perhaps not everything is lost for astrology

[quarky]

I recall an article about a person that had accumulated alot of stats that were ex-post-facto. obscure stuff; he had discovered, amongst other things, that the super bowl was won by the team whose head couch wore a red jacket. it was something like 4 fold difference. I wish i had a link to this weird data.

 

[sthomson]

My goodness, how time flies.
Saturn entered Virgo on September 3, 2007. in the Google Trends graph, the spike labelled "F" (Mattel recalls 800,000 toys) seems to peak almost exactly at this time. Even if it is not exact, the line on the graph (news stories about lead in paint) is higher during September than during the preceeding months of 2007.

This is exactly what I mean. You ignore the peak in August, and the fact that US and worldwide news articles about lead toys were declining with a small peak in early September, but say theres an incredible correlation between astrology and real world events.

That's not a correlation. It's cherry picking. It's a coincidence.

 

[Aquila]

This is exactly what I mean. You ignore the peak in August, and the fact that US and worldwide news articles about lead toys were declining with a small peak in early September, but say theres an incredible correlation between astrology and real world events.

That's not a correlation. It's cherry picking. It's a coincidence.

I'm going to answer this one first as I want to address the broader issue of correlation in following replies.

OK, suppose we analyze what was going on astrologically for August 1, 2OO7, which is, when the Google Trends graph seem to peak. I have uploaded an event chart for August 1, 2007, calculated, arbitrarily, for 11am in Washington, D.C.. It was calculated by Astrodiensnt (www.astro.com)
We can see Saturn, still in Leo, in the 11th house of the chart. Please look at the aspects that Saturn is making to the other planets. It is conjunct Venus in Virgo, with a 7 degree orb. The exact conjunction of Venus and Saturn was a few days earlier. Saturn is also square Mars in Taurus and opposite Neptune in Aquarius. Venus is square Jupiter. When planets are conjunct, like Venus and Saturn, the aspect made from one of the planets - in this case Venus to Jupiter, would carry over to the other planet, in this case Saturn. So we have a T-square between Mars and "Venus-Saturn" and Jupiter, and an opposition with Neptune. We can see these strong aspects in red. As the Sun travelled through Leo in August, it "triggered" this T-square, symbolically shining and shedding light on the energy of the above planets.

As we mentioned above, Virgo is associated with health. The long standing Saturn-Neptune opposition (in aspect most of 2007 and peaking in June) symbolizes the polarity between Leo subjects such as love-affairs, children and creativity, and Aquarius subjects, such as social organization, social communication of news such as through television, and technology. The opposition perhaps correlated with the many news spories (Aquarius) about the deceptivness (Neptune) in lead(Saturn) in children's toys (Leo)and was now in fact past the exact oppostion (Saturn was at 25 Leo and Neptune had turned retrograde and gone back to 20 Aquarius).

Out of all the planets in the T-square, Neptune and Saturn are the slowest, so they can be seen as the sort of bedrock that all faster moving planets (Jupiter, Mars, Venus, Mercury, Moon and Sun) would be triggered by.On August 1, we could say that the past Saturn-Neptune opposition was being "revived" in a way, by all the slower moving planet, bringing it once again to people's attention, but this time, with Venus in Virgo. These planets symbolized that now people not only were outraged at the deceptiveness of China, (or wherever), but the issue now focussed on health, and what we could do about it in a practical way - Virgo is an earth sign. The waning conjunction of Venus and Saturn was a sort of preview of what was going to occur when Saturn itself would enter Virgo.

 

[Aquila]

What is it about the planetary positions at the time of birth that directly causes fate to lock in at that moment?

How does this:

we see that although Uranus was trine Neptune, his Jupiter and Saturn - conjunct in Taurus, are square his Sun in Aquarius and Pluto in Leo.

cause this to happen:

This "T-square" would put a tremendous focus on power, control and secrecy (Pluto). It is in fixed signs, which are, well, very fixed and not very adaptable.

And if the planets do not cause it to happen, then what is the process from the planets to human behavior? Or from planetary alignment to the forumlation of a predestined personality birth chart by which we can all use our free will to deviate from?

ETA: Sorry! She!

Sorry I didn't get to this yesterday.
These questions form the basis of what modern astrology, which is not a science, but a theory, a philosophy and a language, is trying to explain.
Firstly, nothing is predestined. The pattern of the horoscope only shows "karma" (literally meaning "action", and having the connotation of "cause and effect". A person's birthchart is merely a map of the sky for particular point in time, and since the motion of planets and stars seems to follow natural laws, that pattern is dependent on what went on before.

Many astrologers admit that they cannot find a process that links planets to human behavior, so we are left with a big mystery. One of the ways that astrologers reconcile this mystery is by trying to see the process "from a higher perspective" - from above the 3-dimensional view of material existance. They see everything (material and spiritual) as all in a kind of "cosmic soup". I'm not saying that this is the same as concepts formulated by physicists (such as String Theory), but it is just as analogy.

 

[Aquila]

Aquila,
Are you aware of Geoffrey Dean? What do you think of the journey he has made from astrologer to skeptic?

Yes. Good for him.
I am probably going to give you lots of fuel for your arguments by saying this, but I actually think that many more astrologers might turn skeptic in the coming few years. The "reason", I mean correlation, is because Pluto is about to enter Capricorn in January 2008, putting a tremendous emphasis on empirical science and the material perspective.

But the number of people who support astrology, or their celebrity status won't really make a difference to students who see it as something other than an empirical science. It will probably do astrology as service because it will weed out the people who either cannot or will not be open to a spiritual, non-physical dimension to life.

As mentioned in the posts above, astrology is a question of balance. Astrologers do not neglect science - many of them do come from scientific backgrounds, just as scientists do not neccessarily neglect spirituality. It is only when one side this polarity becomes unbalanced that we get into trouble.

 

[Aquila]

Astrology does not accomodate science as was discussed above. It doesn't in any way accomodate psychology, other than to hit home the concepts of suggestibility and maybe some Gestalt stuff. As far as morals- good and evil, those are concepts you've chosen to see in the stars, when really, they're just... stars.

There are several types of astrology, one of which is spiritual astrology. All the branches of astrology use the same planets "out there" in the sky, but spiritual astrology sees these planets as corresponding to the "inner holy planets". These are the ones used in disciplines such as yoga and kaballah.

Here is the link to website that I think does a good job of explaining this system, that I posted earlier.
http://www.borndigital.com/tree/index.html

But stars are pretty damned cool anyways! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star

If we long to believe that the stars rise and set for us, that we are the reason there is a Universe, does science do us a disservice in deflating our conceits?
Carl Sagan

I don't know anyone who thinks that the stars rise and set for us. Most astrologers I know are theists, many of them Jews or Christians. The "wonder" that astronomers (and everyone) feels when they look out at the night sky is correlation in kaballah to the concept or sphere on the Tree Of Life known as "Splendor" - the orange circle on the diagram at the website above.

 

[Garrette]

I'm going to answer this one first as I want to address the broader issue of correlation in following replies.

OK, suppose we analyze what was going on astrologically for August 1, 2OO7, which is, when the Google Trends graph seem to peak. I have uploaded an event chart for August 1, 2007, calculated, arbitrarily, for 11am in Washington, D.C.. It was calculated by Astrodiensnt (www.astro.com)

If it is calculated for 11am in Washington, D.C., then to whom does it apply? And where in Washington, D.C.? You have mentioned how precision matters. Washington, D.C. is a large place, sprawling across the map. Is it for Downtown D.C.? The Washington Monument? The Capitol building? The White House? The distances between them are not trivial, at least not according to your implications about the importance of precision.

We can see Saturn, still in Leo, in the 11th house of the chart. Please look at the aspects that Saturn is making to the other planets. It is conjunct Venus in Virgo, with a 7 degree orb. The exact conjunction of Venus and Saturn was a few days earlier.

And again, we find that you abandon precision. The conjunction wasn't even for the day of the chart yet you are willing to ascribe results to it.

Saturn is also square Mars in Taurus and opposite Neptune in Aquarius. Venus is square Jupiter. When planets are conjunct, like Venus and Saturn, the aspect made from one of the planets - in this case Venus to Jupiter, would carry over to the other planet, in this case Saturn.

Is this always the case, or is the aspect only carried over when it helps the chart?

So we have a T-square between Mars and "Venus-Saturn" and Jupiter, and an opposition with Neptune. We can see these strong aspects in red. As the Sun travelled through Leo in August, it "triggered" this T-square, symbolically shining and shedding light on the energy of the above planets.

Meaning what?

As we mentioned above, Virgo is associated with health. The long standing Saturn-Neptune opposition (in aspect most of 2007 and peaking in June) symbolizes the polarity between Leo subjects such as love-affairs, children and creativity, and Aquarius subjects, such as social organization, social communication of news such as through television, and technology. The opposition perhaps correlated with the many news spories (Aquarius) about the deceptivness (Neptune) in lead(Saturn) in children's toys (Leo)and was now in fact past the exact oppostion (Saturn was at 25 Leo and Neptune had turned retrograde and gone back to 20 Aquarius).

Let me see if I understand:

Leo can mean a lot of things like live-affairs, children, creativity, and a whole host of others.

Aquarius can mean a lot of things like social organization, social communication of news, technology, and a whole host of others.

Neptune can mean a lot of things including deceptiveness and a whole host of others.

Saturn can mean a lot of things including lead and a whole host of others.

Therefore the recall of toys made in China due to lead-based paint was because Saturn was at 25 Leo and Neptune was at 20 Aquarius.

What accounts for the recall that began yesterday? The one in which the date-rape drug plays a role?

Out of all the planets in the T-square, Neptune and Saturn are the slowest, so they can be seen as the sort of bedrock that all faster moving planets (Jupiter, Mars, Venus, Mercury, Moon and Sun) would be triggered by.On August 1, we could say that the past Saturn-Neptune opposition was being "revived" in a way, by all the slower moving planet, bringing it once again to people's attention, but this time, with Venus in Virgo.

This is internally contradictory. Do Neptune and Saturn trigger the faster moving planets or do the faster moving planets trigger/revie Neptune and Saturn?

Or is it dependent upon what conclusion you want to reach?

These planets symbolized that now people not only were outraged

Whoa, there. Where did outrage come in? And which people? Are the Chinese outraged by it? Are all Americans outraged? (Hint: No. Some see it as a good thing that China has public problems)

at the deceptiveness of China, (or wherever),

What do you mean "wherever?" Astrology can't even narrow it to a country for us?

but the issue now focussed on health, and what we could do about it in a practical way - Virgo is an earth sign.

So Virgo isn't the source of the outrage you mentioned earlier; got it.

And what is the "practical way" that it tells us?

The waning conjunction of Venus and Saturn was a sort of preview of what was going to occur when Saturn itself would enter Virgo.

It was a preview? So astrology can be predictive after all?

Or do you mean "preview" in a retroactive sense?

 

[Hokulele]

There are several types of astrology, one of which is spiritual astrology. All the branches of astrology use the same planets "out there" in the sky, but spiritual astrology sees these planets as corresponding to the "inner holy planets". These are the ones used in disciplines such as yoga and kaballah.

How do the "outer" and "inner" planets communicate with each other? How do you define an "out there" planet? Is Pluto a planet? Ceres? Icarus? Titan? Ganymede? The Sun? Spica? Antares?

I don't know anyone who thinks that the stars rise and set for us. Most astrologers I know are theists, many of them Jews or Christians. The "wonder" that astronomers (and everyone) feels when they look out at the night sky is correlation in kaballah to the concept or sphere on the Tree Of Life known as "Splendor" - the orange circle on the diagram at the website above.

Umm no. The wonder that astronomers feel has nothing to do with the kaballah.

 

[Garrette]

These questions form the basis of what modern astrology, which is not a science, but a theory,

I think you mean a collection of contradictory hypotheses.

a philosophy and a language, is trying to explain.

How is astrology either a philosophy or a language? I see no aspects of it that justify those labels.

Firstly, nothing is predestined.

Nor is it distinguishable from not having astrology at all, it seems. So far we have learned that astrology cannot predict anything and that it cannot be used retroactively to determine which person was born when/where. I am seriously trying to figure out what it does that distinguishes it from non-astrology.

The pattern of the horoscope only shows "karma" (literally meaning "action", and having the connotation of "cause and effect".

Which astrologic system makes this claim?

A person's birthchart is merely a map of the sky for particular point in time,

What is it called when the karmic interpretation is added?

and since the motion of planets and stars seems to follow natural laws, that pattern is dependent on what went on before.

They actually do follow natural laws; they do not merely seem to. As such, it is rather obvious and trivial to claim that the "pattern is dependent on what went on before." This is far more an argument in favor of astronomy than astrology.

Many astrologers admit that they cannot find a process that links planets to human behavior,

A process would be nice but is a step beyond where we actually are. Show the link first. Since you have admitted astrology can neither predict anything nor determine which person was born when/where, I am interested in what your take is on what comprises the link. Seriously.

so we are left with a big mystery.

No, we are not, unless you mean the mystery of why so many people believe in the existence of a system which indistinguishable from its non-existence.

One of the ways that astrologers reconcile this mystery is by trying to see the process "from a higher perspective"

Mysteries are not reconciled; they are solved (or not solved). More than that, they are first demonstrated to actually exist. Astrology has not even progressed to the point of establishing that the mystery exists.

- from above the 3-dimensional view of material existance.

Nonsensical words. How, exactly, do astrologers get above the 3-dimensional view of material existence? You can argue that mathematicians and physicists and astronomers do that because they engage in physics and math that involves other dimensions. Astrologers do nothing of the sort; they plot the movements and positions of celestial bodies. The fact that they wrap heavenly charts in fluffy words does not mean that they move beyond 3 dimensions.

They see everything (material and spiritual) as all in a kind of "cosmic soup".

Excuse me, but this is also nonsensical and not at all profound or insightful. "Everything is one" is not new, not helpful, not as meaningful as the musings of real philosophers or astronomers or physicists, and not unique to astrologers.

I'm not saying that this is the same as concepts formulated by physicists (such as String Theory), but it is just as analogy.

And a poor one. Your earlier summation of the state of string theory was a bit off the mark, too.

 

[Aquila]

In other words, it can't predict a darn thing about me. If I'm a serial killer, it's because of my free will. If I'm President, it's because of the Uranus-Pluto conjuction.

No, you are taking just one aspect and making assumptions about the whole of astrology. Firstly, astrology cannot predict a person's behavior, end of argument. But in hindsight, if we were to analyse the whole chart, with all the planets and aspects, plus the environmental influences, we might see why one person became a president and one a criminal. For example, we might see in both charts that Jupiter (abundance) was in the person's second house (self-earned income). But one person could have a high paying job while the other could be a bank-robber. The bank robber would perhaps have other planets in aspect to Jupiter or to other significant points which would correlate with his poor or oppressive early environment which removed the possibility of getting a good education or high paying job.

That was a serious comment, now followed by a serious question: What can astrology do, specifically, that is distinguishable from not using astrology at all?

Yes, this is a serious question. Some astrologers have likened it to an "x-ray" which sees beyond surface appearances. It adds a spiritual dimension to life. To some people, astrology is the "middle ground" between atheism and religion. Astrology is a spiritual discipline, but it applies to everyone , no matter their ethnicity, economic status or gender. It does not have dogma like religion, and although it is not a science, it is at least based on something which observable to everyone (the movement of the planets), rather than a belief that is automatically placed on a person because of his or her ancestry.

 

[Hokulele]

Yes, this is a serious question. Some astrologers have likened it to an "x-ray" which sees beyond surface appearances. It adds a spiritual dimension to life. To some people, astrology is the "middle ground" between atheism and religion. Astrology is a spiritual discipline, but it applies to everyone , no matter their ethnicity, economic status or gender. It does not have dogma like religion, and although it is not a science, it is at least based on something which observable to everyone (the movement of the planets), rather than a belief that is automatically placed on a person because of his or her ancestry.

This doesn't really answer Garrette's question. What "spiritual dimension" does astrology access that cannot be attained without astrology? What exactly is a "spiritual dimension"? Why couldn't you substitute meteorology instead? More people observe and react to the weather than the movements of the planets.

And it apparently does have a dogma, which you have been dogmatically defending for the last several pages.

 

[Aquila]

I can see that you guys really don't like the idea of anything down here having to do with anything up in the sky. I suggest that we remove all words from the English dictionary that could be associated with this terrible, unscientific nonsense. Suggestions for removal:

*Days of the week - after all, they are based on Roman or Norse god myths which correspond to the planets.

*adjectives such as martial, jovial, saturnine, venal

*the word plutocrat, after all it's referring to a mythical the king of the underworld who astronomers later chose to call a planet.

*the words lunacy, or lunatic as they link behavior to the moon. Very unscientific.

*that liquid silver metal they used to put in themometers and is now questioned as a possible link to autism. We'll have to go back to calling it quicksilver.

*we'll have to change the chemical symbols for some of the elements, for example we can't have people thinking that gold (Au) had anything to do with the sun.

*we should probably ban the playing of Gustav Holst's "The Planets".

*we should probably burn all religious books as they are full of stars, crosses, crescents - people might think that these symbols were something to do with astrology.

 

[Hokulele]

No, we are suggesting that what you are pushing is unproven drivel. Of course there are connections between things on earth and things in the sky. No one is denying that the tides are caused by anything other than the moon and the sun. (Funny how that tidbit wasn't in your little list). The main difference is that with the tides, we can observe the effects of the sun and moon in a reliable, repeatable manner. We have some idea of how gravity works, and how it could cause the tides. We can predict when the next high or low tide will occur, and how high or low it will be. We can do this months in advance.

Once your astrology can show this type of reliability and testability, I will be interested. Until then, it is amusing, but no more than any other wild-eyed nonsense.

 

[Aquila]

And it apparently does have a dogma, which you have been dogmatically defending for the last several pages.

OK, that's it! I wouldn't have to defend astrology with all this "dogma" if you guys didn't think that the JREF forum was some kind of repository for the only truth. I thought that this forum was meant to be an educational exchange, but all I'm hearing from you is skepticism which supports empirical science, instead of skepticism which supports a journey to the truth, whatever that they be. I have admitted several times that astrology is not a science and am doing my best to try to explain what it is, and all I get is you nominating your own poeple who defend their empirical science viewpoints for some sort of brownie points.

Oh, by the way, you all might like to take a look at this wikipedia article about Sir Isaac "alchemy" Newton.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac_Newton's_occult_studies

 

[Garrette]

First off, let me offer a preemptive apology. I am not trying to be snarky or rude, but I think I will likely come off that way and probably have already. It's a combination of recent fatigue and long-time revisiting of the same topics with the same objections to the same flawed arguments. I appreciate Aquila being polite as he/she has unfailingly been and wish I could be as polite.

No, you are taking just one aspect and making assumptions about the whole of astrology.

No. I am taking both what you give me and what I know of astrology (which is not nearly what Hokulele and others know) and stating it back to you in a form that demonstrates the logical conclusions to which your arguments lead.

You have said astrology cannot predict anything, so I was right about that part.

You have also said that you (or expert astrologers) cannot take detailed information about a person's life and use it to determine time/place of birth.

You have also said that environment plays a role in determining how a person's life turns out--perhaps a greater role than astrology itself.

You have also implied and are now saying fairly clearly that astrology can look at a person's life and retroactively explain why it turned out how it did, regardless of how it turned out. Astrology can explain every outcome. Ergo every outcome is possible regardless of the astrological birthchart. Ergo astrology is indistinguishable from non-astrology.

Firstly, astrology cannot predict a person's behavior, end of argument.

Got it. I got it earlier. I said it earlier.

But in hindsight, if we were to analyse the whole chart, with all the planets and aspects, plus the environmental influences, we might see why one person became a president and one a criminal.

Does it do it as well as psychologists? Forensic psychologists?

Does it do it better than a reasonably intelligent, reasonably well-educated random adult provided with all the same data except for the astrological information?

What you are saying is this: Give me everything there is to know factually about a person and I will interpret the birthchart to account for it.

Psychologists can account for personal outcomes without resorting to the stars.

By your own admission, astrology does absolutely nothing in advance and does absolutely nothing already accomplished without resorting to astrology.

So I ask again: How is astrology distinguishable from non-astrology?

For example, we might see in both charts that Jupiter (abundance) was in the person's second house (self-earned income). But one person could have a high paying job while the other could be a bank-robber. The bank robber would perhaps have other planets in aspect to Jupiter or to other significant points which would correlate with his poor or oppressive early environment which removed the possibility of getting a good education or high paying job.

Perhaps perhaps.

But a psychologist could simply look at the environmental factors you have admitted you need to account for and reach conclusions based on those.

Yes, this is a serious question. Some astrologers have likened it to an "x-ray" which sees beyond surface appearances.

Give me an example of one statement made by astrology that is seeing beyond surface appearances which cannot also be made by psychologists.

It adds a spiritual dimension to life.

Balderdash. If it adds anything, then it is predictive. Saying "you're a bank robber because Mars was such-and-such in regard to Saturn" isn't spiritual.

To some people, astrology is the "middle ground" between atheism and religion.

Then they understand none of the three.

Astrology is a spiritual discipline,

I think you need to define "spiritual" before I accept this claim.

but it applies to everyone , no matter their ethnicity, economic status or gender.

Anything factual applies regardless of those factors. You have yet to demonstrate that astrology is factual.

It does not have dogma like religion,

Not all religions have dogma.

and although it is not a science, it is at least based on something which observable to everyone (the movement of the planets),

If I propose a discipline called JellyBeanology based on the position of the loose Jelly Beans in my desk drawer, then that discipline is based on something observable. That is a far cry from saying that the alleged link between the Jelly Beans and someone's life is observable; it isn't. Similarly, the link between astrology and someone's life is not observable, either.

rather than a belief that is automatically placed on a person because of his or her ancestry.

Both religion and astrology (which, if it is spiritual as you say, is akin to religion) seem to be without evidence.

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

I can see that you guys really don't like the idea of anything down here having to do with anything up in the sky. I suggest that we remove all words from the English dictionary that could be associated with this terrible, unscientific nonsense. Suggestions for removal:

*Days of the week - after all, they are based on Roman or Norse god myths which correspond to the planets.

*adjectives such as martial, jovial, saturnine, venal

*the word plutocrat, after all it's referring to a mythical the king of the underworld who astronomers later chose to call a planet.

*the words lunacy, or lunatic as they link behavior to the moon. Very unscientific.

*that liquid silver metal they used to put in themometers and is now questioned as a possible link to autism. We'll have to go back to calling it quicksilver.

*we'll have to change the chemical symbols for some of the elements, for example we can't have people thinking that gold (Au) had anything to do with the sun.

*we should probably ban the playing of Gustav Holst's "The Planets".

*we should probably burn all religious books as they are full of stars, crosses, crescents - people might think that these symbols were something to do with astrology.

Don't be silly. Or, rather, don't be sillier.

Asstrology does not work. It has no predictive powers. Nothing you have posted so far would convince an intelligent chicken.

You've responed to the posts of others. How about mine?

 

[Hokulele]

OK, that's it! I wouldn't have to defend astrology with all this "dogma" if you guys didn't think that the JREF forum was some kind of repository for the only truth. I thought that this forum was meant to be an educational exchange, but all I'm hearing from you is skepticism which supports empirical science, instead of skepticism which supports a journey to the truth, whatever that they be. I have admitted several times that astrology is not a science and am doing my best to try to explain what it is, and all I get is you nominating your own poeple who defend their empirical science viewpoints for some sort of brownie points.

Oh, by the way, you all might like to take a look at this wikipedia article about Sir Isaac "alchemy" Newton.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac_Newton's_occult_studies

And regarding Newton, that is a perfect example of how to attain truth. We take all ideas (including the alchemy and religious assertions), test them, and see which ones hold up to scrutiny. You seem to be upset at this testing process, which implies that you do not have any interest in reaching truth, merely confirming your beliefs.

As I mentioned, if astrology could pass just one test, hold up to scrutiny in just one area, I would be interested. It doesn't.

 

[Madalch]

I can see that you guys really don't like the idea of anything down here having to do with anything up in the sky.

I don't see how anything that's been said in this thread has anything to do with your response. We don't like your attempts to blame the stars for what happens on earth, but many of us do appreciate mythology (which includes astrology).

the word plutocrat, after all it's referring to a mythical the king of the underworld who astronomers later chose to call a planet.

No, "Plutos" was the Greek word for wealth. Pluton was the king of the underworld.

Even if your etymology was true, deriving the word from the name of the same mythological deity that a planet(oid) was named after would not mean that the word was named after the planet, or had anything to do with astrology. Would you claim that we'd have to avoid The Amazing Randi because he had an asteroid named after him?

we'll have to change the chemical symbols for some of the elements, for example we can't have people thinking that gold (Au) had anything to do with the sun.

How, pray tell, does Au (from aurum) have anything to do with the sun? Or are you thinking of helium?

we should probably burn all religious books as they are full of stars, crosses, crescents - people might think that these symbols were something to do with astrology.

You get started on that. Let us know how it goes.

 

[Garrette]

OK, that's it! I wouldn't have to defend astrology with all this "dogma" if you guys didn't think that the JREF forum was some kind of repository for the only truth. I thought that this forum was meant to be an educational exchange, but all I'm hearing from you is skepticism which supports empirical science, instead of skepticism which supports a journey to the truth, whatever that they be. I have admitted several times that astrology is not a science and am doing my best to try to explain what it is, and all I get is you nominating your own poeple who defend their empirical science viewpoints for some sort of brownie points.

Oh, by the way, you all might like to take a look at this wikipedia article about Sir Isaac "alchemy" Newton.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac_Newton%27s_occult_studies

Don't be silly, Aquila. No one here is claiming JREF as a repository of any sort, let alone of the only truth. We are merely doing three things:

1. Asking you to describe your claim specifically

2. Asking you to provide evidence of your claim

3. Pointing out the wholes in your evidence and your claim

And your bit about Newton and alchemy is precisely on point. Newton's math and physics were impeccable; they are respected for that. His alchemical pursuits produced nothing and had no evidentiary basis. Therefore, those ideas are discarded. Completely opposite your implication that we are a cult.

When we discuss X it doesn't matter if someone is wrong about Y; what matters is his evidence for (or against) X.


Edit: Drat. Beaten to the punch by Gord, Hokulele, and Madalch.

 

[ben m]

Firstly, astrology cannot predict a person's behavior, end of argument. But in hindsight, if we were to analyse the whole chart, with all the planets and aspects, plus the environmental influences, we might see why one person became a president and one a criminal. For example, we might see in both charts that Jupiter (abundance) was in the person's second house (self-earned income).

We don't doubt that you can look at a person's chart and point out things that sound like correspondences. You've done it several times. You have NOT answered the important question: what about the things that sound like correspondences for any birthday whatsoever?

There's so much going on in these charts; you have thirty or a hundred possible "symbols" to choose from on any date whatsoever. If I told you that John Lennon was born on Jan 1 1900, you'd say "Oh, look, I see music in this sign, and humor in this other sign, and strife in this other sign which must indicate his murder." If I told you that John Lennon was born on Feb 16 1983, you'd say "Look, I see music in this cusp, and a group of four in this conjunction---indicating the Beatles---and a warning in this planet indicating the murder." Try it again using April 1 2563 and you'll say, "Oh, this T-square denotes peace and love, and Uranus talks about strained friendship like the Beatles' breakup, and there are signs of artistic and spiritual instincts at the zenith." Or something like this.

This is a really important point, so please don't ignore it or dodge it. Please answer directly: what do you think you would see if you read a chart for the wrong date? If the answer is "I would find correspondences", then astrology doesn't work. (Please answer: do you agree with this statement?) If the answer is, "no, the correspondences would not be as good if you got the date wrong", then astrology is testable. The test could be:

a) You read a short biography of an (unnamed) person.
b) We give you three (or more? or two?) birthdates, one real and two fake.
c) You "do your thing" looking for correspondences between the birthdates and the biography.
d) You tell us which birthdate has "real-looking" correspondences and which ones look wrong.

I'm happy to type up some short bios of minor historical figures, if you'd like to attempt this test.