers would still argue it was a flawed test.
zzytrewq 2 months ago
@terracottapie
I'm fairly sure Randi is familiar with proper research methodology, but being a small high school classroom, with limited time and funding, I don't think academic rigour was what Mr. Randi was trying to achieve.
mastersausagemaker 2 months ago
@mastersausagemaker I don't disagree with any of that, but that renders this into essentially another social engineering magic trick that doesn't demonstrate anything scientifically.
terracottapie 2 months ago
@terracottapie
It demonstrates a valid point and although the method is not comprehensive, it is acceptable.
There is nothing wrong in principle with social engineering, and using this to at least reduce some tendencies of incredulity is fine. Try to remember that this is a simple high school classroom demonstration whose results are not going to be published in a journal.
mastersausagemaker 2 months ago
@mastersausagemaker That's what I was getting at, it doesn't "demonstrate" anything, if you socially engineered them into making a response you want.
If you "engineered" the response, then it doesn't prove anything. There's better ways to get the point across that astrology is bullshit (and it is bullshit).
terracottapie 2 months ago
@terracottapie
I think that you are somewhat confused. All demonstrations are engineered in that they are designed for the explicit purpose of demonstrating a specific concept. Also, to socially engineer someone, they must first be effected by a process. Your statement assumes that they have been already engineered making your point moot
Randi's demonstration demonstrates that people have a tendency to agree with overly general horoscopes and place undue meaning into it by processes of eisegesis
mastersausagemaker 2 months ago
@mastersausagemaker No, it would only demonstrate that if we could be sure they were giving honest answers.
The openness of the survey makes it very likely they won't give honest answers.
terracottapie 2 months ago
@terracottapie
Oh, Jesus on a stick! Can't you see you are making a big deal over nothing? Would you have preferred a randomised double-blind experiment? This is a high school class filled with ignorant kids who generally have no concept on experimental methods where the primary objective was to demonstrate the concept of eisegesis as it pertains to horoscopes. In this scope and situation, there is nothing incorrect about the methodology employed you are using arbitrary delimiters.
mastersausagemaker 1 month ago
@mastersausagemaker I am not making a big deal out of anything. I made a calm little comment. You're the one talking about Jesus Christ on a stick.
If you think methodology doesn't matter because the intended audience is ignorant, then you're as bad as an astrologer.
terracottapie 1 month ago
@terracottapie
And I responded with a little comment that you were incorrect that Randi ought to have chosen a more rigourous test. I suggest you refer to bounded rationality to understand better my critique. Your absurd notion that a high school demonstration needs to be rigourous in conformity to an ideal case, ignoring the capricious nature of degree, is arbitrary, without normative basis, and impractical.
Methodology only matters in method of science, the rest is pragmatic necessity.
mastersausagemaker 1 month ago
@terracottapie Have you seen the show "10 years younger."? They put a woman in a glass box and ask members of the public what age they think she is. Then they give her a makeover which is supposed to make her look at least ten years younger. They ask members of the public what age they think she is, again. But this time, there's no glass box. The people guessing have to tell her to her face what age they think she is.
Smithpolly 1 month ago
Liam, Watch 'randi psychic investigator part 5 of 15' and you will see my friend Dr Nias. who says:-
"However, we found some VERY CONVINCING EVIDENCE."
Now remember, that's what randi is supposed to be looking for, so at that point randi should have said:- "Really? Please TELL us about that" but of course he wouldn't because it would ruin his show. Chapman is arrogant, pompous and narrow minded, fry is NOT a gentleman to say 'bullshit' on T.V., he's small fry while Dr Seymour is a gentleman.
Z1Z121 2 months ago
I already know that your reply is likely to be negative.
I know you sincerely believe your own opinions, but they are fixed,
because, like other skeptics, you've already made up your mind.
Imagine the horrifying scenario where as an innocent victim, I stand in court before a prosecution lawyer or a judge like you, accused of killing skeptics and then I learn you've dismissed the evidence of Eysenke and Nias without even reading it.
That's what a genuine psychic person is up against, Prejudice.
Z1Z121 2 months ago
LIam, You were not diplomatic, but at least your reply wasn't obscene.
Look at the skeptic comments and see how negative and prejudiced they are,
I know if you were my brother or friend you'd be surprised at psychic things that happen to me, abstract phenomena over which I have no control and is unavailable on demand.
It's fantastic but not fantasy. It's not nice to say I forgot the details, that's your assumption again. Please note Prof Eynsenke and Dr.Nias are more famous than you.
Z1Z121 2 months ago
@Z1Z121 - the ill-informed and statistically inept see every mere coincidence as proof of "powers at work". Casinos make their millions from people who believe in luck. Astrological websites make huge $ from who see their readings as accurate. Religious fruits see every disaster as a sign from God. People interpret events to support the outcomes they seek. Superstitious folks would seem to be incapable of seeing reality.
zzytrewq 2 months ago
Liam, My comment can be verified by Dr. David Nias, an eminent psychologist whom I met when he worked with Prof Eysenke in1977- (we've been in touch and friends ever since).
Dr Nias was once treating Lady Diana for depression. The people I've mentioned are highly respected in their profession and the world of science.
Goodbye and have a great paranormal year, where you learn about things you thought were either nonsense, fake, lies, coincidences or delusions. But if you have no ESP. forget it.
Z1Z121 2 months ago
@Z1Z121 - so astrologers have ESP? That must be why they don't like being tested, they know they will fail. Oh the irony!!!!
LiamXaoh 2 months ago
Liam. In 1977 - before you were born ? I was challenged by the late world famous Scientist, Prof. Hans Eysenke, Univ.of London to name the birth signs of 10 of his scientists, I got 8 right.
In1972, he thought he'd expose astrology as nonsense, being a scientist, he had to do research first until he knew the meaning of "Having Mars in Leo in the 2nd house" etc.,
AFTER 5 YEARS, he wrote a FULL PAGE in the EVENING STANDARD saying how astonished he was to find so much TRUTH in the subject..
Z1Z121 2 months ago 2
@Z1Z121 - no astrologer under controlled conditions has ever done better than guess work to name a person's birth sign out of a group. Your memory of what you think you did is clouded by blind belief. No genuine scientist sets out to prove something is nonsense (you are now using hyperbole as your arguments are so weak) - Prof. Hans Eysenke did not produce any evidence that supported the claims of astrologers; being astounded by anecdotes is one thing, facts is another.
LiamXaoh 2 months ago
The year is 1531, My intelligent friend is dragged off and burned at the stake by ignorant skeptics for saying that one day doors may open as you approach them and music and voices may come out of little boxes. Today's skeptics have the same mentality, so thank God it's 2011,
Z1Z121 2 months ago
@Z1Z121 - your friend would have been the skeptic that was dragged off by religious loonies; if you can't make up an analogy to make your point then you're screwed.
If skeptics are wrong about astrology never having been demonstrated to work then no doubt an aspiring astrologer will provide evidence to the contrary. Mind you in the hundreads of years since astrology stuff was made up not one of them has come up with anything like a theory or a proof. Mind you they're good at slagging critics.
LiamXaoh 2 months ago
If skeptics make up their minds that something is impossible, then, armed with that as a starting point, they want to destroy any claims of the paranormal as nonsense.
If they did several years research with an open mind, they would have found among all the nonsense, convincing evidence, but sadly, they are prejudiced, from day one, NO ESP? NO HOPE !
Z1Z121 2 months ago
I think Mr Randi would be a difficult person to be married to,
so I checked Wikipedia to see if he was divorced, to my surprise it says he came out as gay in March 2010.
I suppose the Wickipedia statement is true or it would not be permitted.
Z1Z121 2 months ago
@Z1Z121 - so Randi being gay is somehow related to what? Astrology is true by default? If you spent more time trying to prove astrology and less time taking pot-shots at its critics you might uncover the reason why rational people think it is nonsense.
"Looking to the heavens to study people makes as much sense as looking at people to study the stars." Adam Peenum
LiamXaoh 2 months ago
I am puzzled that skeptics who have no knowledge or experience of the subjects they rudely denounce, still do so, surely it is unwise.
It's just their opinion, which is an assumption, a prejudgement - prejudice.
It would be so nice if a skeptic said:-
"Personally, I am unable to believe that there is any truth in astrology, telepathy, palmistry , psychic ability or the paranormal" but as I've never studied or experienced those subjects, WHO AM I ridicule or insult those who claim they have"
Z1Z121 2 months ago
@Z1Z121 -Personally, I am unable to believe that there is any truth in astrology, telepathy, palmistry , psychic ability or the paranormal because I have never seen any studies or research that confirms any of the claims of them. Sure I have seen lots of anecdotal information but nothing done under controlled conditions. So on that basis I will still believe there is nothing to support their claims despite believers refusing to accept this view in a similar vein.
ZoeMarks 2 months ago
There are none so deaf as skeptics who will not listen.
WATCH PROFESSOR VICTOR ZAMMIT'S VIDEOS ON YOU TUBE especially 'VICTOR ZAMMIT EXPOSES JIM RANDI' He explains why randi's challenge doesn't hold water and how a successful applicant may never get the million dollars anyway.
Z1Z121 2 months ago
@Z1Z121 - "Lawyer Victor Zammit offers 1 million dollars to any afterlife researcher who can rebut the existing evidence for the Afterlife" - that says it all. It is not up to people to disprove something. Obviously Zammit doesn't have a clue. How about he disproves there are fairies living in my garden? He hasn't proven there is an afterlife, he claims there is one, so what sort of idiot is he to challenge Randi?
ZoeMarks 2 months ago
The late world famous Prof. Hans Eysenke of the Univ. of London decided astrology was nonsense and set out to expose it..
Knowing nothing of astrology, a phrase like" Jupiter in Sagittarius in the 2nd house meant absolutely nothing to him and being a scientist, he could not say something was nonsense until he checked and proved it, so for FIVE YEARS he studied astrology and then published a full page in the Evening Standard saying he was astonished at the truth he'd found in the subject.
Z1Z121 2 months ago
@Z1Z121 even if it works, doest it help us?no, its not helping us at anything. why should we bother and loose our valuable life time with something of no value? would you stake your moms life on hypothesis astrology is true, would you make calculations for rockets to space based on this? its just some pseudo sociology and imho some types of "deviant sociology" are not so important either, youre kidding so much, because youre just trying to maintain your life pillars,dont try to persuade yourself
IOPhaser 2 months ago
Fakes don't apply to randi for fear of losing their business by being ridiculed. GENUINE psychics hope to belittle randi. because they know they've made contact with the paranormal before, but it's a risk, because the paranormal is not available on demand, it comes at random.
Please see Professor Victor Zammit's You Tube put down on randi explaining how his challenge doesn't hold water and can never be paid anyway, as it's not legally acceptable. Prof Zammit is a barrister and gentleman,
Z1Z121 2 months ago
@Z1Z121 - so you and Zammit et al spend all your time trying to attack Randi. When all you and the Zammits of this world would have to do is provide unequivocal proof. And why has that never happened? Can proof only be provided in astrological terms that only can be understood by astrologers? That is just about the biggest laugh there is. Get off your backside and tell the world in unambiguous words where there is proof of the claims of any of these superstitious/paranormal practises.
ZoeMarks 2 months ago
I'm astonished that skeptics want to give their opinion on subjects they have not experienced and know nothing about, surely that is unwise. How can they do that?
It would be so nice if someone who thought stories of the paranormal was nonsense said :-
"Personally, I find it impossible to believe there is any truth in psychic ability, telepathy, astrology or the paranormal, but then, I have no knowledge or experience of those subjects, so WHO AM I to say it's nonsense and insult those who have?
Z1Z121 2 months ago
@Z1Z121 - you are no better than religious fundamentalists. Their whole world of creationism and God relies on word of mouth stories handed down over years with absolutely no scientific proof of any of the claims for the magical aspects (world created in 6 days about 6000 years ago). It is all based on faith (belief without proof) and that seems to be how all these other paranormal claims survive. What people genuinely believe and what is truth for the rest of us aren't the same.
ZoeMarks 2 months ago
@ZoeMarks So where is the proof in science of experiential phenomena which in itself is self evident - of which you and all of us are a part of ? Got any laws, theories? There's only us to refer to. Astrology connects us with our universe - our origin - and in all ways. Science does not and denies us this connection. Randi wants proof of something that science types cannot even provide proof of - what a crock. Astrology deals totally with that stuff.
camij79 2 months ago
@Z1Z121
you ASSUME skeptics have no experience with these things. which is, like your belief in the paranormal, faulty
pyr666 1 month ago
It's unwise to listen to anyone who speaks on a subject they no nothing about.
randi has smugly stated that 700 people had failed his test. Something puzzled me about that. because I know if I threw 700 darts at a dartboard I'd hit the bullseye more than once and If 700 horses were running in a race, surely one jockey would reach the winning post.
I'd now like to throw 700 darts at randi, hoping one would pierce his thick skin.
Best wishes to all genuine psychics,keep up the good work.
Z1Z121 2 months ago
@Z1Z121 your analogies are pathetically flawed. 700 horses in a race - someone has to win. 700 darts thrown at a dartboard, good chance some will hit. How about measuring 700 people who are 5 foot tall & awarding a prize to those over 6 foot. If you were to test 700 astrologers and depending on the type of testing several passed it would support the notion they use guesswork. If 700 astrologers all scored better than say 70% there might be something in astrology, but that has never happened.
LiamXaoh 2 months ago
@Z1Z121
You're so dumb it's almost incomprehensible. Oh, and I like how you spend all your time commenting on James Randi videos. You'd think someone who seemingly hated him wouldn't spend so much time talking about him. Debunking a debunker with no evidence or reason.
Best wishes to all genuine psychics...oh wait, there aren't any. LOL!
Tobunshi 2 months ago
@Z1Z121
you're assuming a test is a function of chance. which, constructed properly, a test never is.
pyr666 1 month ago
good job randi, you are fucking smart person.
markosgraveyard 2 months ago
liamxaoh, You are someone who speaks without research and unaware that you have already made up your mind. Try 5 years of genuine study, it will enable you to learn BOTH SIDES of the argument.
Like all the others skeptics, you've already decided your assumptions are correct.
You've been eagerly following the skeptic's views as they support your beliefs.
It's birds of a feather, like different religions. There are convincing experiments you wouldn't like as they contradict your views. .
Z1Z121 2 months ago
@Z1Z121 - I did my research. I have never been able to get anything sound to convince me it works. All I ever get is anecdotes & fluff. Sceptics don't don't assume their assumptions are correct, you assume too much. We ask to see evidence that has been thoroughly tested, that is something astrologers don't provide. They are the ones with all the assumptions, they assume because it is ancient & many believe in it, it must be true. What're the experiments that will convince me?
LiamXaoh 2 months ago
Three expressions, (which have NOTHING to do with astrology), are often used to suggest there is either a negative or positive force at work :-
1. It never rains but it pours.
2. He's on a gambler's lucky streak.
3. Everything he touches turns to gold.
There is, in fact, a force at work, the astrologers call it astrology. Have another nice day.
Z1Z121 2 months ago
Regarding astrology, the sun comes up over the horizon and the flowers open their petals. The sunspots interfere with radio transmissions. The moon pulls the ocean's tidal waves. Birds, fish and animals fly, swim or travel THOUSANDS of miles to mate on the NIGHT of the full moon - (How do they know WHEN to start their journey?) Other creatures go there as well to eat them, so it's clear that nothing out in space affects life on earth. Have a nice day.
Z1Z121 2 months ago
Kamael32
Your rudeness shows how unhappy you are. Try being pleasant and charming, then things should improve a lot.
I write my comments in capitals for those who are narrow minded and shortsighted, however in your case, it isn't necessary. Please note
I could have been rude back to you, but it's nicer to be polite.
Best psychic wishes and have a nice day.
Z1Z121 2 months ago
YOU SEE, BEFORE OPENING YOUR MOUTHS, IT'S BEST NOT TO SAY ANYTHING IF YOU HAVEN'T DONE ANY RESEARCH.
HOW MANY OF YOU 'EAGER TO CONDEMN' OUTSPOKEN RUDE SKEPTICS HAVE EVEN HEARD OF PROFESSOR EYSENKE OR HIS RESEARCH INTO THE PARANORMAL?, YOU SIMPLY VOICE YOUR ASSUMPTIONS, HOW FOOLISH.
Z1Z121 2 months ago
NARROW MINDED, ALREADY DECIDED, SILLY OLD SKEPTIC RANDI DOES NOT WANT YOUR ATTENTION BROUGHT TO THE 5 YEARS OF RESEARCH DONE BY THE LATE WORLD FAMOUS PROFESSOR HANS EYSENKE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF LONDON, WHO ANNOUNCED IN A FULL PAGE ARTICLE IN THE EVENING STANDARD IN 1977, HOW SHOCKED HE WAS TO FIND SO MUCH TRUTH IN ASTROLOGY, THAT IT ACTUALLY UNDERMINED HIS FAITH IN SCIENCE.
WOW! A HIGHLY QUALIFIED WIDELY RESPECTED SCIENTIST DISCLOSING HIS FINDINGS. RANDI WOULDN'T LIKE THAT, HE'S ONLY A CONJUROR.
Z1Z121 2 months ago
@Z1Z121 Find your fuckin caps lock button and press it once. After that stop spamming every james randi video with nonsense. "Faith in science". Are you handicapped?
kamael32 2 months ago
@Z1Z121 - Quote: Eysenck ... able to point to that much of the acceptance of astrological readings was explained by the Barnum effect. Eysenck: "If the most basic tenets of astrology are true, they should be detectable in their own right . . . If astrology is true, it must pass that kind of test."
As you say, wow, a highly respected scientist stating the obvious. When is astrology going to pass the test? Never.
LiamXaoh 2 months ago
@Z1Z121- A paper by Mayo, White & Eysenck (1978) detailed EPI results for 2324 subjects, in the same journal by a paper by Smithers & Cooper (1978) with results for 559 more. In each case the result was a zig-zag pattern in agreement with astrology. The Eysenck paper was hailed by astrologers as "possibly the most important development for astrology in this century" (Phenomena 1977, 1, 1).Eysenck later discovered the effect disappeared when people unfamiliar with sun-signs were tested. Doh
LiamXaoh 2 months ago
Q: How many light bulbs does it take to change an astrologer?
A: It doesn't matter; no matter how much they were illuminated they still wouldn't see the light.
LiamXaoh 3 months ago
A.S.T.R.O.L.O.G.Y.
A Stargazer's Tale Relying On Ludicrous Old Gobbledygook Yarns.
LiamXaoh 3 months ago
It may seem very obvious that astrology is a scam, but experiments like this reminds us that nothing is obvious and we must always ask questions. Like this, mankind makes big steps forward!
vaderas62 3 months ago
James Randi = awesome
He was the smart kid in The Emporers New Clothes
johndoe43210 3 months ago
SCIENTIST
Does it come to this? Oh well........
Sociopathic Collaborator Intellectually Eradicating Natural Tenets In-so-far-as Sabotaging Truths.
camij79 4 months ago
@camij79
Sociopathic? You're kidding me, right?
ciaobellakate 4 months ago
@camij79 CAMIJ - Can't Assimilate Modern intelligent Journalism?
carmium 3 months ago
A.S.T.R.O.L.O.G.E.R.
A Superstitious Type Relying On Lots Of Gullible Eager Readers
LiamXaoh 4 months ago 12
"Astrology may not predict the future, or accurately describe the present, but it is ancient." Adam Peenum.
LiamXaoh 4 months ago
"Astrology: a precise study of the unproven, by the irrational, for the ignorant." Adam Peenum
LiamXaoh 4 months ago
@LiamXaoh Science - a study of the proven, by the rationalist, for the ignoramus- Adam Peanut
camij79 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
watch?v=g1DjUtQLMko please spread the word. super crucial project and super nice after a safety break! Enlightenment through remembering your original face!! All original music fully conscious hip hop & devotional music with visual 3D animation.
BarclayGolden 4 months ago
I hate astrology more than religion. It gives astronomy and cosmology a terrible name, even though they aren't related at all. Anyone who believes in astrology is a fucking moron.
JWStreeter 4 months ago 6
Go to The Crash of 1929 (Part Three) and forward to 1:55. Then search Evangeline Adams on Trial.
Vote4RonPaulLiberty 5 months ago
This bias is imposed by a supposition that mankind and the universe can be understood through the investigation of matter and energy (inherent therein). Where has physics or math or biology or chemistry ever created a predicate for experiential phenomena? Empirical data for astrology is lacking for the very same reason. Soullessness will get you nowhere.
camij79 5 months ago
Astrology is probably the biggest crock there is. Basing everything on the alignment of the stars when the alignment of the stars has no effect on a damn thing except navigation.
stevensw 5 months ago
@stevensw -absolutely.
"Stars guide ships and fools." Adam Peenum
LiamXaoh 5 months ago
i remember me once i was really so stupid i really wanted to visit numerologist to help me set best date for my serious surgery. i now can only laugh at it.
IOPhaser 7 months ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
A YOUTUBE video "UFO Disclosure A Global Deception Conspiracy "
is a compilation of knowledge hidden from the masses in regards to life
beyond Earth. The compilation contains statements from politicians,
presidents, astronauts, military personnel & credible news
footage, free energy technology awareness and first contact initiation +
current and ongoing E.T. presence which is being hidden from the people + more.
Futurecop2012C 7 months ago
@Futurecop2012C and then go watch Star Trek. It´s really fun!
ebrobaru 7 months ago
@ebrobaru xDD
SpaceMasterRahel 7 months ago
Astrologers are convinced their readings are accurately done. From this test the clients consider any reading to be accurate. Therefore the astrologers are almost guaranteed to consider it to work based on client feedback. A random reading generator would be just as successful.
ZoeMarks 7 months ago
@ZoeMarks The clients are adolescents. Lots of self awareness there hey? - as in most Forer studies claimed by Robert Carroll of the Skeptics Assoc USA - all done on college students. Proves nothing. Should give him the million dollars for that one. Mighty magician.
camij79 7 months ago
@camij79
College students are often used for behavioural studies. I presume it's for two reasons:
1) physiologically they are adults, which is the largest group to sample from.
2) because they are involved in a continuous process of learning, typically they are more receptive to new ideas.
Adults who are set in their dogma will go to ridiculous lengths to defend their beliefs - like the position that ANY religious belief is worth subjugating or harming someone over.
DeadeyeLefty 7 months ago 4
@DeadeyeLefty
Reason 3) they need the money
Reason 4) joining a study can often get them credit in certian classes.
Reason 5) most study grants are given to university professors so advertise where they live
ratholin 7 months ago
@ratholin I've actually heard a lot of professors state that students are a poor cross section for doing any meaningful sociological tests.
ratholin 7 months ago
@DeadeyeLefty
What is the difference between scientific belief and any other belief? Your presumption being that if you can understand matter and energy then you will understand mankind and the universe. Which to me is a load of crock because you cannot intelectualise everything. Consciousness for example has no scientific theory attached toi it even though it remains the basis for your being.
camij79 6 months ago
@camij79 Questions are welcome in science. Real questions help us better understand the universe around us which is precisely what science is all about. Plugging in the supernatural into areas where science has yet to prove anything, only serves to slow down our understanding of the world around us. For example: believing that the world is flat will keep you from going out to sea for fear of falling off of the edge, while knowing that the world is round has given us a greater understanding.
ShrodingerFu 6 months ago
@camij79 - As opposed to astrology specifically:
A scientific answer doesn't help when there's a dearth of data because there's nothing to study. We have so few ontological answers that we are currently building the data set...
If we develop an innate knowledge of consciousness (for example) it will be through the use of science and not by inventing answers with implausible explanations.
Isn't a rational, proven approach likely to provide a better answer than an ad hoc fiction like astrology ?
DeadeyeLefty 6 months ago
@DeadeyeLefty - you realise you're trying to reason with a believer in astrology. I can send you a rock and you can try to reason with it, you'll get a better response.
LiamXaoh 6 months ago 5
@DeadeyeLefty Once again experiential phenomena cannot be explained through the study of matter. Astrology - and there is no god mindset involved - relies on the belief that ALL of nature permeates ALL of nature which of course includes us and our relationship with the cycles of nature experienced by us and is inclusive of consciousness. Understanding the relevence of the cycles of nature is imperative in understanding ourselves - the connection is obvious. Ever heard of life cycles?
camij79 5 months ago
@camij79
"life cycles" ?
You mean the passage of time and the decay or organic compounds ?
How about tidal cycles and seasons ?
We have lived with both for eons and don't attach any supernatural attributes to them because we've had them sussed for a long time.
Yet there will always be a fringe who think aliens on the dark side of the moon control both.
Are you basing your own belief on astrology simply on the existence of repetitive patterns ?
DeadeyeLefty 5 months ago
Comment removed
stevensw 5 months ago
@DeadeyeLefty Don't bother arguing with the fool. Astrologists don't base their beliefs on scientific evidence, they base it on fairy dust. With such closed minded thinking you can't expect them to see reason, like arguing with a brick wall.
stevensw 5 months ago
@stevensw
Hehe...I do see your point but this is just for fun. My argument isn't an earnest one, I'm simply trying to help someone realize that their position doesn't really stand up. We 'cherish' our beliefs because they don't weather any kind of serious scrutiny. ("You can't intellectualize consciousness...") That's why, if you look at Christianity as an example of a widely-held belief, blasphemy is even worse than priests buggering little kids: it's the only sin that cannot be forgiven.
DeadeyeLefty 5 months ago
@DeadeyeLefty The seasons are the basis for the signs of the zodiac. In this modern world where else can you find a subject that clearly attempts to fully incorporate nature with mankind. Modern science has almost successfully de-anthropomorphized cognition. Human self aggrandizement. Every part of our being has emerged from the cosmos and yet the modern world view has severed that connection and relocated it to the autonomous human self. There have to be some who keep the fabric intact.
camij79 5 months ago
@camij79___You said:"...a subject that clearly attempts to fully incorporate nature with mankind.". Do you see the problem with that ? A truly inquiring and unbiased mind doesn't try to impose ANY connections (sentimental or not) because it instantly introduces a bias. Is it not more true to study a subject based strictly on its empirical merits ? A connection found in such a way will stand up to scrutiny or will be revised and retested. It's a simple test that astrology always fails abysmally.
DeadeyeLefty 5 months ago
Astrology is a crock.
Nagneto 8 months ago 43
This has been flagged as spam show
For more information of "INDIAN ASTROLOGY" just click on futureteller.in
chinkyy89 8 months ago
Ah, pseudo-skepticism. I guess everyone has to make money off something
Zareste 9 months ago
Zareste is a pseudo personality for an alignment whore.
adrianeaglrck 9 months ago
I see that you have trouble with some relationships. I also see if you try hard to improve your relationship with your best friend, everything will work out. You are always worried about other people, but you need to let others live their own lives and make their own mistakes. I see you have money problems as well. You should spend less and save more. Also stop eating so much you fat slob. And exercise once in a while or you will drop dead in 5 days, on Friday, at 4:16 and 37 seconds (PM).
greyeyed123 9 months ago
@greyeyed123 - I see you have done Astrology 101. Your predictions are very accurate. You should consider a future at scamming, err, I mean doing readings.
LiamXaoh 9 months ago
@LiamXaoh There are so many people out there, as Mulder's poster said, who "want to believe", that they will allow themselves to be scammed by people who see just how vulnerable gullible people are. They'll even get on fora like this and proclaim Randi a "pseudo-skeptic", as if that term makes any sense...as if the experiment in this video doesn't show conclusively that (for this random group, at least) Astrology doesn't work at all. It's just confirmation bias in action!
greyeyed123 9 months ago
@MarritJolanda People who are gullible enough to believe in astrological signs will start to behave according to this sign so that other people believing in astrological signs will be able to tell from this behavior.
lagerbaer 9 months ago
I knew this girl who could tell anyones astrological sign without knowing when they were born:) She always seemed to be a no-nonsense girl but she got it right every time!
MarritJolanda 9 months ago
@MarritJolanda You would say that. Pisces are so gullible. lol
greyeyed123 9 months ago
@MarritJolanda - I bet you she didn't....no one has ever demonstrated that ability under controlled conditions anywhere in the world, if they had it would be published and the person would be oh so rich.
LiamXaoh 9 months ago 29
@LiamXaoh Well, she did every-time I was around, maybe she got it wrong a few times when I wasn't. I just thought it was cool, but wouldn't try to make some scientific point with it. With that, people who don't believe in astrology wouldn't believe it even if it's true. But that's okay, everybody it's own believes(or not):)
MarritJolanda 9 months ago
@MarritJolanda - astrologers have had hundreds of years to come up with evidence that it works. If they do and the evidence stands scrutiny I'll become a believer. Until then I see it for what it is. A long running lie and scam.
LiamXaoh 9 months ago
@LiamXaoh As long as people find truth in it, or feel supported, it's not that bad I think. We also get told that we will feel happy when buying the newest phone on the market. People believe that, although I don't believe buying stuff contributes to happiness. Same with people lying to others about seeing dead relatives, but sometimes it gives people peace of mind in a hard mourning process. Or religion. There are very few things proven in live, scamming is common business. Just be happy:)
MarritJolanda 9 months ago
@MarritJolanda - as you suggest be happy. Let's be nice, and helpful, without the charade that is astrology and religion. Stay happy!
LiamXaoh 9 months ago
@MarritJolanda "As long as people find truth in it, or feel supported, it's not that bad..."
Just like slavery ?
Or Germany pre-WWII ?
"...she got it right every time"
"...maybe she got it wrong a few times..."
Nuff said, lol.
DeadeyeLefty 6 months ago 3
@LiamXaoh Can you please explain how you would demonstrate the protocol for these controlled conditions? Astrology attempts to explain experiential phenomena in our innate connection to the natural cycles of nature. Physics and math have no predicate for experiential phenomena at all. None nothing zilch.
camij79 7 months ago
This was not a test of astrology, but a test of self knowledge and self deception. They all failed. Few people bother or even dare to know the truth about themselves. For most people, looking in the mirror is scary or at least uncomfortable. Many create a false self to protect the real one and start to believe in it themselves. Many take the opinions of others and think, "OK, that's me then, inferior to all". Verdict: Colossal fail.
jannevellamo 9 months ago
It is very easy to fool people who are not well versed in astrology and if they are a sheeple type - they will believe ANYTHING they are given without question. Some people don't know themselves well either. But that is how society is supposed to be - robots that one can easily program. This is hardly a debunking - more like a mind game.
Innerdepths 10 months ago
So now that ZoeMarks and others refuse to do a test valid for astrology as I understand it (but still 100 % scientifical) for what reasons ever, I can only repeat my offer for anyone who likes test my astrological skills.
Make some proposals ;)
constructivecritism 11 months ago
*glances at comments*
*backs away slowly*
Astrapsody 11 months ago
I did a cursory inquiry on astrology. So far I have heard believers in astrology talk about the use of star constellations and where they get the information to make a horoscope. Problem is, they don't explain the "how it works" part. See, that is what you need to gain acceptance of this theory. Without the "how it works" part, you have really nothing at all. All the belief and philosophy in the world does not prove the idea or theory in ANY way. Scientific explanation anyone ??
orangemod 11 months ago
I was always under the impression that horoscopes were just for entertainment purposes due to obvious reasons. People actually "believe" that horoscope reading is real !!?!??? C'mon people, what year is this...1641 !!??
orangemod 11 months ago
@orangemod No one has replied to this response yet so i'll try you. Astrology as the primal world view believes that intelligence and soul pervade all of nature and the cosmos and the human self directly participates in that larger matrix of meaning and purpose within which it is fully imbedded. The modern world view - all qualities associated with purposeful intelligence and soul are exclusive to humans, radically distinct from the objective non human world. Response would be nice.
camij79 11 months ago
@camij79 Your kidding...right?
orangemod 11 months ago
@orangemod Thanks for that. Comforting to know science types generally don't have a philosophical bone in their collective bodies. Philosophy investigates the causes and laws underlying reality, amongst other things, as science pretends to.
camij79 11 months ago
@camij79 Well Camij, I worked with what I had. What philosophy do I need to go over? Do I "believe" in things that aren't backed-up by empirical evidence?...well..no, sorry I don't. If I was explained the mechanism that astrology works on, maybe I could accept the concept. It's not that it is not "possible", it is only that there is not enough evidence for me to accept the concept as fact. Same as bigfoot, possible but requires more than philosophy. Cheers.
orangemod 11 months ago
As well Camij.... I am not part of any "collective" I have my own understanding of science that is separate from other people's idea(s) If you can explain, in mechanical or scientific terms, how it works then we have something to explore. "Beliefs" or "philosophy's" are a waste of time when trying to gain acceptance of any given theory. May not be what you want, but it is necessary to further explore this subject and how it supposedly works. Cheers.
orangemod 11 months ago
"Astrology is a science in itself and contains an illuminating body of knowledge. It taught me many things, and I am greatly indebted to it. Geophysical evidence reveals the power of the stars and the planets in relation to the terrestrial. In turn, astrology reinforces this power to some extent. This is why astrology is like a life-giving elixir to mankind" Albert Einstein.
This is a quote I have found on many astrology websites. Nice eh? Trouble is it is he didn't say. Bad astrologers!
ZoeMarks 11 months ago
Comment removed
ZoeMarks 11 months ago
OMG, such pwnage. :D
SaerdnaOoOoo 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"This assessment, which is valid at least for psychological astrology, would claim, that quantitative studies are condemned to failure inherently, because they REDUCE AND DETERMINE ASTROLOGY TO CONDITIONS, WHICH DON'T DO JUSTICE TO ASTROLOGY ITSELF."
Translation from the qoute of "Kocku von Stuckrad", appeared in the german book "Geschichte der Astrologie".
I think it sums this whole "independent testing" - issue up nicely
constructivecritism 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"An objektive, on consensus based survey, which could prove the "working" of astrology clearly, is not present...
On the one hand, you could argue that, because of astrology beeing an symbol system, which can not be determined on concrete manifestations of the symbols, an excact clause of prognoses and readings, which is necessary for quantitative elicitations, is OUT OF QUESTION A PRIORI."
constructivecritism 11 months ago
"The single fact that astrologers contradict each other at about every point, and the firm convictions of their own correctness supported by their experience, must call up doubts about the reliability of [their] methods. ... Not a single classical astrological element is shown to be able to resist statistical research." (Ronnie Martens and Tim Trachet, Making Sense of Astrology 1998, a review of astrological claims.)
ZoeMarks 11 months ago
Comment removed
constructivecritism 11 months ago
@ZoeMarks An objective, on consensus based survey, which could prove the "working" of astrology clearly, is not present.
On the one hand, you could argue that, because of astrology beeing an symbol system, which can not be determined on concrete manifestations of the symbols, an exact clause of prognoses and readings, which is necessary for quantitative elicitations, is out of question a priori. (citation follows)
constructivecritism 11 months ago
@ZoeMarks This assessment, which is valid at least for psychological astrology would claim, that quantitative studies are condemned to failure inherently, because they reduce an determine astrology to conditions, WHICH DONT'T DO JUSTICE TO ASTROLOGY ITSELF.
Translation from the quote of "Kocku von Stuckrad", appeared in the german book "Geschichte der Astrologie"
This sums up the whole "testing" issue quite nicely ;)
constructivecritism 11 months ago
@constructivecritism - "...because they reduce an determine astrology to conditions, WHICH DONT'T DO JUSTICE TO ASTROLOGY ITSELF. " That is a typical response on the subject. The words mean nothing & are merely a pathetic attempt to hide behind gibberish. Explain how an astrologer or client decides if a reading is accurate. Defenders of astrology are tragic in their denial. If a client can't pick another client's reading from his own that is enough testing to confirm astrology is a lie.
ZoeMarks 11 months ago
@ZoeMarks Who are you to judge which conditions are appropriate to "test" or research astrology? Who are to say that if a client can't distinguish between his and other readings, to say that would prove astrology was false? You admitted on another occasion you never studied astrology.
To estimate which conditions are appropriate to the testing issue its mandatory to know about the shape of it. You obviously don't know about the shape, and whats worse, you DON'T EVEN WANT TO FIND OUT.
constructivecritism 11 months ago
@constructivecritism - There have been several studies which have found clients couldn't pick their readings from a random set. I don't have to have studied anything to read studies by other people. Study scientific method % realise these studies don't prove astrology to be false as you stated. Science doesn't work that way. They merely demonstrate there is nothing to support the claims that readings are client unique.
Exactly what is the "shape" of astrology? I'd say it is fluid. LOL
ZoeMarks 11 months ago
@ZoeMarks
Your quote: "Study scientific method % realise these studies don't prove astrology to be false as you stated."
I didn't state any studies disproved astrology. I stated YOU claim that "If a client can't pick another client's reading from his own that is enough testing to confirm astrology is a lie".
So the studies and "tests" you are taking into consideration "don't prove astrology to be false" as you say, but on the other hand for YOU one test is enough to say so?
What?^^
constructivecritism 11 months ago
@constructivecritism -at last count there are something like 35 studies that have failed to find astrological readings to be any better than guess work. There was one involving over 10 million people (the video has been removed from YT which is annoying). If there were that many studies that found my belief system was flawed I think I'd study something else - but then again I'm not blindly stubborn.
Let me ask you this - are creationists right about the earth being about 6000 years old?
ZoeMarks 11 months ago
@ZoeMarks Nice, give a link to those 35 studies please.
The 10 million one was a quantitative study.
The claim the world was 6000 years old is in contrary to scientifical research saying the world is about 4,5 billion years old. That way the claim contradicts scinetidic research. The claim of astrology, that people are born with certain dispositions, is supported by scientific disciplines like genetics, epigenetics, psychology etc. so the claim is in accord with scientific research.
constructivecritism 11 months ago
@constructivecritism - people are born with certain dispositions - but no one has ever demonstrated any relationship between them and the heavens. So to imply otherwise is an untruth.
ZoeMarks 11 months ago
@constructivecritism "Who are to say that if a client can't distinguish between his & other readings, to say that would prove astrology was false?" That is the basis of many studies. Some of the testing involved astrologers who couldn't match a reading to a client. Then what use is the reading? It may give comfort to the client until you tell him "oops,I gave you the wrong one". Do 10 readings on 10 clients and mix them up & see how many notice. Oops, can't do that, not a valid test. LOL
ZoeMarks 11 months ago
@ZoeMarks I told you many times you can test my astrological skills. Haven't got an answer yet.
Hm, who is chicken out then ... ;)
constructivecritism 11 months ago
@constructivecritism -I have given you answers but you don't like them. At the risk of repeating myself, I devise the test and choose the rules and you choose to participate. I can't imagine any study where the lab rat gets a say. Live with it.
ZoeMarks 11 months ago
@ZoeMarks Lol thats laughable. But on the other hand it sums up your whole approach to the issue.
The type of scientist I imagine as "ideal" is willing to find out and learn new things. He approaches issues of interest with an open attitude and deals with fields of knowledge respectfully, especially when not knowing much of the certain issue.
That way he gets in contact with other people on the basis of a dialogue. He asks questions rather then giving rash answers.
constructivecritism 11 months ago