The way astrology is meant to work is that at specific times certain events will tend to effect incarnated souls who were within physical bodies at specific times and the planets and stars are somehow used as markers to determine what happens and when. Its more that this will influence the outcome of the things you personally do. I'm not saying its necessarily true but its an interesting concept.
I fully agree with you concerning the pseudo-science of astrology. The interesting point is that this kind of superstition is so tenacious that it could persist through so many centuries.
"Astrology has a) no plausible mechanism for working and b) hasn't been demonstrated to work in controlled settings" - lagerbaer
Try working with Progressions and Transits - time of birth is necessary. I'm not crazy about decanets, cusps, or even solar and lunar returns. Nor do I care for chinese or vedic astrology but that's my opinion.
*Progressions and Transits* - for me, that's the meat and potatoes.
But the skeptic will have a long, long study ahead.
It's depressing to read the comments and see the sheer number of people who either didn't listen to or didn't understand his logic. Unless you can provide an actual mechanism, testable in the real world, by which astrology works, you cannot present it as a rational or justified belief.
Astronomy escaped the confines of Astrology? That just doesn't make sense. Astrology is far from "confining."
Astrologers do have Canadian/American Astronomer Simon Newcomb to thank for ephemerides - immensely detailed tables of mathematically computed places of the planets projected far into the future and as far back into the past.
Yes, newspapers & mag horoscopes are dull not to mention ridiculous. Very few people take them seriously.
Yes, the late Dr. Carl Sagan was quite correct. Human beings are pretty darn good at figuring out the physical & chemical world. However, we don't seem to be able to figure out ourselves, each other, or how to actually treat one another and stay unswervingly on the right path. Psychologically, humans veer off in all sorts of directions.
They're people who believe that they know what they talk about and those who do know what they talk about. According to astrological knowledge base - Carl Sagan failed on so many different levels. Unfortunately, it'll stay like this as an icon of a person who represented a typical astronomer who's annoyed by the fact that daily horoscopes are more popular than of astronomy. The best part is - he never actually said anything about astrology because he wasn't even talking about it. Do homework.
@Aanthanur And you as a person who studied astrology and learned all about it - clearly know. Or, is it rather that you're caught in a belief system of others? Tell me...Is it me who's believing in astrology or you who believe in astrology based upon what others think instead to know? What exactly do you know about astrology when you make such an statement? Have you studied it? No. Have you learned it? No. So, it's not me the one who's a believer. It's you who believe that you know astrology. :)
@c1k4ml3kc3 learn Astrology? No sure not, why would i want to learn charlatanry?
And my Grandmother believed in that nonsense, and every year she send us a year horoscope book, especially made for us. it is the usual nonsense, vague claims that fit most people and nothing concrete. not even the character was correct.
its total rubbish. charlatans use it to make money, gullible people believe it......
the constelations are shifted anyway now, and they didn't even adjust their stuff,......
@Aanthanur Sorry, you fail. Why? *sigh* 1. Constellations play no role in astrology. 2. Prof.Cox (or anyone else) needs to learn astrology to make a valuable information out of it. If we don't learn something - we don't know properly. 3. When you make a point of something being "total rubbish" because of your picture based upon assumptions, you hold no truth in your words. Evidence of someone being incorrect is when they talk about something which they didn't learn in the first place. Shameful.
@c1k4ml3kc3 Zodiac is the ring of constellations that lines the ecliptic, which is the apparent path of the Sun across the celestial sphere over the course of the year.
you don't even know what you belief in....
well yes actually the constellations play no role, because they have zero influence on us.
astrology was based on real observations of constellations, but almost 3000 years ago, and meanwhile the earth has changed position in relation to its axis and.....
@Aanthanur Againm you prove me how wrong you are. 1. Zodiac represents twelve Signs named upon constellations while not actually having them in. It's based upon four seasons and each season has three signs. each sign has exactly 30 degrees. You've just been plainly idiotic regarding that I know nothing of :what I preach: :) Are you twelve years old!? 2. Astrology exists far more than that. Again, you prove nothing to me. 3. Zodiac off by one month? Really? You just invented hot water, wow. :)
@Aanthanur Did Prof. Cox learn astrology? I guess not. Now, tell me, what do you consider to be astrology since you so freely said that it's "a belief system"?
@Aanthanur Now, charlatan? Haha. Again, your point of view is pretty narrow-minded. I can't provide you with informations, however me being an astrologist (you don't even know what's that, you assume what's an astrologist or search over net where every fool can write bullcrap) provides me astrological point of view and i clearly can say who knows astrology and who believes to know astrology. Carl Sagan is one of those who failed so hard that's it's even blasphemous to even start argue about it.
@c1k4ml3kc3 and that means the whole zodiac woo is off by about a month and only astronomy noticed it.....
the charlatans don't care, because it is a belief system anyway. Just like most religions don't accept the theory of evolution , astrology does not accept the reality and goes on with beliefs in nonsense and make good money with it. But hey belief what you want. but don't come to science videos and claim your woo is true, you get challenged and will loose.
@Aanthanur 4. "I'll lose it" by who, exactly? you? :) Don't be ridiculous. It's not me who didn't learn astrology and than claim how wrong it is. It's perfectly fine, by me, if you're going to ignore fact that people need to research something before they start actually talking about it. You included. I feel no mental threat from your side, if that's what you strive and hope for. How could you, actually, dominate over me unless with demagogic aproach? :)
@Aanthanur From my point of view, you're making things in a pretty much stereotypical way which is based upon your perception of what you believe to know and not actually knowing it properly which leads to negation based upon your laziness to properly find out. However, I can't judge you based on that nor i intend to judge to anyone, however I only hope that you'll find some reason and logical observation of your action before proceeding this pointless arguing about what you believe to know.
@Aanthanur Now, Prof Cox fails even further if he didn't learn what he preaches to be wrong. Same like kid who'd say that mathematics are rubbish because there was no cotton carburetor on page 1. Completely rubbish is an opinion of anyone without knowledge.
@c1k4ml3kc3 there is no evidence that astrology, you belief it works and many others do, and many know how to make money with gullible people that belief extraordinary claims without evidence. its a shame. it's the 21. century and you belief in some ancient crap that never worked to begin with....
@Aanthanur 5. Oh, there is an evidence for those who're wiling enough to find it, research, deduce, compare, put effort as well as knowledge, however there're those who stand behind what others say about something that thy never, actually, did try to learn. What you fail to notice is that astrology has its methods in the same manner that psychology, math, astronomy and everything else does have its methods. 6. Evidence? Natal Chart :) ...but don't push your mental limits with that one. ;)
@Aanthanur Now, if you were more ...fond of admitting to yourself that you know nothing about astrology, which is highly obvious, I'd really present you some of the info that might give you a much better and accurate perspective a.k.a point of view. However, since you;re so highly stubborn I can't help it but to wonder for how long will you continue nonsense about astrology being wrong while having on mind that you never learned it in the start. ... :) ... ? Hopefully, you'll conclude it.
@Aanthanur For the end, there's no evidence that astrology doesn't work. There're only assumptions made by those who never studied astrology, by those who say "according to" and by those who use methods which aren't used in astrology, whatsoever. It's similar to...let's say... mental illness which is trying to be disproved with mathematical calculation. Or, we can freely get back to the point of the cotton carburetor. Pretty much (il)logical. Oh, sweet chronology.
@c1k4ml3kc3 oh lol belief what ever you want, its not important enough to debate about it, you seem to not even know how the zodiac came about...... but you want to belief it works.....
@Aanthanur I'm perfectly aware of how did Zodiac "came about" because I'm studying astrology for more than a decade as well as researching it. I agree that it's pointless for you that you argue with me about something that you know nothing of. :) farewell
@c1k4ml3kc3 I made up a magic dragon and wrote a book about it. You have no grounds to dispute the existence of this dragon because I know more than you about it. Do you know the difference between an authority and an expert?
@damandatwin Comparativeness between illusion (imagination) and something which is regarding to a lot more than human capability to invent or imagine is trivial. The point is simple, you made your dragon out of mere imagination, however astrologers are observing planetary positions in correspondence to human behavior. And they have success, however it's highly dependable on many factors involved into observation and final conclusions. Such as chronology, astrologer ability to comprehend'n'obzerv
@damandatwin That being said, I know nothing about your dragon nor I intend to find it out since it's your imagination, not something which exists for several millenia and has a support of a lot of people. Besides, I;m quite able to even more define to you why dragons aren't comparable to astrology, however I leave you to your ignorance about the matter that you're trying to comprehend :)
However, the fact remains that astrology exists, same like truth, and that there're connections. Time tells
@c1k4ml3kc3 People invented astrology because they didn't know the true nature of stars, and of space in general. They made it up. Just because it's old and has had the support of a lot of people over the course of history, that doesn't make it any more valid. From the dictionary: "Astrology: A pseudoscience claiming divination by the positions of the planets and sun and moon."
@damandatwin People didn't made that up, people were logically observing, deducing and making statistical data based upon what they found to be the truth. Astrology is only a term used by people to define certainty. However, there's a lot of progress in astrology based upon when it was firstly used up until now. Valid is determined by the truth factor. What's the truth? People who say that astrology isn't valid never studied astrology nor learned anything particular about it. That's a fact. )
@damandatwin So, based upon your derivation and presentation, and given the fact that person in the video never studied astrology in the first place (when someone is a scientist - that person WILL TAKE all data provided and THAN make a possible analysis). I am 100 % sure that there's no scientist or person who studied astrology and said that it's false or not valid in correspondence to the influences on human life a.k.a position of the planets > = < human life. You know nothing about astrology.
@damandatwin And, that's another fact. :} Quite frankly, I find it highly amusing to find people who so openly accept that something's not valid without even researching it. And I know that you didn't research it. If you did, you wouldn't even talk that nonsense from the start :}
Find me one scientist who did research astrology and who did found it not to be valid and I'll give you 1000. euros. Not those who say "Astrologers say this" or "according to astrology". You'd shit bricks. :]
@c1k4ml3kc3 So you've taken a position of "Nobody can understand astrology and disagree with it." There is no reason to believe an idea whose assertions are contradicted by, or have no supporting evidence. By the way, the name you're looking for is closer than you think: Carl Sagan.
@damandatwin ohoho, please, don't even start making assumptions about my position here. i haven't said nor provided my opinion regarding astrology, whatsoever. Tell me, did you find any scientist who DID, actually, study astrology before disregarding it? HAHAHAHAHAHA Carl Sagan? hahahahahahaha, what, daily horoscopes? Hahahahahaha, you've made me to laugh quite a bit... Carl Sagan never studied astrology. Where's his work, huh? :D Omg, you are plainly idiotic, huh? :)
@damandatwin Anyway, my position is of no concern to you :) I may even hate astrology for all that you know :) the point that I made is quite simple and I'm repeating it again, for you, to adequately comprehend it : You can't know something without actually researching it. A child can't work with nuclear physic if he believes that it's made up from gummy bears, nor can a child make a mathematical calculation before actually knowing numbers and their meaning. Same goes for you. You are a child.:)
And, for the end, which is highly obvious by anyone who ever studies or learned something about astrology - this person never examined it and is only misleading people from the correct truth. Prejudices, guessing and perception of astrology throughout daily horoscopes while comparing it to the mythological beliefs of the old people when "magic" was on the same level as science? anyone actually believing without researching is condemned to live in a lie. Quite basic and concise.
@c1k4ml3kc3 Oh please, you're just writing tl;dr's and making baseless claims. You can make all the claims you like, and it won't make any difference unless you can give some actual evidence. I understand what astrology is, and so does Car Sagan. The fact that you won't accept this just means that you're unreasonable and stubborn, and to further communicate with you would be an exercise in futility. You can tell me that I know nothing about the subject all you like, if it makes you feel better.
@damandatwin I'm unreasonable and stubborn, and you talk about something that neither you nor Carl Sagan learned nor researched while leaning only onto his reputation and nothing else :)
I can see that you know nothing about astrology by you providing D&D manifests as well as imaginably presenting how Carl Sagan learned astrology. Give me a break. If it wasn't sad it'd be hilarious. It's your mere luck that I'm a good person, otherwise I'd make fun of your insolence and ignorance.
Now, he took DAILY HOROSCOPES, which are highly despised by all astrologers and he refers to them as "astrology". Another proof of his ignorance.
A person who's a scientist should, before making a judgement, examine the matter of his interest. Not to find something which isn't related to astrology whatsoever. Daily horoscopes are not astrology. Any astrologer will confirm that. Besides,according to astrological research Twins aren't born at the exact same time nor they live at the exact spot.
4:20 - 4:51 Fail. Incorrect according to all astrological knowledge.
Magazines reassemble astrology - Fail. No magazine can teach you astrology correctly.
Provence that he doesn't know astrology, never examined astrology nor learned basics of it, yet he dares to teach others how it's wrong? That's just a proof of his ignorance as well as his demagogic agenda. Simple logic inclines towards using knowledge instead of guessing what or how astrology functions. Never learned - never will be correct.
@c1k4ml3kc3 Rather than just talking about how nobody understands astrology, how about you link me to some things I could read, so that I won't be attacking a strawman (although I really think you're just moving the goalposts). I'd also ask you to watch this: /watch?v=4vPC7nPX-X4
@damandatwin I'm not ranting, I'm stating a fact that you know nothing of astrology. If I'm wrong, please correct me by mentioning how many Natal Charts have you or Carl Sagan - did. Next thing, I watched that video many months ago and beside that - I find it to present a prefect example of a charlatan astrologer from U.K. No astrologer, real one, does daily horoscopes unless it's only for the fun. I will not give you any link because only one wouldn't suffice. Nor 100 url's would.
@damandatwin What you may think is of no concern to me, I made my point perfectly clear. If someone doesn't research something, that person doesn't know it adequately. If you find that illogical, that's not my problem. It's up to you to learn it, not to me to prove anything or teach you astrology non the less - over the internet in no other place but - YouTube comments. However, it can't be helped since you know nothing about astrology nor cohesive capacities of informations needed to comprehend
@c1k4ml3kc3 I know what the basic premises of astrology are, and that they originated from mysticism. What would be the purpose of studying this subject in-depth if they have no objective evidence? Explain to me exactly how planetary alignment affects human life, show me the logical chain with which astrology discovered this, and show me the evidence that solidifies your argument. Then I'll take you seriously. If you can't do that, then you're wasting my time.
@damandatwin Mysticism? Nice, you need history lessons as well! :) Search a bit more about king Ashurbanipal and the tablets that were found on the shore near city Nineveh. After that, search a bit more about what does and what does not represent astrology. If you're from the American continent - don't even bother. U.S. internet and media are filled with stupidity all the time (unfortunately). Now, all that you demand - what does that has to do with astrology? Now, a proof is called Natal Chart.
@damandatwin It's very nice to ask for particular evidence about a thing that you don't even know what are the methods about :) you are in no position to demand anything from me :) nor am I obliged to provide further info. Actually, you're the one wasting my time because you're stubborn enough to question whether or not you do know astrology adequately and now I realize that you're both angry and lazy to research by yourself.
Learn to do natal Chart, use that method, prove it to yourself. Ta-Da
@damandatwin anyways, if you're expecting for me to show you any type of astrological representative - I will not. The best way to learn is to learn for yourself. You can't look at numbers and assume what's their name - you need to learn their names - and for that - you need books. however, I'm unaware of any foreign astrologer to whom I can trust since I haven't seen their skill of interpretation of Natal Chart, however I do know a lot in my country. If you're not satisfied, your problem.
@c1k4ml3kc3 If you're unable to present objective evidence that supports astrology, then you have failed. That's what it comes down to. I see you have not sufficiently answered any of the questions that I asked last time, and until you do, we're done. You lose.
@damandatwin I have nothing to lose. You may only gain if you're smart enough. I can show you the path to the well of knowledge, I can tell you that it's a tricky one, but I can't go and bring you it so that you taste it and than spit it saying how it's not cold enough.
I know astrology, you don't. nobody gives a f**k about whether you agree or disagree with it - that's a fact. :}
@c1k4ml3kc3 Speaking in metaphor and being vague doesn't help you, I'm sorry. Unless you have evidence to back up what you're saying, don't message me anymore. I'm tired of you and your baseless assertions of intellectual superiority.
@damandatwin Hahaha, considering me being arrogant is quite hilarious. :) I may say that i understand it. That's how a child does react when they have a figure of someone who does know more about particular matter than the child itself :)
I already told you about the evidence :0 It's called Natal Chart. Once you learn to interpret it you may start using astrology adequately. Or, do you want me to draw it for you? :) With sparlings and teddy-bears...? Maybe some "hot chicks" would influence nice?
@damandatwin Oh, I'll give you an evidence :) once you cure mentally ill person with a mathematical calculation by writing a comment on YouTube page where the URL's are even forbidden 9unable) to be placed. There's no irony in this, at all. Again, just a fact.
Point is - you can't expect a gummy bear from a soup that you never tasted. You can't expect evidence about something that you don't even know what it is. Again, you prove your ignorance and insolence.
@c1k4ml3kc3 I think I'll leave you there. What you said about curing a mentally ill person with a mathematical calculation and proving gravity "with letters" was idiotic enough, I don't think I can bring you any lower than that. If you can't post a URL, then reference a peer-reviewed study or something of the sort that demonstrates the validity of astrology. I'll be waiting. Note: I'm not responding to you anymore until I get the evidence. This has gone on long enough.
@damandatwin Of, sweet irony. My words meant to describe your behavior in a lousy effort to use against me... Surely, you're joking, right? :) Hahahahaha. Exactly the same for you. Once you prove that i may prove the astrology to you in the way that you want, not in the way that it's supposed to be. :]
Your actions, metaphorically : "But I want a gummy bear from the soup!! Waaa"
My actions, metaphorically : "Ok, once you start sneezing golden stars :)"
@c1k4ml3kc3 A natal chart is a tool used by astrologers, not evidence that astrology is valid. I am only looking for the same type of objective evidence that would pass in any real discipline of science. I don't know why you can't understand this. You have one more chance. Reference a peer-reviewed study that demonstrates the validity of astrology, or you're done. Failure to do so will show that you have no logical or factual basis for believing in astrology. Put up or shut up.
@damandatwin A simple question - why do you BELIEVE that astrology would be a science?
Did I say that astrology is a science? where do you get all those your prejudices? I'm done? Dude, seriously, start using common sense. You don't know astrology, please, stop assuming things. It's unbearable to correct you in each and every comment. damn, i was just going to talk with you something about Guitar Hero but I guess that it can't be helped, again.
Anyway, a tool? *facepalm*. Where you read that?xD
@damandatwin We're done talking. Before stating anything about astrology make sure that you learn it first. That's how you won't look like the rest of imbeciles who believe to this video without any proper research.
Rather to believe in research, people believe in reputation. That's the malicious behavior of a non-scientific mind, lazy and arrogant.
@c1k4ml3kc3 Just curiosity more then anything but how come on my birthday, I am a saggitarius, does the sun rise in scorpio? If astrology was valid wouldn't it rise in saggitarius?
@Mekiwyn Zodiac Signs are not in any particular correlation with Constellation Signs. Astrology and Astronomy are not sharing anything particular or similar. Signs of Zodiac are based upon Equinoxes and seasons, but real individuation is related toward humans and their need. Just Sign or Rising sign are of no great importance, whole Natal Chart describes concisely and is giving more in-detail. Natal Chart is like a x-ray print of the planetary positions at the moment of birth, when baby breathes
@c1k4ml3kc3 Yeah, i understand that ty, The zodiac signs have nothing to do with astronomy, I understand they are very different things. I think I stem this question from the idea that from the time astrology was made up everything is in a different position, rather drastically. So I guess I find it hard to see how it can apply to anything on earth as it itself isn't even constant. But you are saying that the zodiac has nothing to do with the position of the constellations in the sky?
@Mekiwyn Yes. Constellations are not important in astrology. Astrological signs, a.k.a Zodiac signs are just having names of certain constellations. As for astrology, the idea is simple "As above, so below", taking extreme amount of time to prove that theory and it's still in development. Might take another 10.000 years.
For constellations to be equal to Zodiac signs does sound logical, for an random spectator, however they are not correlated mathematically. . .That means next thing :
@Mekiwyn Each sign was divided based upon equinoxes. Each Sign takes exactly 30 degrees of sky view, from Earth perspective, (latitude and longitude) and each sign is divided by three decans, however even signs are not that important in astrology! What's truly important are degrees and minutes on which one particular sky body is "standing" on (i.e. Sun at 27*35' in Aquarius). Astrology can't "move on" because it's using symbolism to characterize and correlate certain factors of existence.
@Mekiwyn Given that fact, astrology can never be accepted by the majority of scientific world, but interesting fact is hat even thou it does uses symbolism to correlate two different factors of existence, properties of characterization will always remain the same a.k.a astrology does have it's own ground basis on which more advanced characterization may take place. However, whoever learns a bit of astrology always wants the money from it and - anyone can learn it, making it worse in people eyes.
@c1k4ml3kc3 no problem and ty, so the relative position of the earth to the stars doesn't matter or apply in astrology, is that basically what you are saying?
@Mekiwyn When the influence can be validated it will become important for further research, however priority receives the knowledge that it works and for many that knowledge alone is quite good. I'm pretty sure for planets, however for distant start I may only assume neutrinos or light itself. So, to bluntly place it - no. For the time being, that is. But who knows when will people learn to adequately use astrology...current knowledge is no greater than roughly said - 2 % of potential knowledge.
@Mekiwyn Basically astrological knowledge is not correlated to astronomical (as it was before many, many, many years), however it proves that it's not even important. Roughly speaking on every 2000 years one sign shifts itself, and for 2000 years Aquarius might be the one with Pieces "engine" or Aries with Taurus. The point is - those are just terms and names used. :]
@Mekiwyn So, basically, it doesn't mater to be correlated mathematically, in the same way that it doesn't matter what names we give to constellations or signs - they are both there because people imagined so. However, what's important in astrology is Earth's ecliptic and position of the planets on a 2-dimensional sketch called a horoscope a.k.a Natal Chart. Horoscopes in newspapers, that's all rubbish. Signs were correlated towards "pieces of sky" and each piece received 30 degrees. That's truth
@lagerbaer And you as a person who learned and studied astrology will most certainly know that's it's bullshit without even trying nor seeing for yourself. :] The only bullshit's coming from you, not from astrology. The only bullshit's your perspective about a matter that you're not familiar with. What you beleive is not my concern, I have studied it, you have not. End of the story.
@c1k4ml3kc3 There is neither a plausible mechanism nor has it been demonstrated to work anyone but gullible simpletons. Why should I study something that has neither been demonstrated to work nor is able to give a plausible mechanism for why it should work in the first place. This is the "trying to see for yourself" part. I know that people are subjective and easily deceived. That is why I'd demand either a plausible mechanism ("Astrology works via xyz") or a scientific(!) study that it works.
@lagerbaer You can't demand something without even knowing whether or how it starts. If you knew how it works you'd know the cohesive complexity involved. Besides it leans on the symbolism to adequately comprehend the functions since that's the most objective and accurate mean possible in corresponding to the complexity. It's the most delicate and compelling area of knowledge available to the human race.
@c1k4ml3kc3 The most delicate and compelling area of knowledge? Lol. Well, over at the Skeptics Stackexchange site there's currently an open question on astrology. Feel free to provide real-world evidence over there.
@lagerbaer Why would I want to prove something that I have an evidence for? You're the one lacking the knowledge and proof. Just because you haven't experienced it nor did see doesn't mean that you're correct in your assumptions. The matter's simple - knowledge and ignorance. "Real evidence", you say? That's why you're an idiot to my eyes, with no disrespect meant. Only because of your assumptions, prejudices and overly ignorance about the matter. Is there anything unclear about your ignorance?
@c1k4ml3kc3 Thing is, you don't have evidence. You are just gullible and easily fooled. Your personal stories and anecdotes are not evidence for astrology, only evidence to your ignorance and inability to comprehend the world around you. Is there anything unclear about your gullibility?
@lagerbaer And now you're a psychic, too. How wonderful. It's not that I don't have an evidence, it's that you know nothing about it. Face reality. :]
@lagerbaer And now you're a psychic, too. How wonderful. It's not that I don't have an evidence, it's that you know nothing about it. Face reality. :]
@damandatwin Seriously, the only thing that you should do is admit to yourself that you know nothing about astrology (especially now when a person who did study it told you that, and you know it's the truth since you never studied it ;) let's not make this a big fuss) and, if you want - learn it. If you don't want to learn it - that's fine, too. However, what's arrogant is your assumption (human assumption) that you know something without researching it by the methods of research. Farewell. :]
@damandatwin P.S. I just want to tell you since I'm a very honest person - you look like an idiot when you don't know what you're talking about. You believe that you know, but belief alone ain't good enough.
As for some arrogance from me : I can beat you in any song from any part of guitar hero, anytime ;)
@emanitudism Astrology is a belief system, nothing more, it doesn't do anything of use.
it sells expensive and vague descriptions of characteristics that are so vague and general that everyone can see something in it that fits.
or the daily nonsense in newspapers , would you mix up the signs no one would even notice. Its pure belief and no facts behind it. not even the constellations fit anymore. its a joke but when you belief in it i surely make total sense and fits perfectly.....
This video shows that Carl knew a little bit about the history of astronomy-astrology, and very little about what astrology aims to do, its philosophical outlook, its practices, and its aims.
@Aanthanur in fact it's like a religion nothing scientific. if he was a Libra or a Sagittarius, he might have not made this sort of video for just telling the horoscope is unscientific. Scorpio is known for their strongest emotion and passion. once he hates something, he hates it till it dies. once he loves, he believes it till he dies. well, he could show us how Astromony is great, but he didn't have to talk about Astrology. he was an Astronomist, not an Astrologist. any way, he's a Scorpio.
@Aanthanur isn't it boring some to take things on such a way? you don't have to exclude anything you dislike. Carl was a great Astronomist and truly a Scorpio at the same time. it's just a funny truth.
@ayanuhito Scorpio or not Scorpio, it make not the slightest difference. its the individual and not some stupid star positions that are not correct anymore anyway...... it is so laughable.....
it is not working, it never worked and it will never work, its as simple as that.
@ayanuhito and it is such a crapy nonsense that they do not even care if the constellations are still like they were when Astrology started, The whole thing has shifted, and actually i would not be a Libra, i would be a Virgo now. But they didn't adjust anything, they just keep on making up crap by the old system that is not even in agreement with the constellations anymore. they just keep selling their crap to the gullible.
@Aanthanur wasn't it just because Carl watched the sky in the northern part of the continent, while they watched it in the sub-tropical Greece?? i think i'm a Pisces if i were born in the northern Europe, since the constellations different to the ones in Japan(it's in approximately similar latitude to Greece). the northerners definitely should have their own correct Astrology, otherwise it'd be nonsense forever.
@emanitudism erm no, thats the point, they don't look into the sky lol......
the constellations have shifted and they don't care. Because it has nothing to do with star constellations anymore. and it was already woo when they invented it. its a myth and doesn't work nor does it make sense.
That's 'crap'. If you want to make money, astrology is not a good subject to pick. You should take comfort in that instead of railing against something that isn't harming you or your interests.
You seem to project a lot onto astrology and astrologers that just isn't there in them or their field.
Well, I think there are a few points on morality we should acknowledge. Firstly, humans are not universally moral. Secondly, humans don't agree on the finer points of morality. Thirdly, moral agreement, at best, exists for 'the basics', like murder, theft and lying. And those are mostly because we don't want to be murdered, stolen from or lied to ourselves, and it's easier if we all agree not to do it.
I don't know where the matter of the universe came from.
@achzdck We don't know definitely how gravity works, true, and we admit it. There is a great deal of evidence that suggests gravity is merely the result of the warping of space by matter, but it's not conclusive. So we don't claim to know for certain what we can't know for certain, yet.
Matter is created and destroyed all the time, by converting to energy and back. The total amount of matter/energy seems to be decreasing as entropy increases.
You're talking about a set of archaic rules from an ancient book. And yet even you pick and choose from those rules, in accordance with your culturally inherited morality.
« The words of love your neighbor have no meaning »
Not if they're merely a rule set forth by some book.
To you, perhaps, but not in any independently verifiable way.
« Morality is a design for mans actions »
And interaction between individuals is what has shaped morality.
« Ive seen in the last 40 yrs the breakdown / change of morals »
There are some things that could be better. But do you really think that going back to a 50's style of repression and sweeping under the rug of issues is better?
Explanatory models are never proven. We cannot prove that atoms consist of nucleae and electron orbits. At most, we can prove that such a model accurately predicts our observations. Yet all our electronic equipment (to an ever higher degree, depending on the micronisation of electronic circuitry) depends on this model being correct.
« The odds of even 1 of these theorys being true is uncalculatable »
First of all, you're going to have to let go of the notion of "true". When we're testing a proposition about the nature of reality, we cannot know whether it is "true" or not. All we can know is whether it is consistent with observation. We say a scientific model is *accurate* when it is.
« I've seen animals give birth then turn around and devour the young »
1. Oftentimes, there is a reason for this. A wrong smell or strange behavior can indicate birth defects. Killing weak offspring allows the parent to invest more in healthy offspring.
2. Statistically, animals are always less likely to kill ones own species.
3. So? Humans sometimes do the same thing. Are you arguing that morality simply *doesn't* exist?
organisms that dont kill eachother willy nilly but cooperate are more successful than others. it is this principle that forms the biological basis for morality.
If evolution doesn't fit your personal model of morality, then that's unfortunate, but it doesn't make it less true. Morality isn't a yardstick for truth. I also don't understand your point about abiogenesis. Are you trying to say that if life started from non-living origins without intervention from an agent, this means that death has no place? Why do you think that? And lastly, logic doesn't need to encompass anything other than facts, evidence and building conclusions.
@achzdck They thought they knew everything. We know the edges of our understand and see no reason to ascribe that which we do not yet understand to some kind of supernatural other. That's a total cop out.
In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day. Genesis 1:1-5
In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.
The issue is that it's the best explanation of the day, yes. So, a big bang with inflation, aboigenesis and biological evolution is the best explanation we have now. The biggest difference, of course, is that we have a significantly more sophisticated and nuanced understanding of just how ignorant and feeble we are.
its true that there events or things that affect us in such subtle and unknown ways that we would have have no way to make sense of it besides labeling it as spiritual or even magic. science is far behind in this sense. hopefully a further exploration of quantum physics will give us some kind of hope of quantifying or understanding these impossible relationships. millions of unfathomably small particles go through us everyday. u think it wouldnt make a difference if they suddenly disappeared?
What is it with these atheists attacking astrology? Do people really need to be convinced that celestial signs have nothing to do with the outcomes of our lives?
Stick to bashing superstitions people actually believe in!
For the love of the entire Universe, who the heck rated this video down? One third of them thumbed it down? There is something wrong with our species...
I'm sitting here thinking that this all sounds rather familiar, then I dimly recall that I'm almost done reading the book from which his words are based!
Astrology was finally put down in the 20th Century. The Holy Bible was there first, claiming magic, witchcraft, sorcery, enchanters are all evil-doers, liars, and practice deception. With the Hubble Telescope we can see 10-billion-light-years all around Earth, and at any point is a viewing field of galaxies--hundreds of billions of galaxies. The magic reading of the stars was only a witch who learned to say something for money, the stars are independent of our existence: No star magic.
Why are the stupidists statements made on YouTube are by people in their twenties? Is the brain not connected during their twenties? If I throw a rock up does it not come back down to earth? If I find a really stoopid piece of shit on YouTube, is it not written by a twenty year old dipshit?
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Wow, is the background music meant to be a direct rip-off of Janacek's Sinfonietta? Or is it a credited remix, I wonder? It's extremely close, but not exactly the original. However, unmistakable.
interesting video and very informative
prchecker 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Astrologers/ horoscopes = snake oil selling con-men who feed off people's scientific ignorance and desperation.
TheAtheistSocialist 1 week ago
Comment removed
TheAtheistSocialist 1 week ago
Good Video. Thanks for informations.
Flusercom 2 weeks ago
Good Video!! Thanks for shared.
Spasatcom 2 weeks ago
How could anyone "dislike" a Carl Sagan video? I throw my hands up in despair.
grahamlive 2 weeks ago
At first, the music sounded like Two Girls 1 Cup... The internet has ruined me.
olliepaul88 1 month ago
144 people read horoscope everyday.
bogdanov0001 3 months ago 5
UNIBROW
TheMichael408 4 months ago
I stick to Astronomy.
ProtossGod100 4 months ago
The way astrology is meant to work is that at specific times certain events will tend to effect incarnated souls who were within physical bodies at specific times and the planets and stars are somehow used as markers to determine what happens and when. Its more that this will influence the outcome of the things you personally do. I'm not saying its necessarily true but its an interesting concept.
Enzo012 5 months ago
@Enzo012 I like your outlook on astrology
WiggieWomper 1 month ago
Well fuck son im high. And i totally agree with this.
vegano1 6 months ago
Dear Sir:
I fully agree with you concerning the pseudo-science of astrology. The interesting point is that this kind of superstition is so tenacious that it could persist through so many centuries.
Very truly yours,
(Signed, 'A. Einstein')
JLuvs0fficial 7 months ago
Carl Sagan always blows my mind on how he could explain things in such a easy to understand way, no matter how complicated the subject was.
And despite the few things that changed in science since he died, his work is still extremely relevant.
One of the few people ever that I can call, with praticaly no doubt, a true genius.
DarkZholt 7 months ago
143 would rather persist in delusion than see the universe for what it really is!
pooperuber 8 months ago
The fact that about 1/3 of ratings are "dislike" confirms the level of delusion in modern society. WTF is going on out there???!!!
warren52nz 8 months ago 13
This has been flagged as spam show
"Astrology has a) no plausible mechanism for working and b) hasn't been demonstrated to work in controlled settings" - lagerbaer
Try working with Progressions and Transits - time of birth is necessary. I'm not crazy about decanets, cusps, or even solar and lunar returns. Nor do I care for chinese or vedic astrology but that's my opinion.
*Progressions and Transits* - for me, that's the meat and potatoes.
But the skeptic will have a long, long study ahead.
MercuryAquarius 9 months ago
Astrology has a) no plausible mechanism for working and b) hasn't been demonstrated to work in controlled settings.
As long as it can provide neither, we can safely regard it as horsecrap.
lagerbaer 9 months ago
It's depressing to read the comments and see the sheer number of people who either didn't listen to or didn't understand his logic. Unless you can provide an actual mechanism, testable in the real world, by which astrology works, you cannot present it as a rational or justified belief.
hewhosayszonk 9 months ago
Astronomy escaped the confines of Astrology? That just doesn't make sense. Astrology is far from "confining."
Astrologers do have Canadian/American Astronomer Simon Newcomb to thank for ephemerides - immensely detailed tables of mathematically computed places of the planets projected far into the future and as far back into the past.
Yes, newspapers & mag horoscopes are dull not to mention ridiculous. Very few people take them seriously.
Constellations have no value in Astrology.
MercuryAquarius 10 months ago
As I am watching this, there is an ads of Free Psychic reading for 2011 on the right side of video screen.
jonybrown 11 months ago
Aye how do you make a video response?! Can someone please tell me?!
meshyis 11 months ago
Carl my ears and my mind miss you and my heart thanks you.
stramster1 1 year ago
Yes, the late Dr. Carl Sagan was quite correct. Human beings are pretty darn good at figuring out the physical & chemical world. However, we don't seem to be able to figure out ourselves, each other, or how to actually treat one another and stay unswervingly on the right path. Psychologically, humans veer off in all sorts of directions.
1958boomergirl 1 year ago
I Love this man, In a scientific sence you understand? My Mom taught me about him
Shaun17170 1 year ago
They're people who believe that they know what they talk about and those who do know what they talk about. According to astrological knowledge base - Carl Sagan failed on so many different levels. Unfortunately, it'll stay like this as an icon of a person who represented a typical astronomer who's annoyed by the fact that daily horoscopes are more popular than of astronomy. The best part is - he never actually said anything about astrology because he wasn't even talking about it. Do homework.
c1k4ml3kc3 1 year ago
@c1k4ml3kc3 astrology is a belief system and has nothing to do with science.
it is shown daily not to work at all expect for creating money for charlatans and people gullible enough to even believe in that charlatanry.
Aanthanur 1 year ago
@Aanthanur And you as a person who studied astrology and learned all about it - clearly know. Or, is it rather that you're caught in a belief system of others? Tell me...Is it me who's believing in astrology or you who believe in astrology based upon what others think instead to know? What exactly do you know about astrology when you make such an statement? Have you studied it? No. Have you learned it? No. So, it's not me the one who's a believer. It's you who believe that you know astrology. :)
c1k4ml3kc3 1 year ago
@c1k4ml3kc3 learn Astrology? No sure not, why would i want to learn charlatanry?
And my Grandmother believed in that nonsense, and every year she send us a year horoscope book, especially made for us. it is the usual nonsense, vague claims that fit most people and nothing concrete. not even the character was correct.
its total rubbish. charlatans use it to make money, gullible people believe it......
the constelations are shifted anyway now, and they didn't even adjust their stuff,......
Aanthanur 1 year ago
@Aanthanur Sorry, you fail. Why? *sigh* 1. Constellations play no role in astrology. 2. Prof.Cox (or anyone else) needs to learn astrology to make a valuable information out of it. If we don't learn something - we don't know properly. 3. When you make a point of something being "total rubbish" because of your picture based upon assumptions, you hold no truth in your words. Evidence of someone being incorrect is when they talk about something which they didn't learn in the first place. Shameful.
c1k4ml3kc3 1 year ago
@c1k4ml3kc3 Zodiac is the ring of constellations that lines the ecliptic, which is the apparent path of the Sun across the celestial sphere over the course of the year.
you don't even know what you belief in....
well yes actually the constellations play no role, because they have zero influence on us.
astrology was based on real observations of constellations, but almost 3000 years ago, and meanwhile the earth has changed position in relation to its axis and.....
Aanthanur 1 year ago
@Aanthanur Againm you prove me how wrong you are. 1. Zodiac represents twelve Signs named upon constellations while not actually having them in. It's based upon four seasons and each season has three signs. each sign has exactly 30 degrees. You've just been plainly idiotic regarding that I know nothing of :what I preach: :) Are you twelve years old!? 2. Astrology exists far more than that. Again, you prove nothing to me. 3. Zodiac off by one month? Really? You just invented hot water, wow. :)
c1k4ml3kc3 1 year ago
@c1k4ml3kc3 or like Prof. Cox said it so nicely.
"Astrology is total rubbish."
Aanthanur 1 year ago
@Aanthanur Did Prof. Cox learn astrology? I guess not. Now, tell me, what do you consider to be astrology since you so freely said that it's "a belief system"?
c1k4ml3kc3 1 year ago
@c1k4ml3kc3 Prof. Cox did surely not study Astrology, he is a scientist and not a charlatan.
but he does indeed know about particle physics and astronomy.
One does not have to study Astrology, one merely needs to read horoscopes with a bit critical thinking.
or look at thins and they different characters.
you charlatans should better stop scamming people and get a real job.
Aanthanur 1 year ago
@Aanthanur Now, charlatan? Haha. Again, your point of view is pretty narrow-minded. I can't provide you with informations, however me being an astrologist (you don't even know what's that, you assume what's an astrologist or search over net where every fool can write bullcrap) provides me astrological point of view and i clearly can say who knows astrology and who believes to know astrology. Carl Sagan is one of those who failed so hard that's it's even blasphemous to even start argue about it.
c1k4ml3kc3 1 year ago
@c1k4ml3kc3 and that means the whole zodiac woo is off by about a month and only astronomy noticed it.....
the charlatans don't care, because it is a belief system anyway. Just like most religions don't accept the theory of evolution , astrology does not accept the reality and goes on with beliefs in nonsense and make good money with it. But hey belief what you want. but don't come to science videos and claim your woo is true, you get challenged and will loose.
Aanthanur 1 year ago
@Aanthanur 4. "I'll lose it" by who, exactly? you? :) Don't be ridiculous. It's not me who didn't learn astrology and than claim how wrong it is. It's perfectly fine, by me, if you're going to ignore fact that people need to research something before they start actually talking about it. You included. I feel no mental threat from your side, if that's what you strive and hope for. How could you, actually, dominate over me unless with demagogic aproach? :)
c1k4ml3kc3 1 year ago
@Aanthanur From my point of view, you're making things in a pretty much stereotypical way which is based upon your perception of what you believe to know and not actually knowing it properly which leads to negation based upon your laziness to properly find out. However, I can't judge you based on that nor i intend to judge to anyone, however I only hope that you'll find some reason and logical observation of your action before proceeding this pointless arguing about what you believe to know.
c1k4ml3kc3 1 year ago
@Aanthanur Now, Prof Cox fails even further if he didn't learn what he preaches to be wrong. Same like kid who'd say that mathematics are rubbish because there was no cotton carburetor on page 1. Completely rubbish is an opinion of anyone without knowledge.
c1k4ml3kc3 1 year ago
@c1k4ml3kc3 there is no evidence that astrology, you belief it works and many others do, and many know how to make money with gullible people that belief extraordinary claims without evidence. its a shame. it's the 21. century and you belief in some ancient crap that never worked to begin with....
Aanthanur 1 year ago
@Aanthanur 5. Oh, there is an evidence for those who're wiling enough to find it, research, deduce, compare, put effort as well as knowledge, however there're those who stand behind what others say about something that thy never, actually, did try to learn. What you fail to notice is that astrology has its methods in the same manner that psychology, math, astronomy and everything else does have its methods. 6. Evidence? Natal Chart :) ...but don't push your mental limits with that one. ;)
c1k4ml3kc3 1 year ago
@Aanthanur Now, if you were more ...fond of admitting to yourself that you know nothing about astrology, which is highly obvious, I'd really present you some of the info that might give you a much better and accurate perspective a.k.a point of view. However, since you;re so highly stubborn I can't help it but to wonder for how long will you continue nonsense about astrology being wrong while having on mind that you never learned it in the start. ... :) ... ? Hopefully, you'll conclude it.
c1k4ml3kc3 1 year ago
@Aanthanur For the end, there's no evidence that astrology doesn't work. There're only assumptions made by those who never studied astrology, by those who say "according to" and by those who use methods which aren't used in astrology, whatsoever. It's similar to...let's say... mental illness which is trying to be disproved with mathematical calculation. Or, we can freely get back to the point of the cotton carburetor. Pretty much (il)logical. Oh, sweet chronology.
c1k4ml3kc3 1 year ago
@c1k4ml3kc3 oh lol belief what ever you want, its not important enough to debate about it, you seem to not even know how the zodiac came about...... but you want to belief it works.....
have fund with that belief system.
Aanthanur 1 year ago
@Aanthanur I'm perfectly aware of how did Zodiac "came about" because I'm studying astrology for more than a decade as well as researching it. I agree that it's pointless for you that you argue with me about something that you know nothing of. :) farewell
c1k4ml3kc3 1 year ago
@c1k4ml3kc3 so you are a professional charlatan?
Aanthanur 1 year ago
@Aanthanur
Do you understand the definition of 'charlatan'?
Do you understand the definition of 'libel'?
If you're aware of fraud being perpetrated, contact your local consumer protection hotline, or the police.
But if you want to defame people's reputations, you'd better have a good legal representative.
emanitudism 11 months ago
@emanitudism
are you saying you believe in this nonsense? And its not libel, its just the hard trueth.
Aanthanur 11 months ago
@c1k4ml3kc3 I made up a magic dragon and wrote a book about it. You have no grounds to dispute the existence of this dragon because I know more than you about it. Do you know the difference between an authority and an expert?
damandatwin 11 months ago
@damandatwin Comparativeness between illusion (imagination) and something which is regarding to a lot more than human capability to invent or imagine is trivial. The point is simple, you made your dragon out of mere imagination, however astrologers are observing planetary positions in correspondence to human behavior. And they have success, however it's highly dependable on many factors involved into observation and final conclusions. Such as chronology, astrologer ability to comprehend'n'obzerv
c1k4ml3kc3 11 months ago
@damandatwin That being said, I know nothing about your dragon nor I intend to find it out since it's your imagination, not something which exists for several millenia and has a support of a lot of people. Besides, I;m quite able to even more define to you why dragons aren't comparable to astrology, however I leave you to your ignorance about the matter that you're trying to comprehend :)
However, the fact remains that astrology exists, same like truth, and that there're connections. Time tells
c1k4ml3kc3 11 months ago
@c1k4ml3kc3 People invented astrology because they didn't know the true nature of stars, and of space in general. They made it up. Just because it's old and has had the support of a lot of people over the course of history, that doesn't make it any more valid. From the dictionary: "Astrology: A pseudoscience claiming divination by the positions of the planets and sun and moon."
damandatwin 11 months ago
@damandatwin People didn't made that up, people were logically observing, deducing and making statistical data based upon what they found to be the truth. Astrology is only a term used by people to define certainty. However, there's a lot of progress in astrology based upon when it was firstly used up until now. Valid is determined by the truth factor. What's the truth? People who say that astrology isn't valid never studied astrology nor learned anything particular about it. That's a fact. )
c1k4ml3kc3 11 months ago
@damandatwin So, based upon your derivation and presentation, and given the fact that person in the video never studied astrology in the first place (when someone is a scientist - that person WILL TAKE all data provided and THAN make a possible analysis). I am 100 % sure that there's no scientist or person who studied astrology and said that it's false or not valid in correspondence to the influences on human life a.k.a position of the planets > = < human life. You know nothing about astrology.
c1k4ml3kc3 11 months ago
@damandatwin And, that's another fact. :} Quite frankly, I find it highly amusing to find people who so openly accept that something's not valid without even researching it. And I know that you didn't research it. If you did, you wouldn't even talk that nonsense from the start :}
Find me one scientist who did research astrology and who did found it not to be valid and I'll give you 1000. euros. Not those who say "Astrologers say this" or "according to astrology". You'd shit bricks. :]
c1k4ml3kc3 11 months ago
@c1k4ml3kc3 So you've taken a position of "Nobody can understand astrology and disagree with it." There is no reason to believe an idea whose assertions are contradicted by, or have no supporting evidence. By the way, the name you're looking for is closer than you think: Carl Sagan.
damandatwin 11 months ago
@damandatwin ohoho, please, don't even start making assumptions about my position here. i haven't said nor provided my opinion regarding astrology, whatsoever. Tell me, did you find any scientist who DID, actually, study astrology before disregarding it? HAHAHAHAHAHA Carl Sagan? hahahahahahaha, what, daily horoscopes? Hahahahahaha, you've made me to laugh quite a bit... Carl Sagan never studied astrology. Where's his work, huh? :D Omg, you are plainly idiotic, huh? :)
c1k4ml3kc3 11 months ago
@damandatwin Anyway, my position is of no concern to you :) I may even hate astrology for all that you know :) the point that I made is quite simple and I'm repeating it again, for you, to adequately comprehend it : You can't know something without actually researching it. A child can't work with nuclear physic if he believes that it's made up from gummy bears, nor can a child make a mathematical calculation before actually knowing numbers and their meaning. Same goes for you. You are a child.:)
c1k4ml3kc3 11 months ago
And, for the end, which is highly obvious by anyone who ever studies or learned something about astrology - this person never examined it and is only misleading people from the correct truth. Prejudices, guessing and perception of astrology throughout daily horoscopes while comparing it to the mythological beliefs of the old people when "magic" was on the same level as science? anyone actually believing without researching is condemned to live in a lie. Quite basic and concise.
c1k4ml3kc3 1 year ago
@c1k4ml3kc3 Oh please, you're just writing tl;dr's and making baseless claims. You can make all the claims you like, and it won't make any difference unless you can give some actual evidence. I understand what astrology is, and so does Car Sagan. The fact that you won't accept this just means that you're unreasonable and stubborn, and to further communicate with you would be an exercise in futility. You can tell me that I know nothing about the subject all you like, if it makes you feel better.
damandatwin 11 months ago
@damandatwin I'm unreasonable and stubborn, and you talk about something that neither you nor Carl Sagan learned nor researched while leaning only onto his reputation and nothing else :)
I can see that you know nothing about astrology by you providing D&D manifests as well as imaginably presenting how Carl Sagan learned astrology. Give me a break. If it wasn't sad it'd be hilarious. It's your mere luck that I'm a good person, otherwise I'd make fun of your insolence and ignorance.
c1k4ml3kc3 11 months ago
Now, he took DAILY HOROSCOPES, which are highly despised by all astrologers and he refers to them as "astrology". Another proof of his ignorance.
A person who's a scientist should, before making a judgement, examine the matter of his interest. Not to find something which isn't related to astrology whatsoever. Daily horoscopes are not astrology. Any astrologer will confirm that. Besides,according to astrological research Twins aren't born at the exact same time nor they live at the exact spot.
c1k4ml3kc3 1 year ago
4:20 - 4:51 Fail. Incorrect according to all astrological knowledge.
Magazines reassemble astrology - Fail. No magazine can teach you astrology correctly.
Provence that he doesn't know astrology, never examined astrology nor learned basics of it, yet he dares to teach others how it's wrong? That's just a proof of his ignorance as well as his demagogic agenda. Simple logic inclines towards using knowledge instead of guessing what or how astrology functions. Never learned - never will be correct.
c1k4ml3kc3 1 year ago
@c1k4ml3kc3 Rather than just talking about how nobody understands astrology, how about you link me to some things I could read, so that I won't be attacking a strawman (although I really think you're just moving the goalposts). I'd also ask you to watch this: /watch?v=4vPC7nPX-X4
damandatwin 11 months ago
@damandatwin I'm not ranting, I'm stating a fact that you know nothing of astrology. If I'm wrong, please correct me by mentioning how many Natal Charts have you or Carl Sagan - did. Next thing, I watched that video many months ago and beside that - I find it to present a prefect example of a charlatan astrologer from U.K. No astrologer, real one, does daily horoscopes unless it's only for the fun. I will not give you any link because only one wouldn't suffice. Nor 100 url's would.
c1k4ml3kc3 11 months ago
@damandatwin What you may think is of no concern to me, I made my point perfectly clear. If someone doesn't research something, that person doesn't know it adequately. If you find that illogical, that's not my problem. It's up to you to learn it, not to me to prove anything or teach you astrology non the less - over the internet in no other place but - YouTube comments. However, it can't be helped since you know nothing about astrology nor cohesive capacities of informations needed to comprehend
c1k4ml3kc3 11 months ago
@c1k4ml3kc3 I know what the basic premises of astrology are, and that they originated from mysticism. What would be the purpose of studying this subject in-depth if they have no objective evidence? Explain to me exactly how planetary alignment affects human life, show me the logical chain with which astrology discovered this, and show me the evidence that solidifies your argument. Then I'll take you seriously. If you can't do that, then you're wasting my time.
damandatwin 11 months ago
@damandatwin Mysticism? Nice, you need history lessons as well! :) Search a bit more about king Ashurbanipal and the tablets that were found on the shore near city Nineveh. After that, search a bit more about what does and what does not represent astrology. If you're from the American continent - don't even bother. U.S. internet and media are filled with stupidity all the time (unfortunately). Now, all that you demand - what does that has to do with astrology? Now, a proof is called Natal Chart.
c1k4ml3kc3 11 months ago
@damandatwin It's very nice to ask for particular evidence about a thing that you don't even know what are the methods about :) you are in no position to demand anything from me :) nor am I obliged to provide further info. Actually, you're the one wasting my time because you're stubborn enough to question whether or not you do know astrology adequately and now I realize that you're both angry and lazy to research by yourself.
Learn to do natal Chart, use that method, prove it to yourself. Ta-Da
c1k4ml3kc3 11 months ago
@damandatwin anyways, if you're expecting for me to show you any type of astrological representative - I will not. The best way to learn is to learn for yourself. You can't look at numbers and assume what's their name - you need to learn their names - and for that - you need books. however, I'm unaware of any foreign astrologer to whom I can trust since I haven't seen their skill of interpretation of Natal Chart, however I do know a lot in my country. If you're not satisfied, your problem.
c1k4ml3kc3 11 months ago
@c1k4ml3kc3 If you're unable to present objective evidence that supports astrology, then you have failed. That's what it comes down to. I see you have not sufficiently answered any of the questions that I asked last time, and until you do, we're done. You lose.
damandatwin 11 months ago
@damandatwin I have nothing to lose. You may only gain if you're smart enough. I can show you the path to the well of knowledge, I can tell you that it's a tricky one, but I can't go and bring you it so that you taste it and than spit it saying how it's not cold enough.
I know astrology, you don't. nobody gives a f**k about whether you agree or disagree with it - that's a fact. :}
c1k4ml3kc3 11 months ago
@c1k4ml3kc3 Speaking in metaphor and being vague doesn't help you, I'm sorry. Unless you have evidence to back up what you're saying, don't message me anymore. I'm tired of you and your baseless assertions of intellectual superiority.
damandatwin 11 months ago
@damandatwin Hahaha, considering me being arrogant is quite hilarious. :) I may say that i understand it. That's how a child does react when they have a figure of someone who does know more about particular matter than the child itself :)
I already told you about the evidence :0 It's called Natal Chart. Once you learn to interpret it you may start using astrology adequately. Or, do you want me to draw it for you? :) With sparlings and teddy-bears...? Maybe some "hot chicks" would influence nice?
c1k4ml3kc3 11 months ago
@damandatwin And ofc I'm unable to present astrology on a YouTube comments page. Why don't you prove gravity by typing letters? Lol.
c1k4ml3kc3 11 months ago
@damandatwin Oh, I'll give you an evidence :) once you cure mentally ill person with a mathematical calculation by writing a comment on YouTube page where the URL's are even forbidden 9unable) to be placed. There's no irony in this, at all. Again, just a fact.
Point is - you can't expect a gummy bear from a soup that you never tasted. You can't expect evidence about something that you don't even know what it is. Again, you prove your ignorance and insolence.
c1k4ml3kc3 11 months ago
@c1k4ml3kc3 I think I'll leave you there. What you said about curing a mentally ill person with a mathematical calculation and proving gravity "with letters" was idiotic enough, I don't think I can bring you any lower than that. If you can't post a URL, then reference a peer-reviewed study or something of the sort that demonstrates the validity of astrology. I'll be waiting. Note: I'm not responding to you anymore until I get the evidence. This has gone on long enough.
damandatwin 11 months ago
@damandatwin Of, sweet irony. My words meant to describe your behavior in a lousy effort to use against me... Surely, you're joking, right? :) Hahahahaha. Exactly the same for you. Once you prove that i may prove the astrology to you in the way that you want, not in the way that it's supposed to be. :]
Your actions, metaphorically : "But I want a gummy bear from the soup!! Waaa"
My actions, metaphorically : "Ok, once you start sneezing golden stars :)"
c1k4ml3kc3 11 months ago
@c1k4ml3kc3 A natal chart is a tool used by astrologers, not evidence that astrology is valid. I am only looking for the same type of objective evidence that would pass in any real discipline of science. I don't know why you can't understand this. You have one more chance. Reference a peer-reviewed study that demonstrates the validity of astrology, or you're done. Failure to do so will show that you have no logical or factual basis for believing in astrology. Put up or shut up.
damandatwin 11 months ago
@damandatwin A simple question - why do you BELIEVE that astrology would be a science?
Did I say that astrology is a science? where do you get all those your prejudices? I'm done? Dude, seriously, start using common sense. You don't know astrology, please, stop assuming things. It's unbearable to correct you in each and every comment. damn, i was just going to talk with you something about Guitar Hero but I guess that it can't be helped, again.
Anyway, a tool? *facepalm*. Where you read that?xD
c1k4ml3kc3 11 months ago
@damandatwin We're done talking. Before stating anything about astrology make sure that you learn it first. That's how you won't look like the rest of imbeciles who believe to this video without any proper research.
Rather to believe in research, people believe in reputation. That's the malicious behavior of a non-scientific mind, lazy and arrogant.
c1k4ml3kc3 11 months ago
@c1k4ml3kc3 Just curiosity more then anything but how come on my birthday, I am a saggitarius, does the sun rise in scorpio? If astrology was valid wouldn't it rise in saggitarius?
Mekiwyn 10 months ago
@Mekiwyn Zodiac Signs are not in any particular correlation with Constellation Signs. Astrology and Astronomy are not sharing anything particular or similar. Signs of Zodiac are based upon Equinoxes and seasons, but real individuation is related toward humans and their need. Just Sign or Rising sign are of no great importance, whole Natal Chart describes concisely and is giving more in-detail. Natal Chart is like a x-ray print of the planetary positions at the moment of birth, when baby breathes
c1k4ml3kc3 10 months ago
@c1k4ml3kc3 Yeah, i understand that ty, The zodiac signs have nothing to do with astronomy, I understand they are very different things. I think I stem this question from the idea that from the time astrology was made up everything is in a different position, rather drastically. So I guess I find it hard to see how it can apply to anything on earth as it itself isn't even constant. But you are saying that the zodiac has nothing to do with the position of the constellations in the sky?
Mekiwyn 10 months ago
@Mekiwyn Yes. Constellations are not important in astrology. Astrological signs, a.k.a Zodiac signs are just having names of certain constellations. As for astrology, the idea is simple "As above, so below", taking extreme amount of time to prove that theory and it's still in development. Might take another 10.000 years.
For constellations to be equal to Zodiac signs does sound logical, for an random spectator, however they are not correlated mathematically. . .That means next thing :
c1k4ml3kc3 10 months ago
@Mekiwyn Each sign was divided based upon equinoxes. Each Sign takes exactly 30 degrees of sky view, from Earth perspective, (latitude and longitude) and each sign is divided by three decans, however even signs are not that important in astrology! What's truly important are degrees and minutes on which one particular sky body is "standing" on (i.e. Sun at 27*35' in Aquarius). Astrology can't "move on" because it's using symbolism to characterize and correlate certain factors of existence.
c1k4ml3kc3 10 months ago
@Mekiwyn Given that fact, astrology can never be accepted by the majority of scientific world, but interesting fact is hat even thou it does uses symbolism to correlate two different factors of existence, properties of characterization will always remain the same a.k.a astrology does have it's own ground basis on which more advanced characterization may take place. However, whoever learns a bit of astrology always wants the money from it and - anyone can learn it, making it worse in people eyes.
c1k4ml3kc3 10 months ago
@Mekiwyn Anyway, sorry for long chat, however if you have any ore particular question or something is unclear, I'll gladly answer.
c1k4ml3kc3 10 months ago
@c1k4ml3kc3 no problem and ty, so the relative position of the earth to the stars doesn't matter or apply in astrology, is that basically what you are saying?
Mekiwyn 10 months ago
@Mekiwyn When the influence can be validated it will become important for further research, however priority receives the knowledge that it works and for many that knowledge alone is quite good. I'm pretty sure for planets, however for distant start I may only assume neutrinos or light itself. So, to bluntly place it - no. For the time being, that is. But who knows when will people learn to adequately use astrology...current knowledge is no greater than roughly said - 2 % of potential knowledge.
c1k4ml3kc3 10 months ago
@Mekiwyn Basically astrological knowledge is not correlated to astronomical (as it was before many, many, many years), however it proves that it's not even important. Roughly speaking on every 2000 years one sign shifts itself, and for 2000 years Aquarius might be the one with Pieces "engine" or Aries with Taurus. The point is - those are just terms and names used. :]
c1k4ml3kc3 10 months ago
@Mekiwyn So, basically, it doesn't mater to be correlated mathematically, in the same way that it doesn't matter what names we give to constellations or signs - they are both there because people imagined so. However, what's important in astrology is Earth's ecliptic and position of the planets on a 2-dimensional sketch called a horoscope a.k.a Natal Chart. Horoscopes in newspapers, that's all rubbish. Signs were correlated towards "pieces of sky" and each piece received 30 degrees. That's truth
c1k4ml3kc3 10 months ago
@c1k4ml3kc3 It doesn't matter how detailed your natal chart is; it is still bullshit.
lagerbaer 9 months ago
@lagerbaer And you as a person who learned and studied astrology will most certainly know that's it's bullshit without even trying nor seeing for yourself. :] The only bullshit's coming from you, not from astrology. The only bullshit's your perspective about a matter that you're not familiar with. What you beleive is not my concern, I have studied it, you have not. End of the story.
c1k4ml3kc3 9 months ago
@c1k4ml3kc3 There is neither a plausible mechanism nor has it been demonstrated to work anyone but gullible simpletons. Why should I study something that has neither been demonstrated to work nor is able to give a plausible mechanism for why it should work in the first place. This is the "trying to see for yourself" part. I know that people are subjective and easily deceived. That is why I'd demand either a plausible mechanism ("Astrology works via xyz") or a scientific(!) study that it works.
lagerbaer 9 months ago
@lagerbaer You can't demand something without even knowing whether or how it starts. If you knew how it works you'd know the cohesive complexity involved. Besides it leans on the symbolism to adequately comprehend the functions since that's the most objective and accurate mean possible in corresponding to the complexity. It's the most delicate and compelling area of knowledge available to the human race.
c1k4ml3kc3 9 months ago
@c1k4ml3kc3 The most delicate and compelling area of knowledge? Lol. Well, over at the Skeptics Stackexchange site there's currently an open question on astrology. Feel free to provide real-world evidence over there.
lagerbaer 9 months ago
@lagerbaer Why would I want to prove something that I have an evidence for? You're the one lacking the knowledge and proof. Just because you haven't experienced it nor did see doesn't mean that you're correct in your assumptions. The matter's simple - knowledge and ignorance. "Real evidence", you say? That's why you're an idiot to my eyes, with no disrespect meant. Only because of your assumptions, prejudices and overly ignorance about the matter. Is there anything unclear about your ignorance?
c1k4ml3kc3 9 months ago
@c1k4ml3kc3 Thing is, you don't have evidence. You are just gullible and easily fooled. Your personal stories and anecdotes are not evidence for astrology, only evidence to your ignorance and inability to comprehend the world around you. Is there anything unclear about your gullibility?
lagerbaer 9 months ago
@lagerbaer And now you're a psychic, too. How wonderful. It's not that I don't have an evidence, it's that you know nothing about it. Face reality. :]
c1k4ml3kc3 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@lagerbaer And now you're a psychic, too. How wonderful. It's not that I don't have an evidence, it's that you know nothing about it. Face reality. :]
c1k4ml3kc3 9 months ago
@damandatwin Seriously, the only thing that you should do is admit to yourself that you know nothing about astrology (especially now when a person who did study it told you that, and you know it's the truth since you never studied it ;) let's not make this a big fuss) and, if you want - learn it. If you don't want to learn it - that's fine, too. However, what's arrogant is your assumption (human assumption) that you know something without researching it by the methods of research. Farewell. :]
c1k4ml3kc3 11 months ago
@c1k4ml3kc3 You're done.
damandatwin 11 months ago
@damandatwin P.S. I just want to tell you since I'm a very honest person - you look like an idiot when you don't know what you're talking about. You believe that you know, but belief alone ain't good enough.
As for some arrogance from me : I can beat you in any song from any part of guitar hero, anytime ;)
c1k4ml3kc3 11 months ago
"If I throw a stick up in the air it always falls down."
Precisely. That's what science is good at investigating.
Astrology addresses human nature and the living environment, which don't function like thrown sticks.
emanitudism 1 year ago
@emanitudism Astrology is a belief system, nothing more, it doesn't do anything of use.
it sells expensive and vague descriptions of characteristics that are so vague and general that everyone can see something in it that fits.
or the daily nonsense in newspapers , would you mix up the signs no one would even notice. Its pure belief and no facts behind it. not even the constellations fit anymore. its a joke but when you belief in it i surely make total sense and fits perfectly.....
Aanthanur 1 year ago
This video shows that Carl knew a little bit about the history of astronomy-astrology, and very little about what astrology aims to do, its philosophical outlook, its practices, and its aims.
emanitudism 1 year ago
Astronomy is intersting but too arrogant. Astrlogy isn't scientific, but more friendly and familiar to us. so we need them both forever.
ayanuhito 1 year ago
@ayanuhito friendly? Lies and scams are not friendly......
Aanthanur 1 year ago
@Aanthanur Carl himself was a Scorpio, and he probably hated himself to be distingushed so.
ayanuhito 1 year ago
@ayanuhito LOL Astrology doesn't work at all. This is just carp to make money.
only guilible people believe that nonsense, there is no evidence at all.
it is a sort of religion.
Aanthanur 1 year ago
@Aanthanur in fact it's like a religion nothing scientific. if he was a Libra or a Sagittarius, he might have not made this sort of video for just telling the horoscope is unscientific. Scorpio is known for their strongest emotion and passion. once he hates something, he hates it till it dies. once he loves, he believes it till he dies. well, he could show us how Astromony is great, but he didn't have to talk about Astrology. he was an Astronomist, not an Astrologist. any way, he's a Scorpio.
ayanuhito 1 year ago
@ayanuhito spare me that nonsensical crap, it does not work, it is made up crap that has nothing to do with peoples character........
Holy crap.
Aanthanur 1 year ago
@Aanthanur isn't it boring some to take things on such a way? you don't have to exclude anything you dislike. Carl was a great Astronomist and truly a Scorpio at the same time. it's just a funny truth.
ayanuhito 1 year ago
@ayanuhito Scorpio or not Scorpio, it make not the slightest difference. its the individual and not some stupid star positions that are not correct anymore anyway...... it is so laughable.....
it is not working, it never worked and it will never work, its as simple as that.
Aanthanur 1 year ago
@Aanthanur
Your comment is full of (the word) crap :-D
emanitudism 1 year ago
@ayanuhito and it is such a crapy nonsense that they do not even care if the constellations are still like they were when Astrology started, The whole thing has shifted, and actually i would not be a Libra, i would be a Virgo now. But they didn't adjust anything, they just keep on making up crap by the old system that is not even in agreement with the constellations anymore. they just keep selling their crap to the gullible.
Aanthanur 1 year ago
@Aanthanur wasn't it just because Carl watched the sky in the northern part of the continent, while they watched it in the sub-tropical Greece?? i think i'm a Pisces if i were born in the northern Europe, since the constellations different to the ones in Japan(it's in approximately similar latitude to Greece). the northerners definitely should have their own correct Astrology, otherwise it'd be nonsense forever.
ayanuhito 1 year ago
@ayanuhito watch?v=6KlZRz__Fk0
Aanthanur 1 year ago
@ayanuhito
You're confusing constellations with the equal-sized signs of the zodiac originated by the Babylonians.
emanitudism 1 year ago
@Aanthanur
They care enough to look at the skies properly for more than 2000 years. You don't care enough to check your facts about what astrologers do.
emanitudism 1 year ago
@emanitudism erm no, thats the point, they don't look into the sky lol......
the constellations have shifted and they don't care. Because it has nothing to do with star constellations anymore. and it was already woo when they invented it. its a myth and doesn't work nor does it make sense.
Aanthanur 1 year ago
@Aanthanur
That's 'crap'. If you want to make money, astrology is not a good subject to pick. You should take comfort in that instead of railing against something that isn't harming you or your interests.
You seem to project a lot onto astrology and astrologers that just isn't there in them or their field.
emanitudism 1 year ago
@Aanthanur
It's neither.
emanitudism 1 year ago
@achzdck
Well, I think there are a few points on morality we should acknowledge. Firstly, humans are not universally moral. Secondly, humans don't agree on the finer points of morality. Thirdly, moral agreement, at best, exists for 'the basics', like murder, theft and lying. And those are mostly because we don't want to be murdered, stolen from or lied to ourselves, and it's easier if we all agree not to do it.
I don't know where the matter of the universe came from.
bluebeard2 1 year ago
« im in great pain »
Sorry to hear that. Are you receiving therapy?
XGralgrathor 1 year ago
« If a design were not evident »
It isn't. Not in any independently verifiable way, anyway.
« you could have no model to predict on »
...? That's just confused-speak for "The world is designed! And it's true because I say so!"
XGralgrathor 1 year ago
« all questions are either true or false »
That's not the point. The point is that we can never KNOW a proposition about the natural world to be true with absolute certitude.
XGralgrathor 1 year ago
@achzdck We don't know definitely how gravity works, true, and we admit it. There is a great deal of evidence that suggests gravity is merely the result of the warping of space by matter, but it's not conclusive. So we don't claim to know for certain what we can't know for certain, yet.
Matter is created and destroyed all the time, by converting to energy and back. The total amount of matter/energy seems to be decreasing as entropy increases.
TacticusPrime 1 year ago
« breakdown of Rules from a designer »
You're talking about a set of archaic rules from an ancient book. And yet even you pick and choose from those rules, in accordance with your culturally inherited morality.
« The words of love your neighbor have no meaning »
Not if they're merely a rule set forth by some book.
XGralgrathor 1 year ago
« a design of the universe is very evident »
To you, perhaps, but not in any independently verifiable way.
« Morality is a design for mans actions »
And interaction between individuals is what has shaped morality.
« Ive seen in the last 40 yrs the breakdown / change of morals »
There are some things that could be better. But do you really think that going back to a 50's style of repression and sweeping under the rug of issues is better?
XGralgrathor 1 year ago
« If you cant prove a theory »
Explanatory models are never proven. We cannot prove that atoms consist of nucleae and electron orbits. At most, we can prove that such a model accurately predicts our observations. Yet all our electronic equipment (to an ever higher degree, depending on the micronisation of electronic circuitry) depends on this model being correct.
XGralgrathor 1 year ago
« The odds of even 1 of these theorys being true is uncalculatable »
First of all, you're going to have to let go of the notion of "true". When we're testing a proposition about the nature of reality, we cannot know whether it is "true" or not. All we can know is whether it is consistent with observation. We say a scientific model is *accurate* when it is.
XGralgrathor 1 year ago
« what cause and where did matter and space come from? »
These are the questions scientists are asking. The fact that they do not yet have any testable answers doesn't mean there aren't any.
XGralgrathor 1 year ago
« I've seen animals give birth then turn around and devour the young »
1. Oftentimes, there is a reason for this. A wrong smell or strange behavior can indicate birth defects. Killing weak offspring allows the parent to invest more in healthy offspring.
2. Statistically, animals are always less likely to kill ones own species.
3. So? Humans sometimes do the same thing. Are you arguing that morality simply *doesn't* exist?
XGralgrathor 1 year ago
« What accounts for the lone predator's internal responses »
1. Even 'lone predators' have a set of behaviors towards one another, be it a pecking order or something more complex, sometimes even cooperation.
2. What do you mean, "internal responses"?
XGralgrathor 1 year ago
organisms that dont kill eachother willy nilly but cooperate are more successful than others. it is this principle that forms the biological basis for morality.
XGralgrathor 1 year ago
@achzdck
If evolution doesn't fit your personal model of morality, then that's unfortunate, but it doesn't make it less true. Morality isn't a yardstick for truth. I also don't understand your point about abiogenesis. Are you trying to say that if life started from non-living origins without intervention from an agent, this means that death has no place? Why do you think that? And lastly, logic doesn't need to encompass anything other than facts, evidence and building conclusions.
bluebeard2 1 year ago
@achzdck They thought they knew everything. We know the edges of our understand and see no reason to ascribe that which we do not yet understand to some kind of supernatural other. That's a total cop out.
TacticusPrime 1 year ago
THE TRUTH
In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day. Genesis 1:1-5
coolvideo28 1 year ago
THE TRUTH
In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.
Genesis 1:1-5
coolvideo28 1 year ago
@achzdck
The issue is that it's the best explanation of the day, yes. So, a big bang with inflation, aboigenesis and biological evolution is the best explanation we have now. The biggest difference, of course, is that we have a significantly more sophisticated and nuanced understanding of just how ignorant and feeble we are.
But what's your point? :o)
bluebeard2 1 year ago
according to astrology chart ,137 astrologist can go fuck themselves becasue mars looked at jupitors ring
biggidy1st 1 year ago
its true that there events or things that affect us in such subtle and unknown ways that we would have have no way to make sense of it besides labeling it as spiritual or even magic. science is far behind in this sense. hopefully a further exploration of quantum physics will give us some kind of hope of quantifying or understanding these impossible relationships. millions of unfathomably small particles go through us everyday. u think it wouldnt make a difference if they suddenly disappeared?
etheangel2220 1 year ago
Carl Sagan is the disprover of Astrology and its pseudo science. May he live on, in the cosmos.
guyfromdubai 1 year ago
What is it with these atheists attacking astrology? Do people really need to be convinced that celestial signs have nothing to do with the outcomes of our lives?
Stick to bashing superstitions people actually believe in!
RUIXXComics 1 year ago
@RUIXXComics Yes, there still are people that really need to be convinced that astrology is rubbish, because they do actually believe in it.
archapmangcmg 1 year ago
He REALLY did not do is research before creating this video.
MiSs215Live 1 year ago
@MiSs215Live
Explain?
guyfromdubai 1 year ago
@MiSs215Live Right..
JackeShanTwo 1 year ago
For the love of the entire Universe, who the heck rated this video down? One third of them thumbed it down? There is something wrong with our species...
WindScar48 1 year ago
@WindScar48 Yeah! We are ignorant fascist pigs!
asargentb 1 year ago
I'm sitting here thinking that this all sounds rather familiar, then I dimly recall that I'm almost done reading the book from which his words are based!
JBarracudaL 1 year ago
Astrology was finally put down in the 20th Century. The Holy Bible was there first, claiming magic, witchcraft, sorcery, enchanters are all evil-doers, liars, and practice deception. With the Hubble Telescope we can see 10-billion-light-years all around Earth, and at any point is a viewing field of galaxies--hundreds of billions of galaxies. The magic reading of the stars was only a witch who learned to say something for money, the stars are independent of our existence: No star magic.
WOWJBEOWULF 1 year ago
Moral: Science kicks ass. Humainity kicks more ass.
Republica101 1 year ago
Astrologists are to Astronomy what Pat Roberson is to Christianity.
viruscauser 1 year ago
This man was so very good at what he did. Bring science to the masses.
kenshin304 1 year ago 2
Why are the stupidists statements made on YouTube are by people in their twenties? Is the brain not connected during their twenties? If I throw a rock up does it not come back down to earth? If I find a really stoopid piece of shit on YouTube, is it not written by a twenty year old dipshit?
junkyardpolester 2 years ago
He walks like Shaft lol
I guess it has to do with massive testicles
KarinMikazuki 2 years ago 5
I'd love to know the music at 8:50...
1RadicalOne 2 years ago
The Beatles are back!
baigandine 2 years ago
crumbly but good
KarinMikazuki 2 years ago
I giggled a little when he told about being born. It seemed to suggest he had a really fat nurse. xD
CoolFire666 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Wow, is the background music meant to be a direct rip-off of Janacek's Sinfonietta? Or is it a credited remix, I wonder? It's extremely close, but not exactly the original. However, unmistakable.
lexave 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Nice video,
thanks for sharing.
;-)
AstroChartsMadeEasy 2 years ago
Do the world a favor, SMACK an astrologist across the face!
zDurden21 2 years ago 31
hahahahahahaha
RodHullIOnceWasHim 2 years ago