Indian astrology Birth Chart system ?

Pixel42 said:
Everybody who reads a chart they believe is theirs finds something that resonates with them. The dozens of people who read that mass murderer's chart did; probably no two people picked out the same combination of hits, but nearly all found enough to score it 4 or 5 out of 5 for accuracy.

This is due to well known and well understood cognitive biases. Eliminate those biases, and the perceived accuracy is shown to be an illusion. I know this is difficult to believe, but the evidence is all there if you bother to look at it. Or do the simple blind test I described for yourself; if you're correct about the actual accuracy of the kind of astrological chart you're so enamoured with that test will prove it, and you'll be well on your way to winning the JREF million dollars.
Click to expand...

Yes,hopkinsworld, go for it and share the prize with your astrologer.
 
hopkinsworld said:
Around 5-6 were competent. More or less. Some are incompetent.
Click to expand...

Out of how many, and how can you tell?

If you think they're incompetent because they got their predictions wrong, then you have to consider that if you take a random sample of predictions (e.g. for a random selection of people), and apply them to your own circumstances, you should expect a percentage of them to seem more accurate than others just by chance, and 'more or less' would be a good description.

If you throw out the inaccurate ones as 'incompetent', and keep the more accurate ones, you're committing the Texas Sharpshooter fallacy.
 
Last edited:
Pixel42 said:
... Or do the simple blind test I described for yourself; if you're correct about the actual accuracy of the kind of astrological chart you're so enamoured with that test will prove it, and you'll be well on your way to winning the JREF million dollars.
Click to expand...

How about it, hopkinsworld?
 
hopkinsworld said:
Did you had bad relationship with your dad in terms of all your life ? That's what it is in my chart. You see when I say bad relationship, here's what happens - You both did not had common ground ever since you were born, your dad either had skewed personality/worldview all your life and you did not had shared worldview which caused trouble in your relationship. No shared interests. Did you had that all through your life ? And you never were friends with your dad all through your life. Is it like that in your life ? He was either emotionally distant/angry or something all through life. You two were just never connected all through your life.
Click to expand...
That sounds more like you had the misfortune to be born to a bad father, not that J Random Planet was in X Random Part of the sky at the moment you were born.

And why is the date on which you popped out of your mother so important to astrology? Your brain, for better or for worse, has been developing for some time prior to that and will continue to develop for at least another fourteen years after.

Here's another one when Moon's North node is in 4th house - domestic happiness is impaired all throughout life unless some better planet is in your chart which might change the result whenever that planet starts its period in your chart. So I'm 22 right now and I live with my parents. All my life(up till age 22) I had to face domestic violence and abuse - did you also had domestic violence and abuse all your life ? Were you helpless in terms of trying to fix the abuse in your house ? How specific more do you want to be ? Oh yes, some weeks might be peaceful and some weeks might be more intense. But when you look back at your life, you basically had to face abuse all your life and home life was intense. Is this true for you ? Now that changes when beneficial planet like Venus starts and the effects of abuse gets reduced for you and specifically for the period.
Click to expand...
If you can show that a statistically significant number of people born with the Moon's North node in the 4th house have a poor domestic life, then I would be inclined to give your comments more weight. But I will hazard two guesses:
1. A properly conducted study would show no such effect
2. Astrologers would come up with some excuse as to why that is

And I did not try to give meaning to the report. It's like the way it is.
Click to expand...
I believe otherwise, that astrology works by people reading their own lives into what they believe is their chart.
 
dlorde said:
The highlighted sentences are contradictory.
Click to expand...

https://www.google.com/search?um=1&hl=en&pws=0&biw=1280&bih=923&tbm=isch&sa=1&q=hindu+birth+chart

https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&pws=0&q=american birth chart&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=isch

Hindu birth chart is produced in square format and american is usually in a circle format.


dlorde said:
Out of how many, and how can you tell?
Click to expand...

There are local astrologers hired by companies and then you buy points and use those points to do a call with an astrologer. E.g. - 20 points = 20 minutes with the astrologer. These type of astrologers were of bad quality. Whenever I asked them something they always told me to pray to a deity to fix my problems and said wait X months and then you can have success in whatever venture you start. Btw all these were over the phone and they did not make any reports for me. The one which made the prediction had specific claims and was working independently.
 
Last edited:
A chart based on date of birth resulting in subjective descriptions which you then subjectively apply to events in your own past?

Gee, how could that go wrong? :rolleyes:
 
hopkinsworld said:
The one which made the prediction had specific claims.
Click to expand...
Once again: the question is not whether the chart contains specific details that the subject perceives to be accurate, it's whether it contains more such specific details than would be expected by chance. We know that almost anybody who reads almost any chart will think it contains more correct specific details than would be exected by chance, provided they believe the chart has been prepared for them personally. The fact that some astrologers are better at giving this illusion of accuracy than others is not a surprise.
 
hopkinsworld said:
https://www.google.com/search?um=1&hl=en&pws=0&biw=1280&bih=923&tbm=isch&sa=1&q=hindu+birth+chart

https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&pws=0&q=american birth chart&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=isch

Hindu birth chart is produced in square format and american is usually in a circle format.
Click to expand...

So what? They could be in the form of a trapezoid and they would still be bunk. Go and ask your astrologer to accurately predict an event in your future, post it here and then we shall see.
 
Last edited:
Robrob said:
A chart based on date of birth resulting in subjective descriptions which you then subjectively apply to events in your own past?

Gee, how could that go wrong? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

That's how the astrologers make money.
 
"The chart is always stays the same"
"Hindu birth chart is produced in square format and american is usually in a circle format."

dlorde said:
:confused: still contradictory.
Click to expand...

Not contradictory. Chart is same. When I used the word "chart" in that context, I meant the basic planet dignities and in which house they reside, their signs, their strengths. Square and circles are their designs and are not relevant to the planets, their positions and the house in which reside.

Educate yourself if you want. Also the question you are asking is not significant enough and relevant.
 
Last edited:
hopkinsworld said:
"The chart is always stays the same"
"Hindu birth chart is produced in square format and american is usually in a circle format."



Not contradictory. Chart is same. When I used the word "chart" in that context, I meant the basic planet dignities and in which house they reside, their signs, their strengths. Square and circles are their designs and are not relevant to the planets, their positions and the house in which reside.

Educate yourself if you want. Also the question you are asking is not significant enough and relevant.
Click to expand...

''Planet dignities''? Gibberish. And planets do not reside in houses. More gibberish. He was not being entirely serious, by the way. Education is the means by which I know that astrology is bunk. Try reading up on the tests that have been done which show that it is bunk.



''V.1. Astronomical bases.

http://www.astrosurf.com/nitschelm/astrology_english.html

The basic astronomical concepts are rather generally very badly assimilated by astrologers, whatever the school they belong to. The concept of constellation, which is a simple subjective appearance without any physical reality, is very badly understood by astrologers. They indeed associate the constellations with strange and unreal properties related to their names. The forms of these constellations, whose names generally result from Graeco-Roman mythology and have significantly varied since Antiquity, were fixed only in 1930, as well as their number.



The concept of zodiacal sign, which does not have a meaning any longer in modern astronomy, is even more badly used by astrologers because of a simple ignorance of the apparent movements of the stars and of some peculiar movements of the axis of terrestrial rotation. The apparent trajectory of the Sun in one year around the Earth defines on the celestial sphere a large circle called the ecliptic. The ecliptic thus cuts fourteen constellations, of very unequal sizes, on the celestial sphere with their limits of 1930, in this case Pisces (the Fishes), Cetus (the Sea Monster, which is simply skirted by the ecliptic), Aries (the Ram), Taurus (the Bull), Gemini (The Twins), Cancer (the Crab), Leo (the Lion), Virgo (the Virgin), Libra (the Scales), Scorpius (the Scorpion), Ophiuchus (the Serpent Holder), Sagittarius (the Archer), Capricornius (the Sea Goat) and Aquarius (the Water Bearer). Curiously, astrologers have only kept twelve of them to make the twelve zodiacal signs (all of size equalling 30°) of European astrology.



Furthermore, the number of zodiacal signs has significantly varied from one civilization to another since Antiquity. Indeed, it passed from 6 in primeval Mesopotamia to 28 in medieval China, while passing by 11 at Babylon and 20 for the Toltecs. This simple observation removes any logical and precise significance from the twelve signs used nowadays. Why not, indeed, one, ten, one hundred, three hundred sixty five or ten thousand zodiacal signs? Why an integer of signs? Indeed, the constants used in mathematics, physics, chemistry and astrophysics are generally real, i.e. not whole. Why would the astrological constants be then almost always whole?



Because of one of the movements of the terrestrial axis of rotation, called the precession of the equinoxes, the zodiacal signs slip slowly along the ecliptic circle in the retrograde direction compared to the constellations of the zodiac, looping a complete rotation in 25750 years. The consequence of this slow movement is that the zodiacal signs have stopped corresponding to their associated constellations for a long time. For example, the Sun is not in front of the constellation of Aries towards the end of March, but in front of that of Pisces, not far from the official limit with Aquarius, near the place where the Vernal Point is currently located. We can notice that the Vernal Point is given by the direction of the Sun at the time of the vernal (March) equinox. At that time however, it is supposed to be, according to any astrologer, in the sign of Aries, the Ram. In opposition to this problem, some astrologers practise an astrology known as sidereal, which is opposed to traditional astrology, known as tropic, and which considers the constellations of the zodiac and no longer the astrological signs. This new kind of astrology is immediately classified as invalid, the seasons not corresponding anymore to the position of the Sun...



By a curious use of the phenomenon of precession of the equinoxes, some astrologers oddly assert the existence of ages of astral influences. Thus we would be, according to them, towards the end of the Age of Pisces, not far from the beginning of the Age of Aquarius. In fact, these ages would correspond to the period of crossing of the constellation associated by the Vernal Point, because of the movement of precession of the equinoxes. Each astrologer suggests his own date, each time different, for the beginning of this so-called Age of Aquarius, which would always begin in an immediate future. However, while taking the official limits of 1930 for the zodiacal constellations, one arrives by a simple calculation at quite different dates, the beginning of the so-called Age of Pisces being located towards 70 BC, and its end in year 2614 AD, which completely invalidates the astrological reasoning. The so-called Age of Aquarius, which does not make any sense at all in astronomy, only exists in the too fertile, or even delirious, imagination of these astrologers who seem to mix up their fantasies with reality, the constellations being only fictitious projections of some quite terrestrial myths on the ancient Greeks' vault of heaven.



The position of a star on the celestial sphere can only be perfectly known with a system of three co-ordinates: the celestial longitude brought back to an origin, the celestial latitude and the distance. The ignorance of one of these three co-ordinates leads to an enormous inaccuracy in the position of the star. The ecliptic co-ordinates constitute one of the principal celestial frames of reference used in astronomy. The astrologers use very badly this system, the ecliptic longitude being the only one taken into account by them in a very vague way. The knowledge of the precise position of a star is incompatible with the astrological system of location.



Astrology is a product of the temperate areas of the Northern Hemisphere. Indeed, it is only suited to these areas, would it only be because of the phenomenon of the seasons. In the temperate areas of the Southern Hemisphere, the seasons are reversed, which removes any likelihood to the associated symbolism. Thus, the sign of the Lion, which corresponds to the boreal summer, is supposed to have properties of exhalation of heat, which of course does not work in the other hemisphere, which is then in full southern winter. In the tropical zone, the situation is still worse from an astrological point of view, the seasons being only two, the dry season and the wet season (prone to regional variations), without variation in temperature!



In the polar areas, the majority of the astrological systems in use do not even make it possible to build viable horoscopes. Some stars and some signs are indeed never visible there, whereas the astrological "houses", which are absolutely essential for the development of the horoscope, cannot be calculated any longer and do not cross any longer, anyway, the ecliptic, in the majority of the cases.



What is, on this subject, the physical significance of the astrological "houses" and why can they not exist in some cases on and beyond the polar circles? Indeed, these astrological "houses", wherever one is in the Universe, correspond to nothing at all! From another point of view, if astrology were a science, one can legitimately wonder what the horoscope of an individual born elsewhere than on Earth would be, the laws of physics being the same everywhere in the Universe.''
 
Last edited:
dafydd said:
''Planet dignities''? Gibberish. And planets do not reside in houses. More gibberish. He was not being entirely serious, by the way. Education is the means by which I know that astrology is bunk. Try reading up on the tests that have been done which show that it is bunk.
Click to expand...

I meant read about it on wikipedia, yea they are not validated by science but who is even accepting general claims from astrology. I'm talking about certain specific claims

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_(astrology)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_(astrology)#The_Twelve_Houses
 
Last edited:
hopkinsworld said:
I meant read about it on wikipedia, yea they are not validated by science but who is even accepting general claims from astrology. I'm talking about certain specific claims

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_(astrology)
Click to expand...

There should be question mark after ''astrology''. I have no idea who is accepting the claims. I am pointing out that astrology is a primitive superstition with no basis in reality. Read this, please. http://www.astrosurf.com/nitschelm/astrology_english.html
 
Last edited:
hopkinsworld said:
There were sophisticated Indian scholars who created the Indian astrology, and it was not created in a cave.
Click to expand...

J.K. Rowling is quite sophisticated too. So was Tolkien. Do you have anything serious to add to the discussion?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom