I AM an Astrologer!
- Thread starter Atom
- Start date
- Status
Yes sure...gimme someone with a bit of a fire and brimstone Billy Graham/Margaret Thatcher/Sir Winston Churchillian...character and away we go.
Its all very very simple. Lets seee some imagination for once insteead of hidebound scientific shackles and geeks measuring and counting grains of sand.
Bring it on!
)Winston Churchillian?
Who he?
You missed the point.Its all very very simple. Lets seee some imagination for once insteead of hidebound scientific shackles and geeks measuring and counting grains of sand.
Bring it on!
You're supposed to show us why you believe it's scientific, and THEN we take you apart.
You made the claim: back it up or shut up.
Hardly.
Read the rules.
You made the claim.
You provided a "link" that gave unsupported "charts".
No evidence, no support, no data.
So we have to take your word for it?
You're already resorting to wounded claims we lack imagination because we won't provide your evidence for you?
Woowoo.
Read the rules.
You made the claim.
You provided a "link" that gave unsupported "charts".
No evidence, no support, no data.
So we have to take your word for it?
You're already resorting to wounded claims we lack imagination because we won't provide your evidence for you?
Woowoo.
Why didn't you just say so from the get go that it's all in your imagination and save everyone the trouble of responding to your make believe?
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
Ive read everything in the smoke room, just wondering... is the evidence supposed to be in there ???? I sure didnt see it.
And why is it that you can only use it public figures ??
Furthermore, it seems you can only say how much 'fire' someone has and nothing more. Thats exactly why you cant do it for us because you dont get to study us on tv.
Im sorry but its all just a big load of bull.
And why is it that you can only use it public figures ??
Furthermore, it seems you can only say how much 'fire' someone has and nothing more. Thats exactly why you cant do it for us because you dont get to study us on tv.
Im sorry but its all just a big load of bull.
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
Please try to convince me, you havent even tried yet.
Your over complicating the issue, these slight environmental factors are well know and rather hackneyed. In short they are extraneous re. astrology although they may be of some interest sociologically.
Its well known that athletes tend to be born in sept/oct and there is a very slight benefit in children being the oldest members in the class. This is hardly rocket science...in many cases pupils are almost 1 yr older than some other pupils...it follow they have a slight advantage.
Big deal. Is this an important factor in procreating
)No. Its a rather trivial point. My nephew and neice are both top of their class and both are born in july - one on july 4th. The advantage is very slight and I'm not altogether sure what it has got to do with the topic.
First let set aside sunsign astrology. The fact is that it only came into vogue around 1920 in an effort to sell newpapers. The effect is negligible but apparent to a sharp eyed observer. Without a working knowledge of astrology it isn't apparent but nevertheless lets get it out of the way once and for all.
You'd agree that Canadians are slightly different in character than Americans. Even taking environmental factors out of the equation we'd perhaps expect the Americans to be a tad more extrovert and gung ho than the average Canadian. However its a huge generalisation and I am almost as likely to find an extrovert Canadian as I am an introverted American. Sunsigns work in the exactly the same way. The difference is too slight although an astute astrolger can turn it to favour. For example if someone says show me a Leo then I'd make sure that I;d make sure AS MANY PLANETS AS POSSIBLE are in Leo. I use the rapier truths of astrology to my advantage. In other words..I CHOOSE the ground to do battle on. As any good war leader would do. The cards are stacked in my favour.
This is only fair - I am by all accounts the underdog here. But by doing so I know I can defeat the scientist. In fact if the rather bumptious Dickie Dawkins came on her to argue the point I could swat him aside with some ease.
Why concentrate on the Elements.
Again the cards are stacked in my favour. I can use EXTREME examples. Famous people with a lot of Fire are Fiery and Inspirational...whereas in contrast people with lots of Water are more introverted and ruled by emotion.
The scientists dont like this. I've wrong footed them and they are out of their depth.
Oh but you can't use exetreme examples...thats cheating.
ROFL...in what way you poor dears!
Last edited:
In regards to competing with younger lesser developed children?
Sometimes the youngest in the class have to compete more than the older ones for this reason, after all they are made to develop quicker if just trying to stay at the same level. Technically you could suggest the younger children although lesser developed in comparison to the older children of their year are made to be more intelligent to keep up or the strain can cause psychiatric issues.
(Which pretty much undermines your point)
The topic itself is very simple, You claim some magical sorcery to how everybody on this planet can be mathematically calculated with absurdly abstract devices. For instance crystal balls, Reading tea leaves, Reading animal entrails, Reading someones Hand, Seeing which way the die/bones fall or how Cards relate to your interpretation not to forget the old classic in this instance Astrology utilising birthsign and Star positions to indentify how a persons life will live out. (Which is root is of lesser Cult religions, lesser being as not so mainstream in it's development).
Once upon a time, it might of been possible to shake your mojo at us and assume you'd transpire fear of the gods however mankind has learned a new affinity and that itself is the transpiration of the collection of knowledge in the form of sciences. What old school misinterpretations that lead to fear are slowly being wiped out with only the disinformed and those that feel their luck is thin and in need of help continue to believe is such fallacies.
This is not just my opinion and this is why people ask of proof, not some mumbo-jumbo to keep people guessing. If you have something to quantify then do so, otherwise don't prove your ignorance here.
What is it you don't happen to agree with - specifically rather than mere pompous airy dismissal so popular with arrogant sceptics.
Like Pr. Charles..I'm all ears!
Well re. the youngest having to work harder. Your putting words into my mouth that I didnt say so maybe you should re-read the post. I merely suggest those kids are the exception because they are very intelligent. It runs in the family
Your merely proving an ignorance of astrology which is a qualititative science. However you cannot deny the proof of the pudding. In EVERY case the person who inspires through fiery rhetoric (for good or ill) MUST by definition be of a fiery element. This is written in stone.
No amount of scientific wriggling by a Dawkins or a lesser amateur from a forum can possibly disprove the FACTS.
He may complain about the ingredients or the way its made..but if the Pudding flies of the shelves then who has got the recipe correct?
Speaking of rhetoric, do you plan on offering any of this evidence you spoke so confidently of, or are you going to continue with thinly veiled insults and innuendo?
You said you can prove it.
Do so.
I'll volunteer.
What do you need?
Birthdate? Time? Location? What?
You said you can prove it.
Do so.
I'll volunteer.
What do you need?
Birthdate? Time? Location? What?
- Status