They can be used as symbols, though. Like fire could be used to represent strenght and action. Water could be used to represent gentleness.
I AM an Astrologer!
- Thread starter Atom
- Start date
- Status
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
Marilyn Monroe
Now surely you can see what is almost totally absent from that chart?
For the terminally stubborn its Earth.
She lacks practicality..in fact she lacks being grounded, down to earth, practical, stable.
Now to ME that is one example of 'proof'...but the point everyone misses is that I can print examples every day for a year of this 'proof'..how much proof do you need?
Why are you so lacking in even a soupcon of imagination?
I guess we have a different understanding of evidence.
For now, would you tell me how you get the charts ? Do you make them yourself, if so how ?
I think you told me you got them from internet, if so how can you trust them to be right ? How can you be sure someone didnt just make them up ?
I don't think the notion of a proof is understood. Here is an example of one. Take information needed to perform astrology for 100 people (I would recommend doing it electronically to minimize information leakage). Give 5 of them clear, unambiguous, and specific astrological information. Randomly give the other 95 people the information from the original 5.
Ask the original 5 people if the information provided matched exactly. Asked the same question of the other 95 people. Post the results. If the 5 people say "yes" and the other 95 say "no" then you're on to something and the next step would be to expose the process used to achieve the results so that anybody else could do the same at any time and achieve identical results.
It is a common trait of fantastic claimers to value imagination above truth and question a skeptics imagination when pressed for evidence. What fantastic claimers often fail to realize is that the skeptic values truth over imagination and sees the utterly irrelevant ploy to divert attention away from the evidence request.
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
Read this, very interesting: http://www.psychicinvestigator.com/demo/AstroSkc.htm
An interesting study linked there. From the review of the study at that link:
The citation for the original article in published in the scientific journal Nature is:
Carlson, Shawn (1985) A double blind test of astrology. Nature, 318 (6045), 419-425
The results included:Skeptical Astrology said:
And the author of the study itself concluded:
The citation for the original article in published in the scientific journal Nature is:
Carlson, Shawn (1985) A double blind test of astrology. Nature, 318 (6045), 419-425
I'm aware of these tests.
It usually starts 'we took 200 astrologers'..
It begs the question 'from where'. Competent astrologers are few and far between, you'd be hard pressed to find 200 astrologers of good ability in the UK let alone one city.
I'm not sure where and how they find these people. Maybe they just dredge yellow pages although even there they are in short supply and the golden rule when getting even a plumber is never use the directory.
Its similar to a computer..if you feed rubbish in you get rubbish out. Carlson might have told us hoew and where he finds these people.
It usually starts 'we took 200 astrologers'..
It begs the question 'from where'. Competent astrologers are few and far between, you'd be hard pressed to find 200 astrologers of good ability in the UK let alone one city.
I'm not sure where and how they find these people. Maybe they just dredge yellow pages although even there they are in short supply and the golden rule when getting even a plumber is never use the directory.
Its similar to a computer..if you feed rubbish in you get rubbish out. Carlson might have told us hoew and where he finds these people.
Again your comprehension fails you.
Proliferation?
Insults?
Ranting?
Now I understand your methodology - generalise.You were born a mere few hours after Johnny Rotten
As soon as you post something disputable - pretty pictures with no basis are rather pointless.
Might as well post a Jackson Pollock and say it's an astrological chart for all the background you've given so far.
This from the guy who said he could prove it?
Blehh.
Correct - and the failure is on your part.
You've posted nothing worth reading so far.
Scientific studies usually includes that data. Maybe you shoukd hunt for it...
re. Marilyn Monroe
We'll compare her chart which is LACKING in Earth to someone who we'd suspect is the polar opposite.
Now apparently even the basics of Astrology are very hard to grasp so we'll start a Beginners Course for those who have trouble googling.
Earth : The earth signs are Taurus, Virgo, and Capricorn. A native with mainly earth signs will be practical and cautious, sensible and capable and will be happier with concrete things than abstract ideas. They move slowly and carry out their work in a thorough and unhurried manner. Earth subjects are shrewd and careful and need emotional and material security, and will put up with quite a lot to get it. They are generous to those they love, but are otherwise careful not to waste time or money, though there can be a tendency towards meanness. Earth subjects tend to be shy in social situations, and to be slow to commit in love relationships, but are serious when they do. A subject lacking earth will lack common sense and practicality and find it difficult to finish anything they start. They may be scatty, unrealistic, hopeless with money and unreliable.
Scatty and unrealistic certainly. We could add unreliable into the mix. It clearly fits Marilyn to perfection.
We shall endevour to boldly find more examples.
Don't worry - I'll be Back!
We'll compare her chart which is LACKING in Earth to someone who we'd suspect is the polar opposite.
Now apparently even the basics of Astrology are very hard to grasp so we'll start a Beginners Course for those who have trouble googling.
Earth : The earth signs are Taurus, Virgo, and Capricorn. A native with mainly earth signs will be practical and cautious, sensible and capable and will be happier with concrete things than abstract ideas. They move slowly and carry out their work in a thorough and unhurried manner. Earth subjects are shrewd and careful and need emotional and material security, and will put up with quite a lot to get it. They are generous to those they love, but are otherwise careful not to waste time or money, though there can be a tendency towards meanness. Earth subjects tend to be shy in social situations, and to be slow to commit in love relationships, but are serious when they do. A subject lacking earth will lack common sense and practicality and find it difficult to finish anything they start. They may be scatty, unrealistic, hopeless with money and unreliable.
Scatty and unrealistic certainly. We could add unreliable into the mix. It clearly fits Marilyn to perfection.
We shall endevour to boldly find more examples.
Don't worry - I'll be Back!
No True Scotsman fallacy.
How good an astrologer can you be if your reading comprehension is so low? :bugeye: Just what part of "Despite the fact that we worked with some of the best astrologers in the country, recommended by the advising astrologers for their expertise in astrology and in their ability to use the CPI..." do you not understand??????? It clearly says COUNTRY, not city, and also says they were RECOMMENDED by the advising astrologers for their expertise. And that's hardly resorting to the phone book.
So your objections to that trial were just like everything else you've said here - pure ignorant rubbish! :bugeye:
Your not making sense, Stryder.
You dont understand anything about Symbology or the many educational books on the matter from Marina Warner to the way its used in Art. You re trying to fit a square peg in a round hole. The whole point about Earth is that it is not just a rock. It can be a grain of sand just as water can fall from the sky, be a placid pond os erenity or be a storm of epic proportions..in other words they can symbolise complete opposites.
Simply describing it as a liquid is -as i say - scienitific but hardly of use to a painter or writer. It would reduce Shakespeares work to sheer utter tedium. However if you wish to stick in your rigid mindset and imitate Mr.Spock then do so but dont bother posting it to me.
You dont understand anything about Symbology or the many educational books on the matter from Marina Warner to the way its used in Art. You re trying to fit a square peg in a round hole. The whole point about Earth is that it is not just a rock. It can be a grain of sand just as water can fall from the sky, be a placid pond os erenity or be a storm of epic proportions..in other words they can symbolise complete opposites.
Simply describing it as a liquid is -as i say - scienitific but hardly of use to a painter or writer. It would reduce Shakespeares work to sheer utter tedium. However if you wish to stick in your rigid mindset and imitate Mr.Spock then do so but dont bother posting it to me.
It meaningless.
<< we worked with some of the best astrologers in the country, >>
Some?
How many?
Who are they?
What makes you think she is an Earth sign?
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
I dont think that, i asked you. So i guess not then.. :shrug:
Will you please answer the other question too ?
Enmos said:
Exactly..a rare moment of insight by one of the members. Well done!
The usual astrology chart or the just the basic % chart used?
Its simply the percentages of the elements as used in any pie chart. A more complicated way would be to use a normal chart and simply count the number of singificant pointers..Sun, Moon, planets etc..and prioritise them in this very simplified list of the basics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astrology_and_the_classical_elements
Exactly why I have to provide the links is something of a mystery...whats stopping anyone from doing it themselves?
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
I mean where do you get the procentages to make the charts.
Why has Stalin got 66.6% earth, 18.6% water and 14.9% fire ?
- Status