I AM an Astrologer!

[Grantywanty]

:frust:
....And vastly more wrong also, yes?

Look enough of the usual bullshit. Put up or shut up already!

I've done readings for scientists and other skeptics and they have found that their assumptions were incorrect.

If your interested call up astrologers in your area and ask them who they admire. You get a number of hits on one astrologer, try them out.

See I could give a shit if you believe. I just wanted to point out that some of your assumptions were incorrect.

You presented a theory that the readings were so general they fit 99% of the population. This is not true and just shows your ignorance.

 

[GhostofMaxwell.]

I've done readings for scientists and other skeptics and they have found that their assumptions were incorrect.

If your interested call up astrologers in your area and ask them who they admire. You get a number of hits on one astrologer, try them out.

See I could give a shit if you believe. I just wanted to point out that some of your assumptions were incorrect.

You presented a theory that the readings were so general they fit 99% of the population. This is not true and just shows your ignorance.

Look you dickhead, try to keep up. There is no assumption made. It's a play on unscientific claims, like domestos whose slogan is "kills 99.9% of known germs, fact!"

http://www.badscience.net/?p=139

 

[Oli]

I use the rapier truths of astrology to my advantage.

The rapier truths of astrology?
The blind meanderings of woowoos, you mean.

This is only fair - I am by all accounts the underdog here. But by doing so I know I can defeat the scientist.

Then do so: post something worth reading.

The scientists dont like this. I've wrong footed them and they are out of their depth.

Not so far.

Oh but you can't use exetreme examples...thats cheating.

Use whichever examples you like, but you still have to show it applies.

Your merely proving an ignorance of astrology which is a qualititative science.

Incorrect. Astrology is not a science at all, qualitative or quantitative.

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.

Circular logic.
Bad reasoning.

No amount of scientific wriggling by a Dawkins or a lesser amateur from a forum can possibly disprove the FACTS.

Then show us some 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?

You've shown neither pudding NOR recipe so far.

 

[Atom]

<< Look you dickhead, try to keep up. There is no assumption made. It's a play on unscientific claims, like domestos whose slogan is "kills 99.9% of known germs, fact!" >>

I see we have some intellectuals of the board!

 

[Atom]

<< Circular logic.
Bad reasoning. >>

In what respect, Olli...and don't reply 'in every respect' . Lets have a few specifics rather than rabid name calling which is really a sad reflection on the fundamentalist approach of many scientists.

 

[Oli]

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.

You claim they "must be of a fiery element" because they are of a fiery character: you have yet to show that this "fiery element" exists and has an influence/ effect on people.
They're fiery because they're fiery?
Doesn't quite cut it...

 

[Atom]

I have seen things that you and your ilk will never truly understand

Amazing. What are these great wonders you have seen that our 'ilk' will never see?

All I know is that you beginning to sound like a rather pompous and silly human being.

 

[Atom]

You claim they "must be of a fiery element" because they are of a fiery character: you have yet to show that this "fiery element" exists and has an influence/ effect on people.
They're fiery because they're fiery?
Doesn't quite cut it...

Its a shorthand for a number of generalisations that we all carry to a degree. Therefore to glean any real meaning its necessary to make it glaringly obvious to the few, already brainwashed posters on here it has to be taken to an extreme. In other words..one element must be totally dominant over others etc..

Theres a saying "There are none so blind as those that will not see". It should be emblazoned on top of this forum for all to read and then maybe they'd attach some ordered thoughts prior to putting pen to paper of type in this case.

 

[Oli]

So you're still posting rhetoric instead of your proofs and facts?

 

[(Q)]

... make it glaringly obvious to the few, already brainwashed posters on here...

"There are none so blind as those that will not see". It should be emblazoned on top of this forum for all to read and then maybe they'd attach some ordered thoughts prior to putting pen to paper of type in this case.

Wow, 35 posts and this guys already insulting everyone. Nice work, Childish.

 

[GhostofMaxwell.]

<< Look you dickhead, try to keep up. There is no assumption made. It's a play on unscientific claims, like domestos whose slogan is "kills 99.9% of known germs, fact!" >>

I see we have some intellectuals of the board!

If you and your socks come on here rubbishing science and calling people ignorant, dont expect all smiles and thank yous.

You have shown absolute disrespect to science in this thread along with empty claims.

 

[tablariddim]

Me and a couple of lads gonna take him outside and read him the riot act; might stamp on his head while we're at it.

 

[Crunchy Cat]

As for astrology..it works.

Please give me a very specific prediction that proves it.

*bump* we're still waiting. If you cannot perform, we'll have to presume you are a liar.

 

[Repo Man]

The only horoscope worth reading is the one put out by The Onion.

Capricorn: (Dec. 22-Jan. 19)
You will be bilndsided by a disaster that any decent system for predicting the future should have been able to warn you about.

 

[Atom]

If you and your socks come on here rubbishing science and calling people ignorant, dont expect all smiles and thank yous.

You have shown absolute disrespect to science in this thread along with empty claims.

There hasn't been any disrespect for science from me, simply the necessary need to cut it back down to size. Reason is all well and good in its place but at all times it is merely the servant to Wisdom. This is something well known amongst the Ancients from Plato to Aristotle. We have to get back to that mindset and recognise that science is essential but should also know its place. To arrogantly suggest that you are about to reveal the Theory of Everything and then fail miserably is just one of many examples.

The more questions answered by science the more questions that emerge..its a hydra that mere science cannot dispel. But how could one decry it when reAsoning is required merely to set the DVD recorder. However, despite its uses reasoning doesnt present us with a happy home.

Which is the superior need?

 

[Oli]

Reason is all well and good in its place but at all times it is merely the servant to Wisdom.

Define "reason"; define "wisdom".

To arrogantly suggest that you are about to reveal the Theory of Everything and then fail miserably is just one of many examples.

Who did that?
To arrogantly announce that you "can possibly convince people of the fact" that "astrology works", and then fail to do so (or even provide any support for this assertion is also not good.

The more questions answered by science the more questions that emerge..its a hydra that mere science cannot dispel.

And the solution would be...?

But how could one decry it when reAsoning is required merely to set the DVD recorder.

Or just follow the instructions.

 

[GhostofMaxwell.]

There hasn't been any disrespect for science from me, simply the necessary need to cut it back down to size. Reason is all well and good in its place but at all times it is merely the servant to Wisdom. This is something well known amongst the Ancients from Plato to Aristotle. We have to get back to that mindset and recognise that science is essential but should also know its place. To arrogantly suggest that you are about to reveal the Theory of Everything and then fail miserably is just one of many examples.

The more questions answered by science the more questions that emerge..its a hydra that mere science cannot dispel. But how could one decry it when reAsoning is required merely to set the DVD recorder. However, despite its uses reasoning doesnt present us with a happy home.

Which is the superior need?

Your sales pitch doesn't work on me or any other self respecting scientist Im afraid. May I recommend either sticking to the scientifically illiterate, or showing that which you claim is actual fact, is indeed so, in accordence with scientific quantification?

 

[S.A.M.]

Alert! Scientists on the loose in Pseudoscience forum!!!!

 

[Atom]

Your sales pitch doesn't work on me or any other self respecting scientist Im afraid. May I recommend either sticking to the scientifically illiterate, or showing that which you claim is actual fact, is indeed so, in accordence with scientific quantification?

In others words you're ducking out.

One down, lots to go.

 

[S.A.M.]

In others words you're ducking out.

One down, lots to go.

Not everyone knows how to talk to an astrologer.

How do you draw up a chart?