Lindaland
  Astrology
  scientists have found astrology to be rubbish (Page 1)

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
profile | register | preferences | faq | search

UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone!
This topic is 2 pages long:   1  2 
next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author Topic:   scientists have found astrology to be rubbish
Cat
Newflake

Posts: 0
From: USA
Registered: Oct 2009

posted August 19, 2003 05:53 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Cat     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
"scientists have found astrology to be rubbish"

Well they would wouldn't they
Actually, it's hardly surprising that scientists would wish to discredit astrology, and to be honest, it's really not worth getting into an argument them about it What I do find interesting though is the amount of time and energy they feel the need to put into trying to discredit it. Wonder why that is And who's Dr Dean (I've never heard of him) so I have no idea why he says he'll be considered to be a "turncoat". Now if Liz Greene suddenly started "dissing" astrology she would be considered to be a turncoat - but she would never diss astrology....

Anyway, here's an article that was in the Sunday Telegraph newpaper this weekend.....

Astrologers fail to predict proof they are wrong (17/08/2003)

Good news for rational, level-headed Virgoans everywhere: just as you might have predicted, scientists have found astrology to be rubbish, writes Science Correspondent Robert Matthews.

Good news for rational, level-headed Virgoans everywhere: just as you might have predicted, scientists have found astrology to be rubbish.

Its central claim - that our human characteristics are moulded by the influence of the Sun, Moon and planets at the time of our birth - appears to have been debunked once and for all and beyond doubt by the most thorough scientific study ever made into it.

For several decades, researchers tracked more than 2,000 people - most of them born within minutes of each other. According to astrology, the subject should have had very similar traits.

Starry eyed: Grant
The babies were originally recruited as part of a medical study begun in London in 1958 into how the circumstances of birth can affect future health. More than 2,000 babies born in early March that year were registered and their development monitored at regular intervals.

Researchers looked at more than 100 different characteristics, including occupation, anxiety levels, marital status, aggressiveness, sociability, IQ levels and ability in art, sport, mathematics and reading - all of which astrologers claim can be gauged from birth charts.

The scientists failed to find any evidence of similarities between the "time twins", however. They reported in the current issue of the Journal of Consciousness Studies: "The test conditions could hardly have been more conducive to success . . . but the results are uniformly negative."

Analysis of the research was carried out by Geoffrey Dean, a scientist and former astrologer based in Perth, Australia, and Ivan Kelly, a psychologist at the University of Saskatchewan, Canada.

Dr Dean said the results undermined the claims of astrologers, who typically work with birth data far less precise than that used in the study. "They sometimes argue that times of birth just a minute apart can make all the difference by altering what they call the 'house cusps'," he said. "But in their work, they are happy to take whatever time they can get from a client."

The findings caused alarm and anger in astrological circles yesterday. Roy Gillett, the president of the Astrological Association of Great Britain, said the study's findings should be treated "with extreme caution" and accused Dr Dean of seeking to "discredit astrology".

Frank McGillion, a consultant to the Southampton-based Research Group for the Critical Study of Astrology, said of the newly published work: "It is simplistic and highly selective and does not cover all of the research." He added that he would lodge a complaint with the editors of the journal.

Astrologers have for centuries claimed to be able to extract deep insights into the personality and destiny of people using nothing more than the details of the time and place of birth.

Astrology has been growing in popularity. Surveys suggest that a majority of people in Britain believe in it, compared with only 13 per cent 50 years ago. The Association of Professional Astrologers claims that 80 per cent of Britons read star columns, and psychological studies have found that 60 per cent regularly read their horoscopes.

Despite the scepticism of scientists, astrology has grown to be a huge worldwide business, spawning thousands of telephone lines, internet sites and horoscope columns in newspapers and magazines.

It seems that no sector of society is immune to its attraction. A recent survey found that a third of science students subscribed to some aspects of astrology, while some supposedly hard-headed businessmen now support a thriving market in "financial astrology" - paying for predictions of trends such as the rise and fall of the stock market. Astrology supplements have been known to increase newspaper circulation figures and papers are prepared to pay huge sums to the most popular stargazers.

Some of the most popular figures in the field, such as Russell Grant, Mystic Meg and Shelley von Strunckel, can earn £600,000 or more a year.

A single profitable astrology website can be worth as much as £50 million.

When the Daily Mail discovered that its expert on the zodiac, Jonathan Cainer, was about to leave the newspaper in 1999, it reportedly offered him a £1 million salary and a £1 million bonus to stay. He still preferred the offer at the Daily Express: no salary but all the money from his telephone lines.

The time-twins study is only the start of the bad news for astrologers, however. Dr Dean and Prof Kelly also sought to determine whether stargazers could match a birth chart to the personality profile of a person among a random selection.

They reviewed the evidence from more than 40 studies involving over 700 astrologers, but found the results turned out no better than guesswork.

The success rate did not improve even when astrologers were given all the information they asked for and were confident they had made the right choice.

Dr Dean said the consistency of the findings weighed heavily against astrology.

"It has no acceptable mechanism, its principles are invalid and it has failed hundreds of tests," he said. "But no hint of these problems will be found in astrology books which, in effect, are exercises in deception."

Dr Dean is ready for a torrent of criticism. He said: "I'm probably the most hated person in astrology because I'm regarded as a turncoat."

IP: Logged

Kat
unregistered
posted August 19, 2003 07:22 PM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Thanks Cat!

2000 people who are born at the same time still should not have the same characteristics. We know that.My guess is they did not factor in different locations of birth, free will, etc.

Astrology, to me, is meant to be used as a guide not an "etched in stone" pre-biography of someone. I think alot of people view astrology as something outside of themselves that predetermines their life. occasionally I have to remind myself that none of my chart's "predictions" HAS TO BE. We look for answers outside of ourselves rather than looking from within. Clearly the researchers have also come from that point of view. Also I think that those 2000 people are still probably alive - judging someone else's life or spiritual path is a really tough call. I personally don't even think God judges us.

The other day someone showed me a picture of her new boyfriend. I said "Oh he's a Pisces" He was!She described him as being so quickly head-over-heals in love. Or at least in love with love. He just gave off a Pisces vibe. I once guess four people's signs when I first met them. (I must say they were pretty impressed and I was awfully pleased with myself.)Now how did I even know that without even seeing a chart!

I must say that I am concerned over the numerous people who are in it for the money. Many astrologers have even limited knowledge of the subject and are just good at "winging it" through a reading. A doctor who was not thoroughly knowledgable of medicine would eventually be weeded out of the field or sued. I use this doctor analogy because some astrologers charge doctor's rates per hour. I once went to a well-known astrologer who has locally and semi-nationally done much for the astrology field and gave me a terrible reading. It deeply affected me at a point in time which I was vulnerable. She charged me the same amount (as it ironically turned out)as her ex-husband who was my shrink. (neither one of them was very good anyway.) Years later someone I know who is an extremely good astrologer/my teacher gave me a reading. when I brought up the stuff the former astrologer said - she point out how she was incorrect. I guess the lesson to me is know who I am - know where I'm going -and it will all turn out no matter how good or bad my chart is.

Kat

IP: Logged

Carlo
unregistered
posted August 19, 2003 07:40 PM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
from a Pisces woman with a Virgo Moon, who was thrown out of England for her beliefs...


I suppose the worst criticism, and the least called for, comes from a few medical scientists who use arguments that are no longer scientifically valid and are unworthy of their own status in the world of science. But scientists generally love to argue, and it is rare that a group of scientists is in complete accord, even when talking about their own field. I always wonder why some scientists are so reluctant to study astrology, yet are so ardent in refuting it. For instance, if they feel it is a superstition, long dead and buried, why bother to bring it up so frequently? If it is nonsense, then someone should examine it thoroughly and come up with a valid thesis against it. I defy any thinking person to study astrology seriously for a year and still maintain that it is not valid. Astrology is based on the laws of the universe that are the very laws of science, of action and reaction, and of cause and effect.

~ Sybil Leek, My Life in Astrology, 1972


All human beings have magic in them.
The secret is to know how to use this magic,
and astrology is a vital tool for doing just that...

~ Sybil Leek, ibid

I guess scientists will never learn how to use the magic although several scientists who have studied astrology have been converted and written books on astrology, just as old Sybil suspected...

why here's the most important one now, called the Father of Medical Astrology. He and his father were both biochemists...

http://www.lovestarz.com/jansky.html

several chapters of his book right there online...

Love,
Carlo

IP: Logged

Lunargirl
unregistered
posted August 19, 2003 10:43 PM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I saw the article too, and noticed it was replete with quite inflammatory language, and generalities -- quite biased.

Such as referring to astrology as some kind of infection (emphasis is mine):

quote:
It seems that no sector of society is immune to its attraction.

There was not enough specific information in the article that would either A) make sense to an astrologer, whether professional, amateur, or student B) explain what methodology they used to arrive at their results. How can we know from this article what they put in, and what they left out?

Is the Sunday Telegraph considered a good newspaper with thorough reporting?

But Lunar's larf -- they said

quote:
According to astrology, the subject should have had very similar traits.
Well according to moi, the _last_ sign to pick in order to determine similarity would have to be artistic, mutable, scattered and loveable Pisces! Talk about a sign with scads of variation built-in...

Here's a link to a major British astro-debunking site, that has excerpts of the report. I look forward to reading some of it myself, because the artcle is so poorly-written. http://www.astrozero.btinternet.co.uk/Science.htm

IP: Logged

lovely*
unregistered
posted August 20, 2003 01:44 AM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Lunar, when i saw those two words "early March" in this article, i thought.. ohhhh nooooooo!! and then giggled to myself.
ITA with you as im sure others will too. i mean what other sign is more associated with adaptability, change and emotion?

pisces is the one sign i find very hard to read. i too (like kat) have gotten very good at the guess-the-sign game, but i've yet to guess correctly with pisces. they do vary so much -- this was the last sign they should have used in the study (no pun intended) to compare. taurus or leo would have been the ideal signs to study.

cheers everyone,

melissa


IP: Logged

Randall
Webmaster

Posts: 4783
From: The Goober Galaxy
Registered: Apr 2009

posted August 20, 2003 04:26 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Randall     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Astrology isn't a science. Science is used in its calculations, but astrology is part art, part science, part intuition. It is a tool for self-discovery and understanding. I view it as a Cosmic Map of the Soul. I don't think science will ever "prove" astrology, neither can it disprove it, because astrology (like the Soul and afterlife) is outside the narrow, albeit precisioned and organized, confines of science. Science and astrology are mutually exclusive, yet wholly complementary, spokes on the same Uni-versal wheel.

------------------
"Never mentally imagine for another that which you would not want to experience for yourself, since the mental image you send out inevitably comes back to you." Rebecca Clark

IP: Logged

Cat
Newflake

Posts: 0
From: USA
Registered: Oct 2009

posted August 20, 2003 04:31 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Cat     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Hi Everyone
Thanks for your thoughts. Got to dash out now but will check out the links you're given later

Hi Lovely
Yes I giggled as well when I saw they're chosen Pisceans for their "study". No offence to any Pisceans, you're all lovely people - I'm thinking more of the Neptunean influence and we all know Neptune likes to confuse and makes things hard to see clearly.
Sue

PS: Can you imagine if they'd picked a group of Virgo's for their study....we'd have picked holes/ found fault in ever argument they came up with Guess that's why Dr Dean didn't choose us for his study after all the article does say he used to be an astrologer

IP: Logged

Cat
Newflake

Posts: 0
From: USA
Registered: Oct 2009

posted August 20, 2003 04:38 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Cat     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Hi Lunargirl
Yes the Sunday Telegraph is considered a good newspaper....second to "The Times". I was surprised to see this particular newpaper would cover such an article, I would have thought it belonged more in one of the tabloids.
Sue

IP: Logged

FishKitten
unregistered
posted August 20, 2003 01:27 PM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I'm with Lovely...2000 Pisces ended up not fitting into any easily defined roles or structures. Well, duh. Maybe that actually proves astrology IS accurate. (lol) Maybe next they should try to prove or disprove scientifically whether or not there is a god or whether emotions really exist. (Sure people SAY they feel happy, sad, angry, etc. but where's the scientific proof?) ...more laughter...

IP: Logged

StarLover33
unregistered
posted August 20, 2003 02:20 PM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Psychology and Psychiatry are considered sciences, and those two are the most imprecise scientific crap of them all. Although no offense to any genuine people that truly help without astrology.

But still...

"Oh no, I must take these pills for my psychiatrist told me I have a SHOPPING DISORDER."

-StarLover

IP: Logged

Randall
Webmaster

Posts: 4783
From: The Goober Galaxy
Registered: Apr 2009

posted August 20, 2003 04:10 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Randall     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Psychology is scientific with its small sect called behaviorism; otherwise, I agree with Starlover. Most of what psychologists believe is imprecise (to put it mildly), and psychiatry is just a front for drug-peddling.

------------------
"Never mentally imagine for another that which you would not want to experience for yourself, since the mental image you send out inevitably comes back to you." Rebecca Clark

IP: Logged

Carlo
unregistered
posted August 21, 2003 01:48 AM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Using Ptolemy’s system of correspondences, Hippocrates, the father of modern medicine, built his philosophical system. Today every new doctor must swear to uphold the code of medical ethics known as the Hippocratic Oath. And it was the great Hippocrates himself who reminded all practitioners of the medical arts that no one could do an adequate job of healing the sick without a basic knowledge of astrological principles. Hippocrates had discovered what most modern practitioners have forgotten or overlooked: that astrology can make an important contribution to the healing process as well as to maintenance of good physical health.

However, before we get too carried away by the importance of astrology to the medical profession, let’s try to keep it in proper perspective. The ancient sages never considered astrology as a replacement for medical procedures. At its highest and best, astrology is only a diagnostic tool, to be used by the doctor as only one of many important tools and tests in the diagnosis and prognosis of disease conditions. However, the importance of astrology as a diagnostic tool in the doctor’s “bag of tricks” has been sadly underrated and needs to be given much more emphasis by present-day medical practitioners.

Astrology can be put to many uses. For example, certain groups have chosen to incorporate the teachings of astrology into their particular brand of religious belief. However, this does not make astrology “star worship.” To call astrology star worship because certain people give a metaphysical interpretation to the natal chart would be like calling meteorology “weather worship” because the American Indians chose to worship a rain god or the Incas a sun god. Zoology is not “animal worship” just because certain primitive cultures chose to worship the bull as sacred, because the Indians hold the cow sacred or because Christians worship Jesus as the “lamb of God!”

I believe that astrology is used for the greatest good when it is considered as one set of basic symbols (not unlike our alphabet) to better understand and express our relationship to our environment. In the hands of the astrologer-psychologist, it can be a most valuable tool in helping us understand our own behavior and how this behavior manifests from time to time in the symptoms of disease. It can help us understand why we think and act as we do. On the other hand, astrology has been used in divining the future, which is merely fortune-telling, and this has contributed largely to its disrepute. In fact, the practice of astrology is illegal in many municipalities, for what man fears, he attempts to protect himself from, and those who can forecast the future are feared.

~ Robert Carl Jansky

IP: Logged

wannabe_star
unregistered
posted August 21, 2003 06:40 AM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I read that article. It was such rubbish. They had taken pisceans from all over the world that had been born only 4 mins apart and studied them.
They had also got astrologers to try and guess the person from their personal chart. It sounded very scientific.....NOT!
As a Scientist myself I was surprised at their approach and like everything else Astrology is not a precise Science.
How many times at school did you do an experiment that actually worked? Once maybe! Or did you fudge your results constantly to prove a theory that had been carved in stone?!

IP: Logged

lovely*
unregistered
posted August 21, 2003 01:40 PM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
cat, if dr. dean was an astrologer he shouldve known better--therefore this leads me to beleive he chose pisceans purposely.
--and i hear you on virgos, we would be all over and in those scientists narrow little brains, with comments, questions..critisisms. on second thought, i wonder what doc dean's sign is. could be a virgo? does anyone know?

fishkitten, good point on god and emotions. but emotions are chemical and are proven with release of certain chemicals in the brain, dopamine, seratonin, and other neurotransmitters.. but god on the other hand, well..most scientist do not believe in god either.

ps. i gather from your screenname you are a fish?

IP: Logged

Randall
Webmaster

Posts: 4783
From: The Goober Galaxy
Registered: Apr 2009

posted August 21, 2003 01:48 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Randall     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I was going to compliment you on your wise words, Carlo, but then I saw what you wrote was a quote--so my compliments to you on your choice of the quote.

------------------
"Never mentally imagine for another that which you would not want to experience for yourself, since the mental image you send out inevitably comes back to you." Rebecca Clark

IP: Logged

Cat
Newflake

Posts: 0
From: USA
Registered: Oct 2009

posted August 21, 2003 02:17 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Cat     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Hi Lovely
Yes I totally agree with your thinking re Dr Dean. I too was wondering about his chart....bet he's keeping that info a secret Bit of devious stuff in it I reckon as I too think he purposely chose Pisceans. I'm kind of wondering what his "motives" for doing this really were....maybe he's got a grudge against someone?
Sue

PS: Anyone who knows Dr Dean birth details...pleeeeze post them. That would be a lot of fun to look at his chart

IP: Logged

Kat
unregistered
posted August 21, 2003 06:37 PM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Yes, most scientists do not believe in God.
and most all if not all people want to be right and prove themselves to be right. So, they end up (or should I say we) arguing usually without considering other viewpoints.---It's an ego thing.

IP: Logged

lovely*
unregistered
posted August 22, 2003 02:31 AM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
another thought--try kabalah,, there is God and science all in one

IP: Logged

Carlo
unregistered
posted August 22, 2003 12:41 PM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
yes, thank the scientist for those learned words

"If astrology really works, it should be possible to design a test that satisfies both scientists and astrologers. Unfortunately, astrologers never specify what kind of test would be acceptable to them. They argue that astrological research is very difficult because scientific methods are too crude, intrusive or mechanical. Apparently, the alleged astrological effects are so subtle and hard to detect that we may wonder how astrologers had ever been able to identify them."

from http://home.planet.nl/~skepsis/astrot.html

Well, I have devised the perfect astrology test for any and all skeptics, including the author of this weak article:

You give me your birth data, and your wife's phone number, and I will bet you $10,000 that I can have a conversation with her on the phone, while you stand idly by and she says, "Yes...why yes, he does...yes, he is...yes, he always says things like that...yes, that's him!"

There's your test, biotch. Now kick the digits and get out the checkbook.

Love,
Carlo

IP: Logged

kfn327
Knowflake

Posts: 150
From:
Registered: May 2009

posted November 11, 2007 02:40 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for kfn327     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Great thread.

IP: Logged

darkdreamer
unregistered
posted November 11, 2007 06:42 AM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Scientists once believed the earth to be a disc.

DD

IP: Logged

yourfriendinspirit
unregistered
posted November 11, 2007 07:04 AM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
"If astrology really works, it should be possible to design a test that satisfies both scientists and astrologers. Unfortunately, astrologers never specify what kind of test would be acceptable to them. They argue that astrological research is very difficult because scientific methods are too crude, intrusive or mechanical. Apparently, the alleged astrological effects are so subtle and hard to detect that we may wonder how astrologers had ever been able to identify them."

from http://home.planet.nl/~skepsis/astrot.html

Well, I have devised the perfect astrology test for any and all skeptics, including the author of this weak article:

You give me your birth data, and your wife's phone number, and I will bet you $10,000 that I can have a conversation with her on the phone, while you stand idly by and she says, "Yes...why yes, he does...yes, he is...yes, he always says things like that...yes, that's him!"

There's your test, biotch. Now kick the digits and get out the checkbook.


___ ___

LOVE IT!!!

IP: Logged

Green Fairy
unregistered
posted November 11, 2007 07:28 AM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Only thing i can say in this case


Unless those "scientists" had a professional astro-reading from a reputed astrologer and it was proved to be absolute b*ll*cks, i don't give a flying f- what they think.
There you go

IP: Logged

darkdreamer
unregistered
posted November 11, 2007 07:54 AM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
One of the best "contra-proofs" is that research and study Paul Westran did on progressed synastry in his book "When stars collide".

He has studied the beginning and endings of over 1300 relationships (celebrity and historical) and in 80% of all cases there was a conjunction / trine / opposition of Venus-Sun, Venus-Venus or Venus-Mars within 2° (natal-progressed, progressed-progressed), when the relationships began, and when these aspects came out of orb the relationships fell apart.
(He didn`t even include the angles or the Moon in most case, which would have improved the result significantly).
Personally I haven`t found even one relationship that didn`t fulfil these requirements (adding the angles and Moon to the equation).

But even with 80% I think you cannot speak of a coincidence anymore. And 1300 charts are not a little number. I`d think they are statistically relevant.

DD

IP: Logged

stillatlarge
Newflake

Posts: 16
From: TX
Registered: Nov 2010

posted November 11, 2007 10:05 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for stillatlarge     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
It's another one of those things that the elite seek to keep to themselves. I don't think they like the little people having such knowledge.

IP: Logged


This topic is 2 pages long:   1  2 

All times are Eastern Standard Time

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic  Post A Reply
Hop to:

Contact Us | Linda-Goodman.com

Copyright © 2011

Powered by Infopop www.infopop.com © 2000
Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.46a