Earthquake in Iran

[El Greco]

20,000 feared dead.

How helpless one feels

And sad.

And angry.

 

[CFLarsen]

Yup.

I've asked the Danish astrologer Finn Wandahl, who claims that astrology can predict earthquakes, why this one was not predicted. Either.

So far, no answer. I'll keep you posted.

 

[El Greco]

I've asked the Danish astrologer Finn Wandahl, who claims that astrology can predict earthquakes, why this one was not predicted.

If I had the power, I'd take all those imposters and throw them at the ruins to do some rescue work for a couple of days. I feel this would be enough to deter them from further "predictions".

 

[Tmy]

Of cousre it wasnt predictied. It was caused by one of Saddams Weapons of Mass Destruction. If we dont find the Iraqi weather machine soon we'll all be doomed! 007 where are you!

 

[Ed]

Certainly a message from Allah.

 

[Elektrix]

20,000 feared dead.

How helpless one feels

And sad.

And angry.

I understand "helpless" and "sad" as emotions, but could you explain the "angry" part? Is that anger at the Earth for having earthquakes, or something else (i.e. "anger" at the phony psychics who never seem to be able to usefully predict anything like this of consequence, even though they certainly claim they should be able to).

-Elektrix

 

[El Greco]

Re: Re: Earthquake in Iran

I understand "helpless" and "sad" as emotions, but could you explain the "angry" part?

No, I can't explain it, at least not unexceptionably. Feelings are not always rational, are they ? But I'll try:

I could be angry at myself because I can (and/or will) do nothing. Angry at the builders who make paper houses. Angry at the people who will interpret it as "God's will". Angry at the media who will forget it after a few days because it didn't happen in our "civilized" neighborhood.

Certainly a message from Allah.

Nah, Allah communicates with us via electrons and their orbits, not earthquakes.

 

[CFLarsen]

Update:

After I several times had updated Finn Wandahl with how many people had died in Iran, he finally found it in his heart to answer:

"I have no intention of spending more time commenting on your manipulations and distortions of what I have written and not written. You glide over to your flock of unconscious fools on JREF. Frankly my dear, I don't give a damn..."

I could only reply with this:

A more heartless answer has probably never been given. There are many thousands of people in Iran who, at this moment, could have used your (claimed) astrological knowledge and ability.

You have deliberately chosen to ignore that.

How do you sleep at night, Finn?

This is not a game, fellas. We are up against incredible ignorance and deliberate deceit, at the expense of countless of victims.

Pay attention to the writing on the wall.

 

[Ed]

Update:

After I several times had updated Finn Wandahl with how many people had died in Iran, he finally found it in his heart to answer:



I could only reply with this:



This is not a game, fellas. We are up against incredible ignorance and deliberate deceit, at the expense of countless of victims.

Pay attention to the writing on the wall.

Deceit, you got that right. Somebody tell me again how wooism is harmless.

 

[toddjh]

This is not a game, fellas. We are up against incredible ignorance and deliberate deceit, at the expense of countless of victims.

Hmm. I agree with the sentiment, but you're making it sound like he actually caused the earthquake, or that he really did know about it. He's not to blame for any of those people dying.

And really, when it comes to people who think psychics can actually predict earthquakes, there's only so much you're going to be able to do to help them. Not that we shouldn't do what we can to prevent fraud, but...with people that stupid, you can get rid of all the con men, and they'll still find plenty of ways to lose all their money and ruin their lives.

Jeremy

 

[CFLarsen]

Hmm. I agree with the sentiment, but you're making it sound like he actually caused the earthquake, or that he really did know about it. He's not to blame for any of those people dying.

I am not saying that at all. But if, as he claims, earthquakes can be predicted by astrology, he - as an astrologer - should do whatever he can to warn people about upcoming quakes.

Now, as we know, there are a lot of astrologers out there, making a lot of predictions. What they want, of course, is to point out their few hits. What they do not want, of course, is a database of all these predictions, so we can compare the hits to the misses.

Precisely the same strategy as we see with believers in psychics: They also don't want this comparison.

And really, when it comes to people who think psychics can actually predict earthquakes, there's only so much you're going to be able to do to help them. Not that we shouldn't do what we can to prevent fraud, but...with people that stupid, you can get rid of all the con men, and they'll still find plenty of ways to lose all their money and ruin their lives.

Very true. That should not stop anyone from finding out whether or not astrology can predict quakes.

Update: Finn now claims that he did not claim that earth quakes can be predicted by astrology, despite this direct quote from him:

"The earthquake in Gujarat, January 26th, 2001, was, as a matter of fact, predicted by two Indian astrologers, namely Sri K. N. Rao and Pandit Jai Prakash Madhak. Pandit Madhak's prediction was quite unique, since he hit both the date, namely Jan. 26th, which is the Independence Day of India, and the place for the event, namely Gujarat, correctly from the horoscope one month before the earthquake. I wrote a detailed article about the prediction in the Monthly "The Stars", March 2001-issue."

Sheeeesh......

 

[toddjh]

What they want, of course, is to point out their few hits. What they do not want, of course, is a database of all these predictions, so we can compare the hits to the misses.

Precisely the same strategy as we see with believers in psychics: They also don't want this comparison.

The worst part is, neither do their followers. That's the part that's hardest for me to understand.

Update: Finn now claims that he did not claim that earth quakes can be predicted by astrology, despite this direct quote from him:

On a related note, I just got through a long debate with a friend who is a decent person but a total woo woo, and no matter how many real-life examples I used or how simply I explained it, I just could not get her to understand that something that cannot be tested under controlled conditions, or that yields information only after the fact, is completely useless. She wouldn't listen to anything that questioned the "crystal therapy" sessions she spends $100 on every month...

Jeremy

 

[CFLarsen]

The worst part is, neither do their followers. That's the part that's hardest for me to understand.

I think I am beginning to understand this.

I think they know. They know that their beliefs cannot stand scrutiny. They know that what they are claiming is not true. But they cling on to their beliefs, and shut their eyes to reality, for a number of reasons.

One, they can't admit that they were wrong.

Two, they have invested so much in their beliefs, that it has become impossible for them to go back.

Three, they need the world to be magical.

Four, some have made a business out of it, as well as a name. That's where fraud enters the picture. That's where it becomes more than "just" a matter of belief.

 

[karl]

I think I am beginning to understand this.

I think they know. They know that their beliefs cannot stand scrutiny. They know that what they are claiming is not true. But they cling on to their beliefs, and shut their eyes to reality, for a number of reasons.

I don't think it's like that. For some particularly devout believers, perhaps, but most people simply can't be bothered to put up the intellectual effort it takes to cling to a known falsehood. Not in the long run.

Imagine having a discussion with someone who is undeniably a lot smarter than you, but has a completely different political view, for example. This hypothetical person can argue his point very elegantly and no matter how hard you try, you can't seem to locate the flaws in his logic. But his conclusions run contrary to things you have personally experienced and much of what you hold to be self-evident. Now, do you play by the rules of logic and concede, at least temporarily, or do you go by your gut feeling that there has to be something wrong with the way he approached the subject, even though you don't know exactly what?

My guess is that you, and the majority of people, would choose the latter approach. You "know" what you know. If it doesn't stand up to what passes for scrutiny in this context, then maybe scrutiny is at fault. Somehow.

 

[Tesserat]

Part of the problem is that it's so easy to make excuses for any failure.
All the astrologer has to say is that he was focusing on possible earthquakes in the states due to the recent one in California.

He's sorry that he missed the one in India, but the astrologers there weren't doing their job.

Astrologers will always be able to find an excuse. The key to getting rid of this crap is educating the general public.

 

[deBergerac]

Imagine having a discussion with someone who is undeniably a lot smarter than you, but has a completely different political view, for example. This hypothetical person can argue his point very elegantly and no matter how hard you try, you can't seem to locate the flaws in his logic. But his conclusions run contrary to things you have personally experienced and much of what you hold to be self-evident. Now, do you play by the rules of logic and concede, at least temporarily, or do you go by your gut feeling that there has to be something wrong with the way he approached the subject, even though you don't know exactly what?

I am not sure that I agree with the example since there is a difference between discussing politics and discussing about measurable effects of precognition. Politics is a field with many variables and even if something like unemployment rate can be measured what caused it is not so easy to know. When it comes to science and superstition the relation are generally clear 'you take this potion and this will happen'; to find out if it does or not should be simple.
The problem some people have is probably to see the difference between the statments that are complicated to test and the ones that are easy to test and thus they think that it is all a matter of opinion.

 

[Ed]

20,000 feared dead.

How helpless one feels

And sad.

And angry.

and how long before they blame the Jews?

 

[Rose]

For all the tragedy, there are a few glimmerings of light and hope. The US(and many other nations) have jumped to offer and send help, and the Iranians didn't waste a lot of time admitting they needed it. So dialogue has been opened, however tentatively, and at least a few people who would otherwise have died will probably live.

On the resigned sigh side of the equation, I noticed there have been some sticking points on bringing search dogs in to help. Seems many Iranians consider dogs unclean animals... even in the midst of utter ruin people will cling to ideas that are both absurd and counterproductive to their own immediate goals.

 

[Ed]

For all the tragedy, there are a few glimmerings of light and hope. The US(and many other nations) have jumped to offer and send help, and the Iranians didn't waste a lot of time admitting they needed it. So dialogue has been opened, however tentatively, and at least a few people who would otherwise have died will probably live.

On the resigned sigh side of the equation, I noticed there have been some sticking points on bringing search dogs in to help. Seems many Iranians consider dogs unclean animals... even in the midst of utter ruin people will cling to ideas that are both absurd and counterproductive to their own immediate goals.

They won't take help from Isreal. Some glimmer.

 

[karl]

I am not sure that I agree with the example since there is a difference between discussing politics and discussing about measurable effects of precognition. Politics is a field with many variables and even if something like unemployment rate can be measured what caused it is not so easy to know. When it comes to science and superstition the relation are generally clear 'you take this potion and this will happen'; to find out if it does or not should be simple.

If you don't find politics suitable for the analogy, feel free to pick something else. But there are more similarities between politics (as practiced by politicians) and precognition than you might realize at first glance. Here is one example.