Proving Astrology: An Statistical Challenge

TruthSeeker said:
Not necessarily causation. There is a chance that it is caused. But that is a hypothesis.

Well, I've never heard a serious astrologer claim it's causation.. and as pointed out already here, really doesn't sound so likely. It certainly doesn't fit the original hermetic thought on the matter.


That's true. However, astrology can be used much better if you use it to discover yourself.

Well, that's subjectibve right there, isn't it? Not necessarily... though it's certainly easier.


No, they are just bad imitations of something much broader...

I'm talking about my definition of horoscopes, which incidently...


That's not the definition of horoscope. Horoscopes are those things in newpapers- that's all.

...Is the right one. You're talkign about how most people use it today, it certainly isn't accurate, no matter how popular.


In portuguese there is no difference.

I'm Brazillian, yes there is. "Polos" or "Nodos"/"Nodulos." also, "da Terra" e "da lua." We all know what the eath's poles are, the moon's nodes are where the moon's orbit around the earth crosses the earth's orbit around the sun.


Are you an astrologer?

Not a proffesional, but I study a lot.
 
SkinWalker said:
I say astrology doesn't work because I've seen no evidence that it is any better at predicting the future or describing our present than science and inferences or deductions based on observation. Astrology is a con because the "astrologer" wraps normal observational skill and cold-reading ability in a new package and sells it to the consumer who is all-to-willing to pay for hope, mystery, and intrigue.

Well, again, not defending whether astrology works or not.. Just saying that even if it doens't that doesn't make astrologists con men. Not the (possibly rare) good ones, anyway. Certainly they aren't all cold readers, my own astrologer for example does readings over tape and then mails them, to people he never met. Results are fine, though maybe not "AS" accurate. Obviously some things CAN be interpreted differently based on a persons character, making it more accurate... I'm sure there are nasty cold readers out there, I jsut don't liek how you generalize so broadly. I know some of these people personally; Astrology can be complete bullshit, but they certainly don't beleive that, and never say anyhting that isn't right on the map. I know this because I study the matter myself.

I've also yet to see any statistical data that demonstrates that "astrology" isn't simply observation. I have seen statistics that show certain astrological occurrences to certain earthbound events, but wouldn't it be more significant if, considering the billions of possible configurations of stars and planets, that there wouldn't be correlations?

The true test of whether astrology is in fact a real discipline and not simply a con wouldn't be found in statistics, which can be made to fit many scenarios given the enough data. The true test would be what has astrology offered the world in the way of cognitive and substantive data in fields of science and social science? Has astrology successfully predicted events to offer early intervention? Tsunamis, floods, assassinations, and various accidents for instance?

I'm sure someone will take that last question and show what has been predicted and occurred, but they'll never discuss what has been predicted and never occurred. Why? It's bad PR for the con-artist and such data is quickly disgarded and forgotten, even though the misses far, far outweigh the hits.

Astrology is poppycock. But if people want to believe in poppycock, that's their business. But it's the business of all free-thinkers with critical reasoning ability to speak out when these assholes charge money for their poppycock, taking advantage of the human predisposition to believe in the extraordinary.

Im not much a statistics buff myself, I just know what I see and so far that has been accurate. Honestly not interested in proving astrology, Works for me and that's enough for me, not being a professional. Astrology certainly is based on observation. Created from studies of how things that happened at different times related to the skies. We may be operating under different definitions of "Con." I assure you though, none of the astrologers *I*ve met were maliciously making up random stuff to make themselves look good for me, or ever say anyhting not right in the chart. Certainly the many books I read which were also accurate didn't. Astrology may very well be poppycock, I don't think I argued that it isn't, yet... this does NOT mean thge astrologists don't sincerely believe what they're doing and are not trying to take advantage of people. CERTAINLY not all of them.
 
Well, again, not defending whether astrology works or not.. Just saying that even if it doens't that doesn't make astrologists con men. Not the (possibly rare) good ones, anyway.

Perhaps "those" astrologers you refer really do believe they are providing a valid service and are not out to 'con' you, but that does not change the fact that they ARE fleecing those who pay for their services.

What do you mean "good ones?" An astrologer will provide information based on what they personally believe to be the most accurate. Since none of them are accurate to be of any use to anyone, then there can be no such thing as a good or bad astrologer. They are all equally useless.

Obviously some things CAN be interpreted differently based on a persons character, making it more accurate...

That is exactly the expectations of the astrologer - the more you believe in astrology, the more you'll believe its accuracy.

Astrology can be complete bullshit, but they certainly don't beleive that, and never say anyhting that isn't right on the map. I know this because I study the matter myself. Im not much a statistics buff myself, I just know what I see and so far that has been accurate. Honestly not interested in proving astrology, Works for me and that's enough for me, not being a professional.

Exactly my point.

Astrology certainly is based on observation. Created from studies of how things that happened at different times related to the skies.

Perhaps, but astrology works backwards from science. Astrologers observe an event and try to back up the event with the configuration of the skies. Absurd.
 
Sushupti said:
Well, I've never heard a serious astrologer claim it's causation.. and as pointed out already here, really doesn't sound so likely. It certainly doesn't fit the original hermetic thought on the matter.
Why is it not likely? How can we know, really? There are things that we just don't know at this present time, because we are not yet prepared to know. We have been discovering quite exciting things too! For instance, there is now a good part of the scientific community that is bringing back the hypothesis that space is filled with a mysterious "ether". Also, there's something called "quantum entanglement" that basically allow particles that are really far away to interact- a property of matter which could be related to astrology.

Well, that's subjectibve right there, isn't it? Not necessarily... though it's certainly easier.
In the eyes of Carl Jung, astrology is indeed a way of self-discovery. Many psychologists do use astrology as a tool for their practice, to complement their practice...

I'm talking about my definition of horoscopes, which incidently... Is the right one. You're talkign about how most people use it today, it certainly isn't accurate, no matter how popular.
Ok...

I'm Brazillian, yes there is. "Polos" or "Nodos"/"Nodulos." also, "da Terra" e "da lua." We all know what the eath's poles are, the moon's nodes are where the moon's orbit around the earth crosses the earth's orbit around the sun.
Ha! That is true.... Goood... I really need to go back home... I'm forgetting stuff.... And it's kinda confusing too. Here, the "ascendente" they call "rising sign". It's so confusing.... :p

Not a proffesional, but I study a lot.
Cool. I studied it when I used to be a teenager....
 
TruthSeeker said:
Ha! That is true.... Goood... I really need to go back home... I'm forgetting stuff.... And it's kinda confusing too. Here, the "ascendente" they call "rising sign". It's so confusing.... :p


Well, less used long form "Signo ascendente," so "signo que esta ascendendo," "Sign that is rising," "Rising sign." :) "Ascendant" is perfectly valid, too, thought.

Everyhting else you said I don't necessarily disagree with :)



(Q): I'm really not equipped to go into a long debate for astrology against a fundamentalist atheist; so I'll just forfeit now. I'm curiious though, have you ever had a chart made?
 
I'm really not equipped to go into a long debate for astrology against a fundamentalist athiest

What does athiesm have to do with astrology?

so I'll just forfeit now.

That's usually the stance most astrology believers take when questioned - nothing new there.

have you ever had a chart made?

Yes, from members of this forum and a few other forums. All were different and none hit the mark in any way, shape or form. The only results even remotely similar could easily have been gleaned from my posts.

I've also been to a psychic fair and had a variety of "readings" from psychics, astrologers and tarot. All the results once again were different and did not hit the mark in any way. The results were generalized in that one-size-fits-all.

Further to that, one can do a search of a variety of newspapers with their own salaried astrologer and see that they will each publish something different than the other.

Of course, I often wondered how someone who was born on the same day as me living in a third world country in abject poverty would "climb up the corporate ladder."
 
Wal-mart sells ladders in Mexico. Some probably find their way to Guatemala and Honduras.
 
heh, that's usually what gets astrology... people go too craphead conmen, and think all astrologists are the same... Not very easy to fix a bad first impression, which I guess is why so many 'astrology believers' (somehting I'd never call myself... I have an intrest in the matter, and don't like they way so many think of it..) just don't ccare enough to debate too long.

And you know what I meant by atheism, even though I used it wrong.


Regarding your mexican astral-twin, there's a nice anecdote about it...

A french prince had an 'astral twin' who worked in a shoe store. The day prince became king, shoe maker's assistant inherited the store.

Judging astrology from newspapers and psychic fairs is retarded, many levels to thing.
 
Well, if they're not in the newspapers and they don't go to psychic fairs, exactly how do the "real" astrologers get any business? Judging astrology from what appears to sound exactly like a fairy story (being that it involves a prince and the modern equivalent of a shoemaker!) is, well, I never call anything or anybody retarded, but I'm sure you could find an equivalent word to apply.
 
Do astrologers claim that there are only 365 possible configurations (one for each birthday) in a given year? If so, does this not mean that for every 100,000 people born in a given year there are roughly 365 groups of 274 (100,000/365) people each with identical horoscopes in that birth year? How does astrology account for the wild variations in the fortunes of people born on the same day/same year all over the world?
 
Silas: Word of mouth, I guess. Maybe they advertise somewhere, I wouldn't know. I'm ignoring the retarded portion of your reply.

Superluminal: They do not; a chart changes every 4minutes, more or less (slightly, but still,) and people born at the same time in different places also have different charts. Tehy're based on the position of 'planets' in relation to the person (or whatever else you're makign a chart for), not in space, remember.

Also don't forget astrology isn't so specific; of course there are plenty of other things that will effect your personality and life. Each chart has many different ways of playing out, depending on many factors.

My own astrologer has a twin, actually, only 15 minutes older or younger. They are in no way the same; but neither is incompatible with their charts.
 
Didn't think to ask; Couldn't be very much, though, really very VERY little changes in that time.
 
Sushupti said:
They're based on the position of 'planets' in relation to the person
What is it about the position of planets that affects a person? What did astrologists do before the planets Uranus, Neptune, and Puto were discovered and do they incorporate these planets now?
 
I think the mythology is not that the planets affect the person, but rather that the position of the planets is a code of "fate" or "destiny" (not quite...) that the skilled astrologer can read.

Disocvering more planets is like discovering more pieces of the code. They provide more information, which allow the code to be read more accurately.
 
meh. I challenge any so-called astrologist to look at my profile, check my DOB, and make a chart. I was born at 23:40.
 
SkinWalker: Yeah, planets don't affect people. The idea is from hermetic philosophy of cause and effect, "As above, so below" and stuff liek that. I suck at explaining this, but basically... "Kairos" is the Quality of time, as opposed to Chronos, quantity. We can all tell how much time passed, Astrology is about Kairos. Going into metaphysics some, and probably drawing more fire into the whole thing, your soul can only enter this world when the Kairos matches the quality of your soul.

As above, so below. The postion of planets, cards drawn in tarot, I ching results, what you're doing right now, everything that's happening at a certain time reflects current kairos. Including the positioning of planets, not because they cause it, they are affected by it.

Reading the positioning of planets in relation to where you are born, tells us the Kairos of that time, in that place, which tells us what kinds of people can be born there at that time.

Before the new planets, they simply weren't used. and charts were less specific. Now even some new asteroids are sometimes used, more specific. Liek I said above, even the pattern of how your chickens eat their corn tells us about Kairos, the exact relation is just harder to see, heh.

And I imagine I probably did a horrible job at explaining the hermetic view properly, so please instead of lashing just point out my mistakes and I'll adress them as soon as I can.

As for your profile, My astrologist often makes readings on tapes and mails them places [from Brazil]. Farthest so far was a rock band in Norway. They loved it.

Interested?

ADD: An interesting tidbit, from my limited knowledge of the matter, nothing in your chart points to an affinity with astrology. :) Can't tell if it goes so far as to dislike the thoought.

ADD2: oh, and meanwhile www.astro.com is a nice little tool... Just remembered, prepackaged automated readings don't tell you the big picture very well. It SHOULD be accurate enough, but if not, don't discard the whole thing before using a good, real astrologist.
 
Last edited:
Okay... the planets don't affect the individual. So what is the correlation between the individual and the planets and how can it be quantified or qualified? Simply citing "kairos" (Greek for the "right" or "opportune" moment) doesn't demonstrate the correlation between planets and individuals.

Why not include asteroids, comets, and interplanetary debris? Why not the planets of other solar systems? What about the Oort Cloud?

What about the planets' positions indicates what an individual's personality and future holds? And what evidence is there that the whole thing simply isn't good cold reading?
 
Not something that's going to get proven, I wouldn't think. Closest one could do is get pretty statistics. Mystical leaning astrologists either say the cause of the two things correlating is either god, or the ever present "Don't know."

Astrology started with people relating how events turned out, and how the skies looked when it happened, I guess. We just don't know the cause.

Some people do include a nubmer of asteroids. Like I said, you could include a yoyo someone threw very high. The trick would jsut be finding out what it tends to signify. Planets in other solar systems probably aren't as relevant as our own, I'd think, and are there even ephemerides for such things?

The position indicates something, not something about its position... If you're looking for cold hard science as to why, you obviously know there's no such thing.

And in general, if books or people who never met or even saw you can nail your personality from it, it's not cold reading, as I udnerstand it.
 
SkinWalker said:
Why not include asteroids, comets, and interplanetary debris? Why not the planets of other solar systems? What about the Oort Cloud?
Why not indeed? There's a buck to be made in that idea!

That works from both a cynical and an believer's POV, by the way... the believer might justifiably suggest that there are clues to be read in the positions of asteroids, comets, debris, extra-solar planets, and any thing else in "the heavens"... but no one has yet figured out how to read those clues.

What about the planets' positions indicates what an individual's personality and future holds?
I'm sure an astrologer would be happy to tell you.

And what evidence is there that the whole thing simply isn't good cold reading?
None at all! But since when has that stopped a marketable idea, especially in a world where the vast majority of people lack reasonable critical-thinking skills?
 
Back
Top