Indian astrology Birth Chart system ?

[hopkinsworld]

I don't care what Sam Harris said. That link has nothing to do with your belief in astrology. Are you determined to ignore the wealth of scientific evidence that shows astrology to be nonsense?

Yes it might be. I will see if in future the specific claims remains correct.

 

[dlorde]

... the question you are asking is not significant enough and relevant.

Nor is the supposed evidence you have posted; I guess we're quits.

At least I've learnt that, in astrology, 'always the same' means 'can be different'

 

[hopkinsworld]

Nor is the supposed evidence you have posted; I guess we're quits.

Yep.

 

[dafydd]

Yep.

???? Why do you keep posting irrelevancies? Why do your posts never address the questions that were asked of you?

 

[hopkinsworld]

J.K. Rowling is quite sophisticated too. So was Tolkien. Do you have anything serious to add to the discussion?

straw man fallacy.

???? Why do you keep posting irrelevancies? Why do your posts never address the questions that were asked of you?

Already addressed above. Why would you keep asking the same questions like a troll.

 

[hopkinsworld]

I've to go now. I think there are more significant things I can be doing then debating this matter.

Peace

 

[dafydd]

straw man fallacy

No. Look up the meaning of the word

Already addressed above. Why would you keep asking the same questions like a troll.

Because you never answer them. Links are not answers. Now, without linking, tell me what planetary dignities are.

 

[Blue Mountain]

I've to go now. I think there are more significant things I can be doing then debating this matter.

Peace

Sorry to see you go so soon. But please stick around, and maybe take a look at other areas of this site. There's lots of interesting talk, debate, and chatter.

As far as astrology goes: Phil Plait (an astronomer) on astrology.

In order for astrology to work, we'd need to throw out two centuries worth of advances in astronomy and physics.

 

[Pixel42]

I will see if in future the specific claims remains correct.

So you're not interested in finding out whether astrology really works, then? Because for the reasons which have been explained to you, subjectively validating a single chart will not enable you to do so.

Dozens of studies and careful experiments using masses of data have shown that astrological charts, however prepared, are no more accurate than would be expected by chance. If you're going to dispute that mountain of evidence you need some pretty compelling evidence of your own. A single anecdote won't cut it.

I think there are more significant things I can be doing then debating this matter.

That at least you've got right. The question of whether there is anything to astrology was settled decades ago, in the negative. Any more time spent on it is wasted.

 

[pakeha]

I've to go now. I think there are more significant things I can be doing then debating this matter. ...

I'm sorry you think so as the links and reasoning posted up here by other posters were most interesting indeed.
And just out of curiosity, I'll ask for the third time-why not perform the simple test that has been proposed here and see for yourself the reality of the Forer Effect?

 

[dafydd]

I'm sorry you think so as the links and reasoning posted up here by other posters were most interesting indeed.
And just out of curiosity, I'll ask for the third time-why not perform the simple test that has been proposed here and see for yourself the reality of the Forer Effect?

He won't, because he wants to believe.

 

[Andy_Ross]

I remember hearing an interview with Michael Parkinson (I think it was)
He was talking about his early career in journalism. One of his first jobs on a local paper was to the the Astrology page.
They had a pile of 'readings' and all they did was recycle them every few months into different birth signs. No one ever noticed.

 

[dafydd]

I remember hearing an interview with Michael Parkinson (I think it was)
He was talking about his early career in journalism. One of his first jobs on a local paper was to the the Astrology page.
They had a pile of 'readings' and all they did was recycle them every few months into different birth signs. No one ever noticed.

Wasn't that James Randi?

 

[Hokulele]

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.

In addition, it would not surprise me at all if hopkinsworld only included the details from the report that were hits, rather than giving us the full text of the report.

 

[hopkinsworld]

New update:

The astrologer specifically said that according to my birth chart, I will have a surgery which is correct because I'm in fact preparing for one this month.

This is not the forer effect and is not applicable for everyone. He doesn't have to go into details about which type of surgery I will be doing.

What do you guys have to say about that ?

 

[MarkCorrigan]

That it isn't very impressive.

What's the mechanism if it doesn't work for say, me? Why would it work for some people and not others? Does this person know you at all? Were they aware you had a problem?

Those are my first thoughts. I may have more on this later.

 

[Pixel42]

What do you guys have to say about that ?

That lots of people have surgery.

Anybody who makes predictions will - unless they're very unlucky or very poor at making intelligent guesses - have some of them come true. The question is whether more come true than would be expected. To determine that you need to keep a record of all predictions, with criteria of what would consitute a hit agreed beforehand, along with a pre-calculated expected hit rate due to chance/intelligent guesswork to compare the actual hit rate to.

 

[Hokulele]

When did he make the prediction? How many readings have you had between the last time you posted and this? Was this the only thing he got right, and how many things have your readings gotten wrong?

Without the complete set of readings, these anecdotes are worthless.

 

[pakeha]

...
The astrologer specifically said that according to my birth chart, I will have a surgery which is correct because I'm in fact preparing for one this month.

This is not the forer effect and is not applicable for everyone. He doesn't have to go into details about which type of surgery I will be doing.

What do you guys have to say about that ?

Did you understand the Forer Effect, hopkinsworld?
If so, why do you imagine a 'hit' proves astrology is anything but a cruel scam?

I'll ask for the fourth time-why not perform the simple test that has been proposed here and see for yourself the reality of the Forer Effect?

 

[Blue Mountain]

New update:

The astrologer specifically said that according to my birth chart, I will have a surgery which is correct because I'm in fact preparing for one this month.

This is not the forer effect and is not applicable for everyone. He doesn't have to go into details about which type of surgery I will be doing.

What do you guys have to say about that ?

If the astrologer had said, "You will have surgery in 2012," that would be interesting. Not everyone will have surgery this year.

If the astrologer had said, "You will have surgery in October 2012 for X" (where X is that very thing you're going in for) that would be much more interesting.

But "will have surgery"? Without a timeline it's pretty much a given. At my age I can't think of any of my contemporaries who haven't gone under the knife at some point.

ETA: Also, "a surgery" is incredibly broad. It can be anything from getting a mole removed to multiple organ transplant.