@meengreens - ...hate to disappoint you but there is no evidence Newton never said that. It most likely a misquote as he didn't believe in astrology and it was probably a reference to religion as he was deeply religious.
Not everyone knows astrology is valid. No one has ever presented any scientific evidence that is works. It is a belief system with no basis in fact.
@meengreens Would you please stop with these categorical absolutist statements like "everyone, real, people like you, don't even know, valid"? Nothing you say is even remotely coherent if you do not back it up. It's easy enough to say these broad categorical statements, but it doesn't mean they are true. Instead say something productive, such as multiple instances where Astrology predicted something that could not have been predicted with other methods.
@meengreens - all astrologers believe their version is correct. It's like religion, if you're bought up in a particular faith you believe it to be the one and only version of the truth.
Astrology has not demonstrated through proper testing that it is valid or accurate. Trouble is you base your opinions on anecdotes, not facts.
- All Astrology is equally invalid. There is no scientific evidence to support it, nor is there any consistency in it. James Randi has a very good set of videos dealing with Astrology that I would suggest you watch.
- Fallacy statement, "Equivocation".
- Fallacy statement, "False Attribution" It does not matter what Newton believed. He also believed in alchemy and biblical prophecy, but they do not get credence from his work in science.
@meengreens Have you studied Harry Potter? Nope! Your entire standpoint was just obliterated because you have not studied some unrelated prerequisite I arbitrarily selected for my own purposes. Studying something does not make it inherently valid, using the scientific method and scrutinizing models of reality does. Astrology is not a science, not does it comply with science; It is merely wishful thinking. When you have a proven case study - then we'll talk.
The International Association of Astrologers, Clairvoyants and Fortune-Tellers (IAACFT) has announced that 301 of its members will commit mass suicide in New York City on Friday. The spokesperson of the organization, Cher Starsinger, said these members were utterly ashamed and desperate. "They are at a loss to understand why they did neither foresee the demise of Arab dictators nor the events in Japan, let alone the death of Kim Jong Il". They felt empty and worn-out she continued.
@LiamXaoh That...wait, sorry, I'm confused. You said that astrologers have proven 8 of the last 2 economic downturns. Was that sarcastic? For some reason I didn't read the "8" part. I'm exhausted so I think I've misunderstood.
Show me the research on Kepler that he found astrology tedious. Dont just make up stories but give proof also. It is How much energy does it take for chromosome crossovers? How do you know astrology doesnt work? What studies have you undertaken? Do you know what the common factor is in terms of planetary relationship between being anemic, chronic depress and low metabolic rate? What are the two most common astrological elements that you find amongsgt people who are left handed?
@stargaze9 - first you say "Dont just make up stories but give proof " then you say "do you know what the common factor is in terms of planetary relationship between being anemic, chronic depress and low metabolic rate?"
LOL.
No studies have ever found astrology to work as claimed.
Educate yourself and do some research. Fascinating
Could Cycles of War or Peace Be Tied to Cycles of the Sun?
by Dr. Buryl Payne - National Council on Geocosmic Research
A growing number of scientists, health care professionals, and concerned citizens argue that these invisible frequencies are responsible for a host of various health problems. Meanwhile, the largest polluter has gone unnoticed: the Sun. At certain times, the Sun's activity can also aggravate mental health problems.
Payne's article is speculative and presumptuous to say the least. Without sources he claims solar storms affect male hormone levels--but HOW? He doesn't say, of course. Payne's incorrect about UV light too--the Sun, a G2 star, radiates well in the UV even at sunspot minimum.
And worst of all, he brings back the notion of 'lunacy'--that moonlight has a property that affects people.
Fascinating, sure, but speculative and unsubstantiated.
Also, the solar cycle is independent of Earth's orbit about the sun and Earth's rotation. By Payne's reasoning, human behavior under the noonday sun should be seen as 'strange', more so during solar minimum.
These aren't personality traits he's talking about. He's speculating about people being adversely affected by solar storms. (He's also deep into 'paranormal' issues.)
Obliquity of the ecliptic was designed as part of the master plan I am sure and is very responsible for the changing magnetic filed of the earth. Obviously you are not into any research on astrology nor have done any research besides maybe some Sun sign stuff. Kepler laid the basis of astronomy and you think he just sold horoscopes for money. Read his treatise on aspects and astrological work first. Your approach is very negative about something you know very little about.
Earth's magnetic field is generated by convection currents in its liquid nickel-iron outer core caused by our rather rapid rotation. (Venus, similar in composition to Earth, has no magnetic field because it rotates so slowly.)
What does our axial tilt--"Obliquity of the ecliptic"--have to do with the magnetic field?
I've read up on Kepler. He found astrology tedious and unfounded and willingly sold phony horoscopes to political figures in order to stay in cash.
Kepler was an amazing scientist. If you have read his entire volume on astrology, you will see how scientific his methods were and he was not motivated by money at all. Way ahead of his time and thorough researcher.
Kepler created and sold bogus horoscopes in order to please his wealthy patrons in order to secure his annuity. He knew astrology was suspect but went along with it in order to get paid.
He sold snake oil same as any other astrologist/psychic/priest, but he didn't believe it. Neither did Tycho, Galileo, Huygens, Newton .... don't even try using their names at us.
They were the thinkers who beat back superstition to make way for reason.
What we need is portable pet scans and more knowledge about how magnetoreception works, both physically and neuro-physiologically. The use of magnetite has been shown in magnetotactic bacteria that are rotated by a magnetic field because of the torque exerted on their magnetite particles. The effect of geomagnetic storms on suicide is overwhelming. Small clues to how astrology works... More in about six months!
You know that solar flares' effects occur far out in space, thousands of kilometres removed from the Earth's surface, yes? And yet you claim a huge spike in suicides because of the Sun?
The Sun's obliquity of the ecliptic seems to be essential to the geomagnetic variations in the earth's field along with the interaction with other planetary aspects. The geomagnetic tagging when one is both stays with them all their life and how we respond to the constantly changing magnetic field is what makes astrology work. But how can we prove it? Give it another about ten years or so and scientists would have answers by then.
"[Sagan's] last argument about the gravitational impact of Mars and the influence it can have on you... what!? That's like saying, the gravitational influence of your keyboard has a greater effect on you than the Sun simply because its closer... "
And that would be correct, actually. Inverse square law. You said it right.
"I love how people can watch the moon pull the ocean tides in and out, but still somehow think that celestial bodies have no effect on US (even though our bodies are mostly water)."
The moon raises tides in huge, massive VOLUMES of liquid water--oceans. Humans are very very small. And how should (weak) lunar gravity and the earth's rotation under it affect a person? What effect?
The next closest planet is Venus--25 times farther than the moon and its weak gravity. Influential how?
The magnetic compass that birds and some other animals use for navigation is part of the visual system, and requires light. This is known as the “radical pair” mechanism. Movement in a magnetic field will result in an induced electric field.
Behavioural studies over more than 50 years have shown that many animals are able to sense steady magnetic fields even weaker than the earth field and exploit this extraordinary capacity for orientation, navigation and homing.
How magnetoreception works, both physically and neuro-physiologically, is still a matter of debate. Magnetic nano-particles coupled to the nervous system and field dependent chemical reactions involving photoinduced spin-correlated free radicals are part of the answer.
Kepler's 'astrology' was a means for him to make money. He cast horoscopes for the coin--he didn't believe in astrology in any way and said as much. In other words, he made shit up and sold it so he could afford to do his REAL work: computing Mars' orbit.
How great was Carl Sagan? Bit of a druggy I believe. Must of known what he was talking about then? He must know a lot about astrology? NO! He must of spent a massive amount of time studying astrology to reach his brain wave conclusion? NO!
I disparity at the human race when people proclaim utter shit like astrology to be real. It's just another type of magical thinking, much like the religious disease. Pathetic, end of story.
"We are convinced however that astrology does not work. Astrology cannot be used to predict events of any kind, nor is astrology able to provide any useful information regarding personality, occupation, health, or any other human attribute" (Roger Culver and Philip Ianna, The Gemini Syndrome 1979, a review by astronomers of years of data collection, tests, and most of the available evidence.)
"The casting of horoscopes provides a living to thousands of individuals and provides dreams to an infinitely larger number of consumers. ... [But] since the most painstaking studies have shown the inanity of horoscopes, there should be a strong rising up against this exploitation of public credulity" (Michel Gauquelin, after analysing the horoscopes of 16,000 famous people, Dreams and Illusions of Astrology 1969.)
"The single fact that astrologers contradict each other at about every point, and the firm convictions of their own correctness supported by their experience, must call up doubts about the reliability of [their] methods. ... Not a single classical astrological element is shown to be able to resist statistical research." (Ronnie Martens and Tim Trachet, Making Sense of Astrology 1998, a review of astrological claims.)
And you are still arguing the implications of truth, 40 years after hence. Look at yourselves and your foolishness. Astrology isn't an exact science let alone a quantifiable nor legitimate field. Ask a psychologist, and they'll tell you it is impossible, the with a biologist, an astronomer, and any sort of learned or intelligent individual. Yet you people below, continue to argue over the stupidity and superstitious beliefs in astrology.
If I wasn't such an optimist, I would say that I've lo
Sadly (for your argumentation;)), a lot of "learned individuals" (lot of psychologists) as you call it work with astrology and have found it to be quite consistent. The programmer from astro . com is a physicist and a supporter of astrology. I can tell you more people if you are interested.
Research before you post shallow, populistic allegations ;)
Please explain the mechanism and measurable forces behind astrology. Please explain why the stars of twelve Greek-invented invented constellations allegedly affect people's behavior, but the stars in the rest of the sky do not. Please explain how a lightweight ball of ice like Pluto has influence over someone's life. Please explian why the closest star to us is not included in the so-called zodiac.
i) French statistician M Gauquelin conducted detailed tests that uncovered no astrological effects. (His early, highly publicized report of a "Mars effect" on professional athletes was the result of an error in his calculations, & follow-up studies by others showed no such effect.) In one test he examined the signs (moon, zodiacal, planetary, ascendant, and mid-heaven) for 15,560 professionals from 5 European nations in 10 different occupations. He found no evidence of any astrological effects.
i) Sadly this study implied a reduction of the astrological symbols. Statistical research and astrological complexity is hard to connect, so that the study does justice to the complex system astrology is. Quantitaive studies are more suitable.
h) There is no empirical evidence that astrology has any value at all as a means of prediction. Scientific testing indicates that there are no astrological "effects". Michigan State Uni psychologist B Silberman asked astrologers to list compatible & incompatible signs. He inspected records of 478 couples who divorced & 2978 who married in ‘67 & ‘68 in Michigan. No correlation was found beyond random chance between the astrological signs predicted to be compatible or incompatible by astrologers.
h) He only focussed on sun signs. A valuable study for astrology has to contain much more tetailed astrological factors. The test was noat approprate to the substance of astrology.
g) Astrologers are in effect saying that for unknown reasons the positions of some of the stars and planets are indications of the undetectable effects of unknown types of undetectable forces emanating from unknown, undetectable sources. Such a proposition is even more ludicrous than the traditional astrological view that the stars and planets - never mind how - influence our daily lives.
f) Some astrologers, especially the "humanistic" variety, attempt to discount criticisms such as these by claiming that the planets and stars do not produce astrological effects, but, rather, that the positions of astronomical bodies only serve as "indications" of astrological forces. This is a transparent attempt to evade questioning of astrology’s supposed causal mechanism by retreating into a fog of ever-vaguer claims.
e) Most popular type of astrology is natal astrology, in which astrological forces supposedly leap into action at the moment of an individual’s birth, imprinting her or him with certain characteristics. But the choice of the time of birth as the moment of supposed astrological imprinting makes no sense at all. They might argue that a mother’s body shields her baby from astrological "radiation" until birth, but that argument ignores the fact that almost all babies are born indoors.
The moment of birth is the time where the baby becomes an individual when the umbilical chord is beeing cut; the umbilical chord which connected the baby to the mother. The whole "radiation" stuff see answer a).
e) Astrologers only concern themselves with the apparent position—to a viewer on Earth—of Mars in relation to the backdrop of the zodiac constellations and the other planets. So, if the astrological "radiation" ("vibration"—choose your own nebulous term) of the planets does influence human beings as astrologers claim, it would have to be a most peculiar type of radiation, one which disobeys a fundamental, well-established law of physics.
d) Astrologers, in their computations, do not take into account the inverse square law, which is a fundamental law of physics. It says that the amount of radiation received by a body varies as the inverse square of its distance from the source of the radiation. But laws of physics do not matter to astrologers, and they don’t care whether Mars is 40 million or 100 million miles away.
c) There is no reason whatsoever to believe that the mysterious, undetectable, astrological forces supposedly emanating from the planets would be any stronger than the gravitational forces of the planets. And those forces are weak indeed. At its nearest conjunction, Mars exerts far less gravitational force upon a newborn infant than the midwife or doctor who delivers the child.
b) Astrology does not take into account all of the major bodies in our solar system, let alone all those in our galaxy or the billions of other galaxies in the universe. Most astrologers make their computations using only the planets known to the ancients; they don’t allow for those discovered by modern science (Uranus, Neptune, & Pluto); astrologers take into account the nearest stars, that are far nearer to us than those in the zodiac constellations, that are at wildly varying distances.
b) Most astrologers use Sun. Moon, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptun, Pluto as the relevant luminaries in an astrological interpretation. Luminaries of our solar system.
Uranus discovered 1781, Neptune 1865, Pluto 1930, Pluto since found to be not a true planet but the nearest representative of a TYPE of icy body called a Kuiper Belt Object.
Pluto is not a planet at all.
"Luminaries"? Uranus and Neptune aren't even visible to the naked eye.
a) Many believers in astrology suggest each planet issues a different variety of special as-yet-undetected radiations or "vibrations". There is conclusive evidence that the sun, moon, planets, & stars are all made of the same stuff, varieties & combinations of atomic particles all governed by uniform laws of physics. It makes no sense to suppose that the various planets & the moon, all with rather similar physical properties, could manage to affect human affairs in totally dissimilar fashion.
a) Lot of astrologers dont believe in an physical affecton of the luminaries. The foundation for their astrological comprehension is based on a certain comsos - earth analogy.
2. Science tests everything and respect is not an issue. Astrologers get all precious because they know deep down it will fail all proper testing. You fail.
3. If astrologers quote Einstein and Newton as being pro-astrology then it can't be anything other than on purpose. So do they type the words by accident? You fail.
4. We agree you're incorrect.
5. Your facts aren't scientific, which is what I referred to. You fail.
1. You ask which type of astrology is correct. I tried to explain many types can be correct. You dont understand. Fail.
2. Science cant test the world properly when thinking it was a plate. Science (Scientists) need to understand the nature of astrology before testing it properly. Fail.
3. People supporting astrology can find quotes regarding astrology of einstein on the internet. Not everybody takes the time to check wheter these quotes are correct or not. Fail.
1. "many types are correct" but none are proven. Fail
2. I know nothing about baseball players but I can look at their statistics and tell you who has the best batting and pitching performance. And I don't even have to study it. Amazing.
3. If someone publishes quotes on a website without checking they are being lazy and dishonest. I asked an astrologer to remove an Einstein quote and she refused. And we know why.
1. ""many types are correct" but none are proven. Fail"... Point "1" was originally "astrologers cant agree on the rules". It seems you finally understand you were wrong :)
2. Cool that you can look at the statistics of baseball players. You cant look on the astrological content because you have no clue about it and cant estimate it, bottom line :)
3. The complexity of opinions on the internet sometimes make it hard to check which quote is correct and which not. Fact.
2. I said I know nothing about baseball players but there is information in the statistics to tell me what I need to know. Where is a set of statistics that proves the accuracy of astrology? If astrologers claim success there must be measures but they don't exist. Paradoxical. You fail big time again on that one.
3. I use source material to confirm whether what is said about Einstein is correct. Astrologers are lazy.
1. At least I can read dictionarys. You obviously can't. F.A.I.L :)
2. You compare the incomparable. Nice try though :)
3. What would it change if Einstein said it or not. I prefer to RESEARCH about astrology MYSELF. But you are not the research type of person. You proved a few times now ;)
@constructivecritism - 1. Astrologers can't agree on the rules and none are proven, I quoted your statement (notice the inverted commas?) to highlight your attempted little distraction. The statement "many types are correct" means some types are incorrect, is it due to different types per se or different rules? It must be different rules as that what dictates the type.
The simple reason you don't win is I have reason and science on my side. You have an age old superstition with no evidence.
1. You need to pay attention better, and you need to learn to differentiate. I already explained astrologers can agree on the rules. And I didn't say "many types are correct", I sais "many types CAN be correct".
Its not only that you refuse to research appropriatly, you are not even able to quote decently. And then you want to have "science on your side".
@constructivecritism - regardless of the words you agree there are correct and incorrect versions. That must be because of the rules. Now seeing as these astrologers who can't agree on the rules have been studying/researching the subject as even you have suggested are obviously still unable to find out how it works, or even if it does work. Yes I do have science on my side. It supports testing which astrology doesn't.
Different branches of astrology have different rules.
No studies have provided solid evidence for all the claims of astrologers.
Whenever it has been tested it produces results no better than guesswork
"You can't test it unless you study it to understand it" doesn't even seem to help astrologers as to date not one has even explained how it works, its theory or produced evidence of the workings producing repeatable accurate results/
4. People researching astrology can say a lot more of its truth content than people repeating the same dogmas over again. Therefore people who research astrology come much closer to the substance of astrology then people who refuse to research astrology (as most pseudo-sceptics do). Fail.
5. Who cares if they are scientific. Who said astrology was a regular science anyway. Fail.
Oh this says it all: "Who said astrology was a regular science anyway.[sic]"
There is science (measurable, provable) and there is pseudo-science and superstition. Trouble is we're not sure if astrology is pseudo-science and superstition or both.
@constructivecritism - people like you who "research" astrology I'm sure only take note of information purporting to support it because you're convinced it's correct. Yet no scientists have been able to find anything that supports all the claims. I assume it is because all scientists are part of the grand conspiracy against astrology. You confuse research with looking at stuff you believe. You are an astrological fundamentalist, live with it.
"people like you who "research" astrology I'm sure only take note of information purporting to support it"
The problem is, you cant even discuss astrological issues on an contentual level because you refuse to research the content. You're a sperm whale assessing the desert (haughty).
The word ``contentual'' is not normal English, but it is in the Oxford English Dictionary: 1. contentual contentual , a. Philos. and Psychol. f. content sb.1 + -al on type of conceptual, eventual, etc., as tr. G. inhaltlich. Belonging to, or dealing with, content (opp. act or form). * 1909 W. M. Urban Valuation iv. 106 The decrease in these contentual aspects does not..mean loss in worth suggestion.
@LiamXaoh * 1935 Brit. Jrnl. Psychol. XXVI. 208 As regards the `contentual' and the `actual' views, the former characterized the works of Sully and Volkmann. * 1962 W. G. Runciman Plato's Later Epistem. iv. 132 Distinguishing the formal from the contentual features of propositions.
"I assume it is because all scientists are part of the grand conspiracy against astrology"
No, thankfully there are lots of scientist out there, who researched astrology unbiasedly and have found it to be quite consistent. But those people were scientists and no pseudo-sceptics following their dogma ;)
Fundamentalism is characterized by rigid adherence to principles regarding the own conviction, and by intolerance of other views and opposition to secularism. Actually I simply research astrology to find out if or whats true about it. I havent even said astrology was correct at all. ;) Funny how fast you judge, before even researching. Not the best premise for a scientist ;)
@LiamXaoh You started the attack mate! Be honest, you haven't a clue on what you are attacking? You make up some pseudo crap and then create a straw man to attack. Why do you waste your time attacking a system that has survived for thousands of years and then make some mental emotional rubbish. I feel sorry for you! Open your eyes to the universe instead of thinking you know it all!!
@TheLogic1010 - so cite studies that confirm the veracity for all astrological claims. It has existed for thousands of years so it must be true - so has belief in thousands of different gods. If the "its old so it must be true" is the depth of your argument you are fighting a battle of wits unarmed.
Mother Theresa knew nothing about UNDERWATER ELECTRIC ARK WELDING, so she NEVER gave her opinion or lectured on that subject, how wise !
I've noticed skeptics are undiplomatic, fixed in opinion, narrow minded and have NO knowledge or experience of the paranormal, they're motivated by their prejudiced, unqualified, opinions. They often need words like 'fuck' to emphasize their feelings about the subject or psychic people.
They have no ESP, so for them, it is understandably complete nonsense.
Sun comes up over the horizon, flowers open their petals.
Sunspots interfere with radio waves.
Moon pulls the oceans.
Heat and light from the sun affect all life forms.
Jupiter's gravity grabs thousands of potentially dangerous asteroids, etc., heading for the earth.
Fish, birds and other creatures swim, fly and travel THOUSANDS of miles to MATE on the NIGHT of the full moon at a SPECIAL location. Others go to eat them. How do they know when to depart? Oh no ! Nothing out in space affects us ?
@Z1Z121 so are you saying that astrology is science? instead of giving examples, just come out and say what you believe. then maybe we could discuss your beliefs.
@Z1Z121 " ....flowers open their petals." Evolution at work "Sunspots interfere with radio waves." Physics at work "Moon pulls the oceans" (no, it pulls at everything) "...light from the sun affect all life forms." Evolution at work "Jupiter's .....gravity grabs asteroids...". Wow, physics at work. "Fish, birds and other creatures swim, fly and travel THOUSANDS of miles ... etc" Evolution at work. "...Nothing out in space affects us?" Stupid statement . . Still no proof for astrology. Sigh.
@sabuncuhoca ,SO EVERYTHING IS UNDER CONTROL OF HIM, PRESENT AND FUTURE ALSO, IF FUTURE WASNT DECIDED AND KNOWN BY HIM BY THE BOOK OF ASTROLOGY THIS WOULD MAKE HIM HELPLESS ABOUT TIME AND FUTURE.ASTROLOGY IS HIS REVELATION ABOUT THE FUTURE BTW HIS NAME IS ALLAH
@sabuncuhoca - God is like astrology. Made up. The laws of physics are testable and provable. God is a concept made up by early man to explain things; rational and educated folks have moved on from belief in such superstitions.
You're ignorant as demonstrated by you inability to turn CAPS off.
@sabuncuhoca - seeing as there is no such things as hell... well apart from listening to superstitious loonies like you.
The CAPS lock is really easy to find. It usually has "Caps lock" written on it. Oh that's right "caps" means you're shouting your god gibberish at the non believers. Lucky I'm an atheist and it doesn't affect me.
Do you mind if I spell "god" lower case? If he minds he'll blast me to hell no doubt. LOL
9. I am intuitive and have a good feeling for something unspoken. (Neptun in 8th house)
10. I experience Power and powerlessness, conversion at work. I develop big persuasivness and force at work. I campaign myself full-on for a chosen task. I work profoundly and passionatly. (Pluto in sixth house)
4. a) I have difficulties in „enjoyment of life“, to stretch a point at times and sensuality. I am trying to develop a balanced ability to enjoy. (Saturn in Taurus).
b) My boundaries, inhibitions but also my biggest chance for personal progression in the area of my charisma, assertiveness. My aim is to develop a positive assertiveness. (Saturn in first house)
9. I live my independence in the area of work. I have a imaginative, witty style of work. I need al ot of free space at work.
4. a) I am thinking diplomatically, I like complex, balanced constructs and strategies. I decide between balanced and imbalanced (Mercury in Libra).
b) I use my mind with delight in everyday life and at work. I find my way around in various areas fastly. My style of work is agile, clever and efficient (Mercury in 6th house)
5. a) My perception of love, relationship and beauty is proud and generous, but also stagily at times. (Venus in Leo)
I don't believe in astrology, but it seems to me that certain zodiac signs tend to have almost identical personal characteristics, I just wonder why that is, if it can be actually proven to be anything but a false observation. :)
And I must also say that I'm not really the right person to make conclusions on, I admit that I'm only 18 years old and not that experienced in astrology and never gave a reading, although it's my favourite hobby, and it surely wouldn't be if it were fake trust me. I would say you ask someone who calls himself a "good" astrologer, I'm just a student with a few years of experience.
HE WAS A CLEVER NICE PERSON WHO DECIDED ASTROLOGY WAS NONSENSE. HE THEN CONDEMNED THE SUBJECT.
YOU MUST RESEARCH AND STUDY ANY SUBJECT IF YOU WISH TO COMMENT ACCURATELY ON IT.
MR SAGAN DIDN'T DO THIS, SO SADLY, HIS OPINION IS BASED ON ASSUMPTION AND PREJUDGEMENT (PREJUDICE).
READ WORLD FAMOUS PROFESSOR HANS EYSENKE'S REPORT WHO DID FIVE YEARS RESEARCH TO PROVE ASTROLOGY WAS NONSENSE AND THEN CHANGED HIS MIND SAYING HE WAS ASTONISHED AT THE TRUTH HE FOUND IN THE SUBJECT. HAVE A NICE DAY.
@ebrobaru Well give me your birth details (date, hour, mins. and place) and I will be able to tell a lot of detailed info on your life while I never met you. That's proof enough for me I think.
@ebrobaru Okay . One thing is you are a serious person and probably a fierce debater who has strong individual opinions, someone who demands solid proof for everything, you are also a workaholic, you are a charming and friendly person, you probably have a whole lot of hobbies, you have a great sense of responsibility and ambitious, you demand stability and feel vulnerable although you don't like to show emotions at all and it takes a lot of effort to make you show them. you hate injustice.
@JohnnyX1239 I looked at your Natal chart and progressions by the info you gave me, maybe it's a little too general but I'm not that good of an astrologer. Anyway hope to hear your reply on this.
@JohnnyX1239 Serrious person. You think? he is a fan of Sagan and against fairy tales. 0 points. A fierce debater. Yep, he has offered you a challenge, that is also obvious.0 points. Someone who demands proof. Same. 0 points. Workaholic. I dunno, lets say he is.1 point. Charming and freindly? Barnum statement; 0 points. Lots of Hobbies; Barnum= 0 points Responsible ambitious wants stability feels vunerable wants justice= all textbook Barnum.TOTAL =0. Really all that crap fails vs atheists
@tommiatkins Eh, are you him??? How can you possibly know him that well, only he HIMSELF can tell with his own experiences if it fits, and how can I know that he is a fierce debater?? He just asked me to give him proof, that doesn't mean he directly is a fierce debater now is it? I looked at his Rising being Aries, and Mars, the ruler, being in the 9th house to come to that conclusion. You know nothing about astrology, never even studied the subject, how can you say it's crap?
So here is the reading for you. The first part of the reading is built similar to a chain-sentence. Its a simple way to get an overview of the astrological dispositions. The following information is taken from astrological books, when I make a statement i will always add the astrological constellation so that you and other people can keep track of the statements and compare them to astrological sources on the internet or in books.
The following chain-sentence is written in the first-person-perspective.
1. a) Essentially I am a human who is thorough and critical. My principle is „I am particular about something“ „I examine“. (Sun in Virgo)
b)I find my biggest evolvement in structuring procedures, in incorperating myself best as possible fot the bigger system. Cues: convenient patient, persistent, steady, focused, autonomous. (Sun in sixth house)
1. My role and my sense of life is: leading, proactive, strong-minded, vigorous (Aries rising), complemented by a serious, worthy appearance (saturn in first house).
2. a) My temper is of empathy, I am helpful, applied to family, moody. (Moon in cancer) b) I am shoved intuitivly in searching familiarity and intimacy. I am underway to find belonging and emotional security. (Moon in 4th house)
@tommiatkins And please use some different Barnums this time. Things like, "I am a fair person but like to defend my position, or I have strong values". Throw in some date related stuff like, ooh im 40 years old, so lets see.. "I am worried about my weight, or I feel more tired these days than i used to". Chuck in some geographical ones." I am a straight talker who likes to be careful with money". Alternatively go put on a spooky hat and mumble your gibberish to the gullible
@tommiatkins You have a deep fear of life, and there can be times of loneliness and isolation, a lack ot originality in the character, you do seem to have sudden outbursts of understanding, like things you didn't know for a long time suddenly come to mind, you are also a serious and upbeat person, not that ambitious though, you might work in the showbizz or in the health care sector. You care a lot for financial stability, you may have a lot of "weird" friends, you are sensitve and eaily hurt.
@JohnnyX1239 I have absolutly zero fear of life or death.I am personally crowded out with freinds and family,but naturally,as for ALL people,there are times.I am described often as funny and spontaneous by others negeting the orgininality.Like everyone I get neural pathways trigger that havnt in many years, hey I remember the past! Crazy huh? Serious and upbeat, you can read that easily from my style of writing.Correct about the public sector,together those cover nearly 7 million employees
@tommiatkins Everyone cares for finacial stability, what a brilliant Barnum statement! I must use that one myself in my "palm readings" Oh, actually I already do. Everyone is sensitive and easily hurt.
RIGHT. Thats me dealt with.Astrology is either utter rubbish or you are personally really bad at it!
Let me explain how it works.You may have been duped by ppl to think that some exploding gas giant somehow makes all people born on a certain day feel confident about work,or whatever.BUT....
@tommiatkins What is ACTUALLY happening is you are using vague easily applied statements that will be accepted by anyone.Its a trick used by many many con artists. "I am getting a spirit here! Their name Begins with M! M? No...Might be a N??"
"YES! Its my auntie Nora!" "NO! Its my Auntie Norris"
"Thats right both of you! And she loves you and knows when you died you both felt sad. She's sorry you went off your food at that time"
"WOW! This guys amazing, Nora/Norris must really be there!!!"
@tommiatkins Believe what you want but I have used astrology and learned very much from it. I will just leave it at this: study the subject before you judge it. And I said I'm not that good. You're just a close-minded, way too serious Capricorn lol. I think you have too much Saturn influences.. Peace bro.
@JohnnyX1239 Oh well, I have studied it to quite a large degree! I judge it to be false. However, I'm always up for learning more and may well dip back in:) Meanwhile I encourage you to read up on Cold Reading and Cognitive dissonace. Peace.
Nin hao ma? Astrologers can't even predict their own death date. Dzai jien, hsien-sheng.
diamondmcnamara 1 day ago
OK, Mr Sagan, THAT newspaper crap is NOT Astrology, shame on you.
Also everyone who KNOWS real Astrology KNOWS it is real and valid. ANYone who does not believe in it, has NO CLUE about it. Funny how that is.
AS Newton said to a naysayer... 'YOU HAVE NOT STUDIED ASTROLOGY, I HAVE."
meengreens 1 day ago
@meengreens - ...hate to disappoint you but there is no evidence Newton never said that. It most likely a misquote as he didn't believe in astrology and it was probably a reference to religion as he was deeply religious.
Not everyone knows astrology is valid. No one has ever presented any scientific evidence that is works. It is a belief system with no basis in fact.
LiamXaoh 1 day ago
@LiamXaoh EVERYONE who has studied REAL Astrology knows it is VALID.
Most people, like you, dont even know what REAL Astrology is.
meengreens 10 hours ago
@meengreens Would you please stop with these categorical absolutist statements like "everyone, real, people like you, don't even know, valid"? Nothing you say is even remotely coherent if you do not back it up. It's easy enough to say these broad categorical statements, but it doesn't mean they are true. Instead say something productive, such as multiple instances where Astrology predicted something that could not have been predicted with other methods.
UndeadPizzaGuy 10 hours ago
@meengreens - all astrologers believe their version is correct. It's like religion, if you're bought up in a particular faith you believe it to be the one and only version of the truth.
Astrology has not demonstrated through proper testing that it is valid or accurate. Trouble is you base your opinions on anecdotes, not facts.
LiamXaoh 2 hours ago
@meengreens
- All Astrology is equally invalid. There is no scientific evidence to support it, nor is there any consistency in it. James Randi has a very good set of videos dealing with Astrology that I would suggest you watch.
- Fallacy statement, "Equivocation".
- Fallacy statement, "False Attribution" It does not matter what Newton believed. He also believed in alchemy and biblical prophecy, but they do not get credence from his work in science.
UndeadPizzaGuy 14 hours ago
@UndeadPizzaGuy you obviously missed the point I made with Newton's comment.
OH, by the way, have YOU studied Astrology? NO, gee how'd I know.
meengreens 10 hours ago
@meengreens Have you studied Harry Potter? Nope! Your entire standpoint was just obliterated because you have not studied some unrelated prerequisite I arbitrarily selected for my own purposes. Studying something does not make it inherently valid, using the scientific method and scrutinizing models of reality does. Astrology is not a science, not does it comply with science; It is merely wishful thinking. When you have a proven case study - then we'll talk.
UndeadPizzaGuy 10 hours ago
name of the song at 3:37?
bounceitdown1 5 days ago
@bounceitdown1 The Age Of Aquarius
HypeBeGone 4 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The International Association of Astrologers, Clairvoyants and Fortune-Tellers (IAACFT) has announced that 301 of its members will commit mass suicide in New York City on Friday. The spokesperson of the organization, Cher Starsinger, said these members were utterly ashamed and desperate. "They are at a loss to understand why they did neither foresee the demise of Arab dictators nor the events in Japan, let alone the death of Kim Jong Il". They felt empty and worn-out she continued.
diamondmcnamara 6 days ago
@diamondmcnamara - LOL. Astrologers predicted 8 of the last 2 economic downturns...
LiamXaoh 1 day ago
@LiamXaoh Prove it, cuz that's complete bullshit as far as any rationally minded human is concerned.
DantehMan 18 hours ago
@DantehMan - prove what?
LiamXaoh 11 hours ago
@LiamXaoh That...wait, sorry, I'm confused. You said that astrologers have proven 8 of the last 2 economic downturns. Was that sarcastic? For some reason I didn't read the "8" part. I'm exhausted so I think I've misunderstood.
DantehMan 9 hours ago
@DantehMan - it's cool. Have a beer and a lie down.
LiamXaoh 2 hours ago
You all know he's dead.he can't do anymore request.
spitingcobra 1 week ago
Carl Sagan sounds like Captain Kirk meets Agent Smith meets Reverend Lovejoy.
adNauseum100 1 week ago
Comment removed
adNauseum100 1 week ago
Show me the research on Kepler that he found astrology tedious. Dont just make up stories but give proof also. It is How much energy does it take for chromosome crossovers? How do you know astrology doesnt work? What studies have you undertaken? Do you know what the common factor is in terms of planetary relationship between being anemic, chronic depress and low metabolic rate? What are the two most common astrological elements that you find amongsgt people who are left handed?
stargaze9 1 week ago
@stargaze9 this`ll do;) /watch?v=pA9YoEy343Q&t=31s
MrRobertAnthony 1 week ago
@stargaze9 - first you say "Dont just make up stories but give proof " then you say "do you know what the common factor is in terms of planetary relationship between being anemic, chronic depress and low metabolic rate?"
LOL.
No studies have ever found astrology to work as claimed.
LiamXaoh 1 day ago
Educate yourself and do some research. Fascinating
Could Cycles of War or Peace Be Tied to Cycles of the Sun?
by Dr. Buryl Payne - National Council on Geocosmic Research
A growing number of scientists, health care professionals, and concerned citizens argue that these invisible frequencies are responsible for a host of various health problems. Meanwhile, the largest polluter has gone unnoticed: the Sun. At certain times, the Sun's activity can also aggravate mental health problems.
stargaze9 1 week ago
@stargaze9
"invisible frequencies"
Payne's article is speculative and presumptuous to say the least. Without sources he claims solar storms affect male hormone levels--but HOW? He doesn't say, of course. Payne's incorrect about UV light too--the Sun, a G2 star, radiates well in the UV even at sunspot minimum.
And worst of all, he brings back the notion of 'lunacy'--that moonlight has a property that affects people.
Fascinating, sure, but speculative and unsubstantiated.
MadHighway 1 week ago
@stargaze9
Also, the solar cycle is independent of Earth's orbit about the sun and Earth's rotation. By Payne's reasoning, human behavior under the noonday sun should be seen as 'strange', more so during solar minimum.
These aren't personality traits he's talking about. He's speculating about people being adversely affected by solar storms. (He's also deep into 'paranormal' issues.)
MadHighway 1 week ago
Obliquity of the ecliptic was designed as part of the master plan I am sure and is very responsible for the changing magnetic filed of the earth. Obviously you are not into any research on astrology nor have done any research besides maybe some Sun sign stuff. Kepler laid the basis of astronomy and you think he just sold horoscopes for money. Read his treatise on aspects and astrological work first. Your approach is very negative about something you know very little about.
stargaze9 1 week ago
@stargaze9
Earth's magnetic field is generated by convection currents in its liquid nickel-iron outer core caused by our rather rapid rotation. (Venus, similar in composition to Earth, has no magnetic field because it rotates so slowly.)
What does our axial tilt--"Obliquity of the ecliptic"--have to do with the magnetic field?
I've read up on Kepler. He found astrology tedious and unfounded and willingly sold phony horoscopes to political figures in order to stay in cash.
MadHighway 1 week ago
Kepler was an amazing scientist. If you have read his entire volume on astrology, you will see how scientific his methods were and he was not motivated by money at all. Way ahead of his time and thorough researcher.
stargaze9 1 week ago
@stargaze9
Kepler created and sold bogus horoscopes in order to please his wealthy patrons in order to secure his annuity. He knew astrology was suspect but went along with it in order to get paid.
He sold snake oil same as any other astrologist/psychic/priest, but he didn't believe it. Neither did Tycho, Galileo, Huygens, Newton .... don't even try using their names at us.
They were the thinkers who beat back superstition to make way for reason.
MadHighway 1 week ago
More on magnetoreception in human eye wiki/Magnetoception.
stargaze9 1 week ago
What we need is portable pet scans and more knowledge about how magnetoreception works, both physically and neuro-physiologically. The use of magnetite has been shown in magnetotactic bacteria that are rotated by a magnetic field because of the torque exerted on their magnetite particles. The effect of geomagnetic storms on suicide is overwhelming. Small clues to how astrology works... More in about six months!
stargaze9 1 week ago
Comment removed
MadHighway 1 week ago
@stargaze9
You know that solar flares' effects occur far out in space, thousands of kilometres removed from the Earth's surface, yes? And yet you claim a huge spike in suicides because of the Sun?
MadHighway 1 week ago
The Sun's obliquity of the ecliptic seems to be essential to the geomagnetic variations in the earth's field along with the interaction with other planetary aspects. The geomagnetic tagging when one is both stays with them all their life and how we respond to the constantly changing magnetic field is what makes astrology work. But how can we prove it? Give it another about ten years or so and scientists would have answers by then.
stargaze9 1 week ago
@stargaze9
"The Sun's obliquity of the ecliptic"? The sun's apparent path through the sky defines the ecliptic. It's the earth that's oblique.
Which "other planetary aspects"? Name them.
Which "constantly changing magnetic field"? The Sun's?
MadHighway 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"[Sagan's] last argument about the gravitational impact of Mars and the influence it can have on you... what!? That's like saying, the gravitational influence of your keyboard has a greater effect on you than the Sun simply because its closer... "
And that would be correct, actually. Inverse square law. You said it right.
MadHighway 1 week ago
"I love how people can watch the moon pull the ocean tides in and out, but still somehow think that celestial bodies have no effect on US (even though our bodies are mostly water)."
The moon raises tides in huge, massive VOLUMES of liquid water--oceans. Humans are very very small. And how should (weak) lunar gravity and the earth's rotation under it affect a person? What effect?
The next closest planet is Venus--25 times farther than the moon and its weak gravity. Influential how?
MadHighway 1 week ago
The magnetic compass that birds and some other animals use for navigation is part of the visual system, and requires light. This is known as the “radical pair” mechanism. Movement in a magnetic field will result in an induced electric field.
stargaze9 1 week ago
Behavioural studies over more than 50 years have shown that many animals are able to sense steady magnetic fields even weaker than the earth field and exploit this extraordinary capacity for orientation, navigation and homing.
How magnetoreception works, both physically and neuro-physiologically, is still a matter of debate. Magnetic nano-particles coupled to the nervous system and field dependent chemical reactions involving photoinduced spin-correlated free radicals are part of the answer.
stargaze9 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@stargaze9
"constantly changing magnetic field"--you from another post.
"orientation, navigation and homing"
"Magnetic nano-particles" --made of what?
MadHighway 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Kepler's 'astrology' was a means for him to make money. He cast horoscopes for the coin--he didn't believe in astrology in any way and said as much. In other words, he made shit up and sold it so he could afford to do his REAL work: computing Mars' orbit.
MadHighway 1 week ago
Comment removed
MadHighway 1 week ago
How great was Carl Sagan? Bit of a druggy I believe. Must of known what he was talking about then? He must know a lot about astrology? NO! He must of spent a massive amount of time studying astrology to reach his brain wave conclusion? NO!
TheLogic1010 2 weeks ago
@TheLogic1010 - I see that rather than providing something useful you're applying Rule 5. Oh how predictable.
ZoeMarks 2 weeks ago
I disparity at the human race when people proclaim utter shit like astrology to be real. It's just another type of magical thinking, much like the religious disease. Pathetic, end of story.
Treyb3yond 2 weeks ago
was it a fat ostertrition as well? so they had bigger gravity?
2012felixx 2 weeks ago
carl sagan just handed astrology its ass
larcomberowan 3 weeks ago
"Compromise will help release tension"
Well, no shit Sherlock Astrologer...
gishidenki 3 weeks ago
"We are convinced however that astrology does not work. Astrology cannot be used to predict events of any kind, nor is astrology able to provide any useful information regarding personality, occupation, health, or any other human attribute" (Roger Culver and Philip Ianna, The Gemini Syndrome 1979, a review by astronomers of years of data collection, tests, and most of the available evidence.)
LiamXaoh 3 weeks ago
"The casting of horoscopes provides a living to thousands of individuals and provides dreams to an infinitely larger number of consumers. ... [But] since the most painstaking studies have shown the inanity of horoscopes, there should be a strong rising up against this exploitation of public credulity" (Michel Gauquelin, after analysing the horoscopes of 16,000 famous people, Dreams and Illusions of Astrology 1969.)
LiamXaoh 3 weeks ago
"The single fact that astrologers contradict each other at about every point, and the firm convictions of their own correctness supported by their experience, must call up doubts about the reliability of [their] methods. ... Not a single classical astrological element is shown to be able to resist statistical research." (Ronnie Martens and Tim Trachet, Making Sense of Astrology 1998, a review of astrological claims.)
LiamXaoh 3 weeks ago
"If it wasn't for the planets talking to me I wouldn't believe in astrology" Adam Peenum.
LiamXaoh 3 weeks ago
More Astrology Rules:
1. Claim it can't be tested but then claim it is accurate
2. Divert the debate to something else when the going gets tough
3. Parallel astrology with real scientific studies to make it sound credible
4. Fail to cite any studies to support the claims
5. Quote endless anecdotes about astrology as if they were facts
6. Assume there is a conspiracy by the scientific community against astrology
7. Avoid explaining how astrology works at all costs
LiamXaoh 3 weeks ago
And you are still arguing the implications of truth, 40 years after hence. Look at yourselves and your foolishness. Astrology isn't an exact science let alone a quantifiable nor legitimate field. Ask a psychologist, and they'll tell you it is impossible, the with a biologist, an astronomer, and any sort of learned or intelligent individual. Yet you people below, continue to argue over the stupidity and superstitious beliefs in astrology.
If I wasn't such an optimist, I would say that I've lo
comradeJoe2 1 month ago
@comradeJoe2
Sadly (for your argumentation;)), a lot of "learned individuals" (lot of psychologists) as you call it work with astrology and have found it to be quite consistent. The programmer from astro . com is a physicist and a supporter of astrology. I can tell you more people if you are interested.
Research before you post shallow, populistic allegations ;)
constructivecritism 1 month ago
@constructivecritism I think LiamXaoh could do with some help!
TheLogic1010 3 weeks ago
@constructivecritism
Please explain the mechanism and measurable forces behind astrology. Please explain why the stars of twelve Greek-invented invented constellations allegedly affect people's behavior, but the stars in the rest of the sky do not. Please explain how a lightweight ball of ice like Pluto has influence over someone's life. Please explian why the closest star to us is not included in the so-called zodiac.
MadHighway 1 week ago
it seems carl forgot to study occultisim....
by the way ASTROLOGY FORM newspappers is pure quackery....
dont belive in the news papper... go to a real astrologer.
andresraya 1 month ago
@andresraya
There's no such thing as a 'real astrologer'--that's Sagan's point.
MadHighway 1 week ago
i disagree with you on this one carl.
andresraya 1 month ago
i) French statistician M Gauquelin conducted detailed tests that uncovered no astrological effects. (His early, highly publicized report of a "Mars effect" on professional athletes was the result of an error in his calculations, & follow-up studies by others showed no such effect.) In one test he examined the signs (moon, zodiacal, planetary, ascendant, and mid-heaven) for 15,560 professionals from 5 European nations in 10 different occupations. He found no evidence of any astrological effects.
LiamXaoh 1 month ago
@LiamXaoh
i) Sadly this study implied a reduction of the astrological symbols. Statistical research and astrological complexity is hard to connect, so that the study does justice to the complex system astrology is. Quantitaive studies are more suitable.
constructivecritism 1 month ago
h) There is no empirical evidence that astrology has any value at all as a means of prediction. Scientific testing indicates that there are no astrological "effects". Michigan State Uni psychologist B Silberman asked astrologers to list compatible & incompatible signs. He inspected records of 478 couples who divorced & 2978 who married in ‘67 & ‘68 in Michigan. No correlation was found beyond random chance between the astrological signs predicted to be compatible or incompatible by astrologers.
LiamXaoh 1 month ago
@LiamXaoh
h) He only focussed on sun signs. A valuable study for astrology has to contain much more tetailed astrological factors. The test was noat approprate to the substance of astrology.
constructivecritism 1 month ago
g) Astrologers are in effect saying that for unknown reasons the positions of some of the stars and planets are indications of the undetectable effects of unknown types of undetectable forces emanating from unknown, undetectable sources. Such a proposition is even more ludicrous than the traditional astrological view that the stars and planets - never mind how - influence our daily lives.
LiamXaoh 1 month ago
@LiamXaoh
g) See answer a).
constructivecritism 1 month ago
f) Some astrologers, especially the "humanistic" variety, attempt to discount criticisms such as these by claiming that the planets and stars do not produce astrological effects, but, rather, that the positions of astronomical bodies only serve as "indications" of astrological forces. This is a transparent attempt to evade questioning of astrology’s supposed causal mechanism by retreating into a fog of ever-vaguer claims.
LiamXaoh 1 month ago
@LiamXaoh
f). Its not about indication of astrological forces. Its about an comos-earth analogy.
constructivecritism 1 month ago
e) Most popular type of astrology is natal astrology, in which astrological forces supposedly leap into action at the moment of an individual’s birth, imprinting her or him with certain characteristics. But the choice of the time of birth as the moment of supposed astrological imprinting makes no sense at all. They might argue that a mother’s body shields her baby from astrological "radiation" until birth, but that argument ignores the fact that almost all babies are born indoors.
LiamXaoh 1 month ago
@LiamXaoh
The moment of birth is the time where the baby becomes an individual when the umbilical chord is beeing cut; the umbilical chord which connected the baby to the mother. The whole "radiation" stuff see answer a).
constructivecritism 1 month ago
@constructivecritism
How do stars and planets affect an umbilical cord?
MadHighway 1 week ago
@MadHighway
Do they? Who told you that?
constructivecritism 1 week ago
e) Astrologers only concern themselves with the apparent position—to a viewer on Earth—of Mars in relation to the backdrop of the zodiac constellations and the other planets. So, if the astrological "radiation" ("vibration"—choose your own nebulous term) of the planets does influence human beings as astrologers claim, it would have to be a most peculiar type of radiation, one which disobeys a fundamental, well-established law of physics.
LiamXaoh 1 month ago
@LiamXaoh
e) See answer to a).
constructivecritism 1 month ago
d) Astrologers, in their computations, do not take into account the inverse square law, which is a fundamental law of physics. It says that the amount of radiation received by a body varies as the inverse square of its distance from the source of the radiation. But laws of physics do not matter to astrologers, and they don’t care whether Mars is 40 million or 100 million miles away.
LiamXaoh 1 month ago
@LiamXaoh
d) See answer to a).
constructivecritism 1 month ago
c) There is no reason whatsoever to believe that the mysterious, undetectable, astrological forces supposedly emanating from the planets would be any stronger than the gravitational forces of the planets. And those forces are weak indeed. At its nearest conjunction, Mars exerts far less gravitational force upon a newborn infant than the midwife or doctor who delivers the child.
LiamXaoh 1 month ago
@LiamXaoh
c) See answer to a).
constructivecritism 1 month ago
b) Astrology does not take into account all of the major bodies in our solar system, let alone all those in our galaxy or the billions of other galaxies in the universe. Most astrologers make their computations using only the planets known to the ancients; they don’t allow for those discovered by modern science (Uranus, Neptune, & Pluto); astrologers take into account the nearest stars, that are far nearer to us than those in the zodiac constellations, that are at wildly varying distances.
LiamXaoh 1 month ago
@LiamXaoh
b) Most astrologers use Sun. Moon, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptun, Pluto as the relevant luminaries in an astrological interpretation. Luminaries of our solar system.
constructivecritism 1 month ago
@constructivecritism
Uranus discovered 1781, Neptune 1865, Pluto 1930, Pluto since found to be not a true planet but the nearest representative of a TYPE of icy body called a Kuiper Belt Object.
Pluto is not a planet at all.
"Luminaries"? Uranus and Neptune aren't even visible to the naked eye.
MadHighway 1 week ago
a) Many believers in astrology suggest each planet issues a different variety of special as-yet-undetected radiations or "vibrations". There is conclusive evidence that the sun, moon, planets, & stars are all made of the same stuff, varieties & combinations of atomic particles all governed by uniform laws of physics. It makes no sense to suppose that the various planets & the moon, all with rather similar physical properties, could manage to affect human affairs in totally dissimilar fashion.
LiamXaoh 1 month ago
@LiamXaoh
a) Lot of astrologers dont believe in an physical affecton of the luminaries. The foundation for their astrological comprehension is based on a certain comsos - earth analogy.
constructivecritism 1 month ago
did NOT expect that voice
arxidoforos 1 month ago
Astrology Rules:
Rule 1 - Astrologers can't agree on the rules
Rule 2 - Slag science as a distraction
Rule 3 - Misquote famous people
Rule 4 - Avoid real supporting evidence
Rule 5 - Use ad hominem attacks instead of facts
Rule 6 - See rules 1-5
LiamXaoh 1 month ago 18
@LiamXaoh
1. In my country we have an association of astrolgers who aggreed on clear rules. Fail.
2. I have no problem with science. Science as astrology as many other things isn't good or bad. Its what you make of it. Fail
3. I can't remember misquoting famous people. I know lots of astrologers who don't quote at all. Fail.
4. Why should I avoid supporting evidence. I prefer to research instead of avoiding. Fail.
5. These discussions end personal on both sides often, sadly. Fail.
constructivecritism 1 month ago
@constructivecritism
1. Which type of astrology is correct (different rules) - fail
2. Astrologers say science can't test astrology as it is outside science. - fail
3. Many astrologers quote Newton and Einstein as being adherents and (mis)quote them - do your research - fail
4. Where is the supporting evidence? Research isn't evidence.- fail
5. Where are the facts?
LiamXaoh 1 month ago
@LiamXaoh
1. If one type of astrology was correct it doens`t make the other type incorrect automatically. Fail
2. Science can test astrology if it respects its nature. Fail.
3. I dont think they do it on purpose. In times of the internet some things arent that unambigious anymore ;) Fail.
4. Research is the purpose to find evidence. Correct.
5. There are lots of facts..Fail.
constructivecritism 1 month ago
@constructivecritism
1. Who said it was automatic? Not me. You fail.
2. Science tests everything and respect is not an issue. Astrologers get all precious because they know deep down it will fail all proper testing. You fail.
3. If astrologers quote Einstein and Newton as being pro-astrology then it can't be anything other than on purpose. So do they type the words by accident? You fail.
4. We agree you're incorrect.
5. Your facts aren't scientific, which is what I referred to. You fail.
LiamXaoh 1 month ago
@LiamXaoh
1. You ask which type of astrology is correct. I tried to explain many types can be correct. You dont understand. Fail.
2. Science cant test the world properly when thinking it was a plate. Science (Scientists) need to understand the nature of astrology before testing it properly. Fail.
3. People supporting astrology can find quotes regarding astrology of einstein on the internet. Not everybody takes the time to check wheter these quotes are correct or not. Fail.
constructivecritism 1 month ago
@constructivecritism -
1. "many types are correct" but none are proven. Fail
2. I know nothing about baseball players but I can look at their statistics and tell you who has the best batting and pitching performance. And I don't even have to study it. Amazing.
3. If someone publishes quotes on a website without checking they are being lazy and dishonest. I asked an astrologer to remove an Einstein quote and she refused. And we know why.
LiamXaoh 1 month ago
@LiamXaoh
1. ""many types are correct" but none are proven. Fail"... Point "1" was originally "astrologers cant agree on the rules". It seems you finally understand you were wrong :)
2. Cool that you can look at the statistics of baseball players. You cant look on the astrological content because you have no clue about it and cant estimate it, bottom line :)
3. The complexity of opinions on the internet sometimes make it hard to check which quote is correct and which not. Fact.
constructivecritism 1 month ago
@constructivecritism
1. Your understanding of English is poor. Fail
2. I said I know nothing about baseball players but there is information in the statistics to tell me what I need to know. Where is a set of statistics that proves the accuracy of astrology? If astrologers claim success there must be measures but they don't exist. Paradoxical. You fail big time again on that one.
3. I use source material to confirm whether what is said about Einstein is correct. Astrologers are lazy.
LiamXaoh 1 month ago
@LiamXaoh
1. At least I can read dictionarys. You obviously can't. F.A.I.L :)
2. You compare the incomparable. Nice try though :)
3. What would it change if Einstein said it or not. I prefer to RESEARCH about astrology MYSELF. But you are not the research type of person. You proved a few times now ;)
constructivecritism 1 month ago
@constructivecritism - 1. Astrologers can't agree on the rules and none are proven, I quoted your statement (notice the inverted commas?) to highlight your attempted little distraction. The statement "many types are correct" means some types are incorrect, is it due to different types per se or different rules? It must be different rules as that what dictates the type.
The simple reason you don't win is I have reason and science on my side. You have an age old superstition with no evidence.
LiamXaoh 1 month ago
@LiamXaoh
1. You need to pay attention better, and you need to learn to differentiate. I already explained astrologers can agree on the rules. And I didn't say "many types are correct", I sais "many types CAN be correct".
Its not only that you refuse to research appropriatly, you are not even able to quote decently. And then you want to have "science on your side".
You are always good for a laugh :)
constructivecritism 1 month ago
@constructivecritism - regardless of the words you agree there are correct and incorrect versions. That must be because of the rules. Now seeing as these astrologers who can't agree on the rules have been studying/researching the subject as even you have suggested are obviously still unable to find out how it works, or even if it does work. Yes I do have science on my side. It supports testing which astrology doesn't.
LiamXaoh 1 month ago
@constructivecritism - so let's sum it up.
Different branches of astrology have different rules.
No studies have provided solid evidence for all the claims of astrologers.
Whenever it has been tested it produces results no better than guesswork
"You can't test it unless you study it to understand it" doesn't even seem to help astrologers as to date not one has even explained how it works, its theory or produced evidence of the workings producing repeatable accurate results/
LiamXaoh 1 month ago
@LiamXaoh
4. People researching astrology can say a lot more of its truth content than people repeating the same dogmas over again. Therefore people who research astrology come much closer to the substance of astrology then people who refuse to research astrology (as most pseudo-sceptics do). Fail.
5. Who cares if they are scientific. Who said astrology was a regular science anyway. Fail.
constructivecritism 1 month ago
@constructivecritism
Oh this says it all: "Who said astrology was a regular science anyway.[sic]"
There is science (measurable, provable) and there is pseudo-science and superstition. Trouble is we're not sure if astrology is pseudo-science and superstition or both.
LiamXaoh 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@LiamXaoh
"Trouble is we're not sure if astrology is pseudo-science and superstition or both"
Trouble is YOU don't know what it is :). Its wheter pseudo-science nor superstition, to give you a hint ;)
constructivecritism 1 month ago
@constructivecritism - people like you who "research" astrology I'm sure only take note of information purporting to support it because you're convinced it's correct. Yet no scientists have been able to find anything that supports all the claims. I assume it is because all scientists are part of the grand conspiracy against astrology. You confuse research with looking at stuff you believe. You are an astrological fundamentalist, live with it.
LiamXaoh 1 month ago
@LiamXaoh
Your quote:
"people like you who "research" astrology I'm sure only take note of information purporting to support it"
The problem is, you cant even discuss astrological issues on an contentual level because you refuse to research the content. You're a sperm whale assessing the desert (haughty).
constructivecritism 1 month ago
@constructivecritism - the reason I never talk about astrology on a "contentual level" level is quite simple:
a) there is no such word as contentual
b) I can't discuss things about made up words
c) I only like to discuss things where there is a common language
LiamXaoh 1 month ago
@LiamXaoh
The word ``contentual'' is not normal English, but it is in the Oxford English Dictionary: 1. contentual contentual , a. Philos. and Psychol. f. content sb.1 + -al on type of conceptual, eventual, etc., as tr. G. inhaltlich. Belonging to, or dealing with, content (opp. act or form). * 1909 W. M. Urban Valuation iv. 106 The decrease in these contentual aspects does not..mean loss in worth suggestion.
constructivecritism 1 month ago
@LiamXaoh * 1935 Brit. Jrnl. Psychol. XXVI. 208 As regards the `contentual' and the `actual' views, the former characterized the works of Sully and Volkmann. * 1962 W. G. Runciman Plato's Later Epistem. iv. 132 Distinguishing the formal from the contentual features of propositions.
//people.cs.uchicago.edu/~odonnell/Teacher/Lectures/Formal_Organization_of_Knowledge/Formal_vs_informal/
You should look up the word "research" in the dictionary too ... :)
constructivecritism 1 month ago
@LiamXaoh
"I assume it is because all scientists are part of the grand conspiracy against astrology"
No, thankfully there are lots of scientist out there, who researched astrology unbiasedly and have found it to be quite consistent. But those people were scientists and no pseudo-sceptics following their dogma ;)
constructivecritism 1 month ago
@LiamXaoh
"You are an astrological fundamentalist..."
Fundamentalism is characterized by rigid adherence to principles regarding the own conviction, and by intolerance of other views and opposition to secularism. Actually I simply research astrology to find out if or whats true about it. I havent even said astrology was correct at all. ;) Funny how fast you judge, before even researching. Not the best premise for a scientist ;)
Amusing :)
constructivecritism 1 month ago
@LiamXaoh The ignorance of this opinion is beyond par excellence!
R1 Astrologers can't agree on the rules? What on earth are you going on about boy??
R2 Slag science?? It's science that has such a low opinion of itself mate!
R3 Misquote famous people. You don't like the truth??
R4 Avoid real supporting evidence. Time to look at the honesty of supposed real scientists.
R5 Ad hominem attacks?? Science doesn't do it better mate!
Come out of your fantasy world and smell the coffee mate!!!
TheLogic1010 3 weeks ago
@TheLogic1010 - ah I see your stance. Rather than provide a case for astrology you attack science. You're obeying Rule 2 perfectly.
LiamXaoh 3 weeks ago
@LiamXaoh You started the attack mate! Be honest, you haven't a clue on what you are attacking? You make up some pseudo crap and then create a straw man to attack. Why do you waste your time attacking a system that has survived for thousands of years and then make some mental emotional rubbish. I feel sorry for you! Open your eyes to the universe instead of thinking you know it all!!
TheLogic1010 3 weeks ago
@TheLogic1010 - so cite studies that confirm the veracity for all astrological claims. It has existed for thousands of years so it must be true - so has belief in thousands of different gods. If the "its old so it must be true" is the depth of your argument you are fighting a battle of wits unarmed.
LiamXaoh 3 weeks ago
Leave it to an idiot to completely miss the point of what was just said.
EnragedSephiroth 1 month ago
2:29 Look at that fucking boss swag.
bp56789 2 months ago 33
@bp56789 u gay for sagan?
cpufightclub 1 month ago
Mother Theresa knew nothing about UNDERWATER ELECTRIC ARK WELDING, so she NEVER gave her opinion or lectured on that subject, how wise !
I've noticed skeptics are undiplomatic, fixed in opinion, narrow minded and have NO knowledge or experience of the paranormal, they're motivated by their prejudiced, unqualified, opinions. They often need words like 'fuck' to emphasize their feelings about the subject or psychic people.
They have no ESP, so for them, it is understandably complete nonsense.
Z1Z121 2 months ago
@Z1Z121
Your comments assume that paranormal phenomena are as provable and real as air and water. They're not. You're deluded if you think they are.
uktransplantedyank 2 months ago
Sun comes up over the horizon, flowers open their petals.
Sunspots interfere with radio waves.
Moon pulls the oceans.
Heat and light from the sun affect all life forms.
Jupiter's gravity grabs thousands of potentially dangerous asteroids, etc., heading for the earth.
Fish, birds and other creatures swim, fly and travel THOUSANDS of miles to MATE on the NIGHT of the full moon at a SPECIAL location. Others go to eat them. How do they know when to depart? Oh no ! Nothing out in space affects us ?
Z1Z121 2 months ago
@Z1Z121 so are you saying that astrology is science? instead of giving examples, just come out and say what you believe. then maybe we could discuss your beliefs.
viralvideoguy1988 2 months ago
@Z1Z121 All those examples have perfectly understood mechanisms as how they work. Unlike astrology
ebrobaru 2 months ago
LiamXaoh 1 month ago
@LiamXaoh ,THOSE YOU RECITE ARE THE LAWS OF GOD AND GOD HIMSELF, EVERY VISION,EVERY MOVEMENT ,EVERY ROTATION,EVERYTHING IS HIMSELF
sabuncuhoca 1 month ago
@sabuncuhoca ,SO EVERYTHING IS UNDER CONTROL OF HIM, PRESENT AND FUTURE ALSO, IF FUTURE WASNT DECIDED AND KNOWN BY HIM BY THE BOOK OF ASTROLOGY THIS WOULD MAKE HIM HELPLESS ABOUT TIME AND FUTURE.ASTROLOGY IS HIS REVELATION ABOUT THE FUTURE BTW HIS NAME IS ALLAH
sabuncuhoca 1 month ago
@sabuncuhoca - God is like astrology. Made up. The laws of physics are testable and provable. God is a concept made up by early man to explain things; rational and educated folks have moved on from belief in such superstitions.
You're ignorant as demonstrated by you inability to turn CAPS off.
LiamXaoh 1 month ago
@LiamXaoh ,SHUT UP MORON, WHEN YOU GO TO HELL YOU GET HE IS REAL OR NOT
sabuncuhoca 1 month ago
@sabuncuhoca - seeing as there is no such things as hell... well apart from listening to superstitious loonies like you.
The CAPS lock is really easy to find. It usually has "Caps lock" written on it. Oh that's right "caps" means you're shouting your god gibberish at the non believers. Lucky I'm an atheist and it doesn't affect me.
Do you mind if I spell "god" lower case? If he minds he'll blast me to hell no doubt. LOL
LiamXaoh 1 month ago
@LiamXaoh MY CAPS ARE FOR THE MORON,BLIND.DEAF,SPEECHLESS PEOPLE
sabuncuhoca 1 month ago
@sabuncuhoca - perhaps you have mistaken me for someone who cares to listen to your mindless rantings. Go back to shagging your sister.
LiamXaoh 1 month ago
9. I am intuitive and have a good feeling for something unspoken. (Neptun in 8th house)
10. I experience Power and powerlessness, conversion at work. I develop big persuasivness and force at work. I campaign myself full-on for a chosen task. I work profoundly and passionatly. (Pluto in sixth house)
constructivecritism 2 months ago
4. a) I have difficulties in „enjoyment of life“, to stretch a point at times and sensuality. I am trying to develop a balanced ability to enjoy. (Saturn in Taurus).
b) My boundaries, inhibitions but also my biggest chance for personal progression in the area of my charisma, assertiveness. My aim is to develop a positive assertiveness. (Saturn in first house)
9. I live my independence in the area of work. I have a imaginative, witty style of work. I need al ot of free space at work.
constructivecritism 2 months ago
4. a) In my opinion, valuable is the attitude of life „balance, fairness and equality“ (Jupiter in Libra).
b) I feel rich in the area of work. I have confidence and leadership abilities at work. I am reputable and highly prestigous. (Jupiter in 6th house)
constructivecritism 2 months ago
5 b) I know hot to put myself into the right perspective, I love love an the flirt. (Venus in 5th house)
4. a) I fight enthusiasticlyy and snappy. Main reason for aggression is injustice. (Mars in Saggatarius)
b) I advocate my own convictions comittedly. I contend high ideals. I tend to assertiveness ans intolerance (Mars in 9th house)
constructivecritism 2 months ago
4. a) I am thinking diplomatically, I like complex, balanced constructs and strategies. I decide between balanced and imbalanced (Mercury in Libra).
b) I use my mind with delight in everyday life and at work. I find my way around in various areas fastly. My style of work is agile, clever and efficient (Mercury in 6th house)
5. a) My perception of love, relationship and beauty is proud and generous, but also stagily at times. (Venus in Leo)
constructivecritism 2 months ago
I don't believe in astrology, but it seems to me that certain zodiac signs tend to have almost identical personal characteristics, I just wonder why that is, if it can be actually proven to be anything but a false observation. :)
cyclopwarriorgunman 2 months ago
Three expressions are used which are not said in connection to astrology.
IT NEVER RAINS BUT IT POURS
HE' ON A GAMBLER'S LUCKY STREAK
EVERYTHING HE TOUCHES TURNS TO GOLD.
The first implies there is a bad influence affecting things.
The other two imply there is a good influence affecting things.
Astrologers know what it is, it's called astrology.
Some skeptics will NOT have a nice day today, while others WILL, yet none of them really know why - but we do, don't we ! shh! don't tell 'em.
Z1Z121 2 months ago
@Z1Z121
Explain now astrology works. Name the forces involved.
MadHighway 1 week ago
And I must also say that I'm not really the right person to make conclusions on, I admit that I'm only 18 years old and not that experienced in astrology and never gave a reading, although it's my favourite hobby, and it surely wouldn't be if it were fake trust me. I would say you ask someone who calls himself a "good" astrologer, I'm just a student with a few years of experience.
JohnnyX1239 2 months ago
HE WAS A CLEVER NICE PERSON WHO DECIDED ASTROLOGY WAS NONSENSE. HE THEN CONDEMNED THE SUBJECT.
YOU MUST RESEARCH AND STUDY ANY SUBJECT IF YOU WISH TO COMMENT ACCURATELY ON IT.
MR SAGAN DIDN'T DO THIS, SO SADLY, HIS OPINION IS BASED ON ASSUMPTION AND PREJUDGEMENT (PREJUDICE).
READ WORLD FAMOUS PROFESSOR HANS EYSENKE'S REPORT WHO DID FIVE YEARS RESEARCH TO PROVE ASTROLOGY WAS NONSENSE AND THEN CHANGED HIS MIND SAYING HE WAS ASTONISHED AT THE TRUTH HE FOUND IN THE SUBJECT. HAVE A NICE DAY.
Z1Z121 2 months ago
He's good but Astrology is real :)
JohnnyX1239 2 months ago
@JohnnyX1239 prove it
ebrobaru 2 months ago
@ebrobaru Well give me your birth details (date, hour, mins. and place) and I will be able to tell a lot of detailed info on your life while I never met you. That's proof enough for me I think.
JohnnyX1239 2 months ago
@JohnnyX1239 Sure, Mexico City, September 5, 1969 8:20 pm
ebrobaru 2 months ago
@ebrobaru Okay . One thing is you are a serious person and probably a fierce debater who has strong individual opinions, someone who demands solid proof for everything, you are also a workaholic, you are a charming and friendly person, you probably have a whole lot of hobbies, you have a great sense of responsibility and ambitious, you demand stability and feel vulnerable although you don't like to show emotions at all and it takes a lot of effort to make you show them. you hate injustice.
JohnnyX1239 2 months ago
@JohnnyX1239 I looked at your Natal chart and progressions by the info you gave me, maybe it's a little too general but I'm not that good of an astrologer. Anyway hope to hear your reply on this.
JohnnyX1239 2 months ago
@JohnnyX1239 Serrious person. You think? he is a fan of Sagan and against fairy tales. 0 points. A fierce debater. Yep, he has offered you a challenge, that is also obvious.0 points. Someone who demands proof. Same. 0 points. Workaholic. I dunno, lets say he is.1 point. Charming and freindly? Barnum statement; 0 points. Lots of Hobbies; Barnum= 0 points Responsible ambitious wants stability feels vunerable wants justice= all textbook Barnum.TOTAL =0. Really all that crap fails vs atheists
tommiatkins 2 months ago
@tommiatkins Eh, are you him??? How can you possibly know him that well, only he HIMSELF can tell with his own experiences if it fits, and how can I know that he is a fierce debater?? He just asked me to give him proof, that doesn't mean he directly is a fierce debater now is it? I looked at his Rising being Aries, and Mars, the ruler, being in the 9th house to come to that conclusion. You know nothing about astrology, never even studied the subject, how can you say it's crap?
JohnnyX1239 2 months ago
@JohnnyX1239 Ok, let´s analize your reading. Shall we?
"you are a serious person and probably a fierce debater who has strong individual opinions, someone who demands solid proof for everything"
Hmm, the very fact that I am here in this thread discussing with you makes that statement pretty obvious.
"you are also a workaholic"
not really, actually I try not to overdo it
"you are a charming and friendly" Well, won´t everybody will say this is true about himself?
ebrobaru 2 months ago
@JohnnyX1239 "you probably have a whole lot of hobbies"
depends on what "a ehole lot" means to you. I´d say about 3 or 4. Then again, what would the average be
"you have a great sense of responsibility and ambitious" "you demand stability"
Hmm, again, who would say NO to these characteristics?
"feel vulnerable although you don't like to show emotions at all and it takes a lot of effort to make you show them"
Hmmm, no, not really, I kind of cry easily in movies and with family
ebrobaru 2 months ago
@JohnnyX1239 "you hate injustice."
Do you know ANYONE that love injustice?
So, all in all, I see a pretty weak "reading". Mainly they are generalizations that can apply to anyone, really. And others are pretty obvious ones.
Thanks for trying though
ebrobaru 2 months ago
@ebrobaru
Hi Ebrobaru,
I'd be interested in giving you an astrological reading, too. Before I have a few questions:
1. Is that your real birthdate (September 5th, 1969 8:20 pm) ? (Sorry I ask but I had people fooling me)
2. Do you want me to write it down here as comments or in a text I send to you?
All the best
constructivecritism 2 months ago
@ebrobaru
Hi Ebrobaru
So here is the reading for you. The first part of the reading is built similar to a chain-sentence. Its a simple way to get an overview of the astrological dispositions. The following information is taken from astrological books, when I make a statement i will always add the astrological constellation so that you and other people can keep track of the statements and compare them to astrological sources on the internet or in books.
constructivecritism 2 months ago
The following chain-sentence is written in the first-person-perspective.
1. a) Essentially I am a human who is thorough and critical. My principle is „I am particular about something“ „I examine“. (Sun in Virgo)
b)I find my biggest evolvement in structuring procedures, in incorperating myself best as possible fot the bigger system. Cues: convenient patient, persistent, steady, focused, autonomous. (Sun in sixth house)
constructivecritism 2 months ago
1. My role and my sense of life is: leading, proactive, strong-minded, vigorous (Aries rising), complemented by a serious, worthy appearance (saturn in first house).
2. a) My temper is of empathy, I am helpful, applied to family, moody. (Moon in cancer) b) I am shoved intuitivly in searching familiarity and intimacy. I am underway to find belonging and emotional security. (Moon in 4th house)
constructivecritism 2 months ago
@ebrobaru
I'll send the whole text to you so you can read it better. I may write something more the next days, this is just a general overview. All the best :)
constructivecritism 2 months ago
@JohnnyX1239 Im up for that! 29/12/70 3:30am West Yorkshire. Go for it!
tommiatkins 2 months ago
@tommiatkins And please use some different Barnums this time. Things like, "I am a fair person but like to defend my position, or I have strong values". Throw in some date related stuff like, ooh im 40 years old, so lets see.. "I am worried about my weight, or I feel more tired these days than i used to". Chuck in some geographical ones." I am a straight talker who likes to be careful with money". Alternatively go put on a spooky hat and mumble your gibberish to the gullible
tommiatkins 2 months ago
@tommiatkins That's like saying a book is fake with only reading the cover and not the whole book itself.
JohnnyX1239 2 months ago
@tommiatkins You have a deep fear of life, and there can be times of loneliness and isolation, a lack ot originality in the character, you do seem to have sudden outbursts of understanding, like things you didn't know for a long time suddenly come to mind, you are also a serious and upbeat person, not that ambitious though, you might work in the showbizz or in the health care sector. You care a lot for financial stability, you may have a lot of "weird" friends, you are sensitve and eaily hurt.
JohnnyX1239 2 months ago
@tommiatkins Please comment on my reading, I feel some things here must be really spot on.
JohnnyX1239 2 months ago
@JohnnyX1239 I have absolutly zero fear of life or death.I am personally crowded out with freinds and family,but naturally,as for ALL people,there are times.I am described often as funny and spontaneous by others negeting the orgininality.Like everyone I get neural pathways trigger that havnt in many years, hey I remember the past! Crazy huh? Serious and upbeat, you can read that easily from my style of writing.Correct about the public sector,together those cover nearly 7 million employees
tommiatkins 2 months ago
@tommiatkins Everyone cares for finacial stability, what a brilliant Barnum statement! I must use that one myself in my "palm readings" Oh, actually I already do. Everyone is sensitive and easily hurt.
RIGHT. Thats me dealt with.Astrology is either utter rubbish or you are personally really bad at it!
Let me explain how it works.You may have been duped by ppl to think that some exploding gas giant somehow makes all people born on a certain day feel confident about work,or whatever.BUT....
tommiatkins 2 months ago
@tommiatkins What is ACTUALLY happening is you are using vague easily applied statements that will be accepted by anyone.Its a trick used by many many con artists. "I am getting a spirit here! Their name Begins with M! M? No...Might be a N??"
"YES! Its my auntie Nora!" "NO! Its my Auntie Norris"
"Thats right both of you! And she loves you and knows when you died you both felt sad. She's sorry you went off your food at that time"
"WOW! This guys amazing, Nora/Norris must really be there!!!"
tommiatkins 2 months ago
@tommiatkins Believe what you want but I have used astrology and learned very much from it. I will just leave it at this: study the subject before you judge it. And I said I'm not that good. You're just a close-minded, way too serious Capricorn lol. I think you have too much Saturn influences.. Peace bro.
JohnnyX1239 2 months ago
@JohnnyX1239 Oh well, I have studied it to quite a large degree! I judge it to be false. However, I'm always up for learning more and may well dip back in:) Meanwhile I encourage you to read up on Cold Reading and Cognitive dissonace. Peace.
tommiatkins 2 months ago
Happy birthday Carl, you are a great teacher
BowlofIndoMee 2 months ago
@BowlofIndoMee That's lovely! :D Happy birthday from me too, Carl!
volvoxmusix 2 months ago
I could listen to this guy talk about Gold and still find it interesting.
666Silson 2 months ago