shadowdude said:
You know, we could probably do an OT "survey" by leaving off the zodiac signs, scrambling the order of them, then letting everyone pick which one matched them best, then display the sign they picked.
Do you think astrology is legitimate?
- Thread starter IglooDame
- Start date
You know, we could probably do an OT "survey" by leaving off the zodiac signs, scrambling the order of them, then letting everyone pick which one matched them best, then display the sign they picked.
shadowdude
cynic in training
That would be an excellent idea as we could determine if the zodiac signs work.IglooDude said:
Bozo Erectus
Master Baker
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2003
- Messages
- 22,389
Yeah it is a great idea
shadowdude said:
Okay I'll get it going tonight after work. In the meantime folks, don't go looking at horoscope sign information.
Bozo Erectus
Master Baker
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2003
- Messages
- 22,389
Im already familiar with my horoscope so I guess I'll miss out on the fun, but it'll be interesting to see how the 'infidel non-believers' do.
Double Barrel
Deity
Interesting observation: Two children, born roughly 2 1/2 months apart, one a Taurus and the other a Cancer, both now two years old.
As a skeptic, I find astrology amusing, much in the same way I like reading about ancient mythology or UFO's or the supernatural.
However, as a passing fancy, I like comparing things while observing (must be my Libra tendencies! ), and each kid does naturally display those traits inherent in their astrological signs!
For instance, there are those that subscribe to the line of thought that we can find traits in all of us described in each sign. But not true! I'm not a stubborn person in any sense of the word. So a Taurus, being a very stubborn sign, could never be used to describe me. But it is my son to a "T"! There are other tendencies that he displays, as well, that are very strange coincidences.
And his little cousin, 2 1/2 months younger, can almost be described as a "perfect" Cancer.
None of these traits are taught. We are talking about their natural tendencies and dispositions observed from the time of their births.
My younger brother, also a Taurus, is the same way.
Weird stuff...especially in the eyes of a skeptic!
As a skeptic, I find astrology amusing, much in the same way I like reading about ancient mythology or UFO's or the supernatural.
However, as a passing fancy, I like comparing things while observing (must be my Libra tendencies!
), and each kid does naturally display those traits inherent in their astrological signs!For instance, there are those that subscribe to the line of thought that we can find traits in all of us described in each sign. But not true! I'm not a stubborn person in any sense of the word. So a Taurus, being a very stubborn sign, could never be used to describe me. But it is my son to a "T"! There are other tendencies that he displays, as well, that are very strange coincidences.
And his little cousin, 2 1/2 months younger, can almost be described as a "perfect" Cancer.
None of these traits are taught. We are talking about their natural tendencies and dispositions observed from the time of their births.
My younger brother, also a Taurus, is the same way.
Weird stuff...especially in the eyes of a skeptic!
Bozo Erectus
Master Baker
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2003
- Messages
- 22,389
DB, yes its too much to be mere coincidence. My sister and a friend of mine are both typical Sagitarius, their birthdays are within 2 days of each other. My other sister and my mom are both typical Leo. An ex significant other was a standard Virgo, which if we're believing the astrology stuff, would explain why we're history:
@thestonesfan
Ya I was wondering if that was correct or not. Since it's all nonsesne anyways and even in the list I'm still a Pisces(stupid fish) I just thought it was still right. The maker of the list must of just divided the year by 13 instead of 12 and a bit. Thanks for pointing it out
The only Pisces trait that I have is that I'm fussy about my feet. I don't like them. I can't stand it when people even make it look like they're gonna touch them, and it doesn't have anything to do with being ticklish either. But everything else that a pisces is suppose to be I am not
Ya I was wondering if that was correct or not. Since it's all nonsesne anyways and even in the list I'm still a Pisces(stupid fish) I just thought it was still right. The maker of the list must of just divided the year by 13 instead of 12 and a bit. Thanks for pointing it out
The only Pisces trait that I have is that I'm fussy about my feet. I don't like them. I can't stand it when people even make it look like they're gonna touch them, and it doesn't have anything to do with being ticklish either. But everything else that a pisces is suppose to be I am not
raen said:Maybe there is something, Dont know.
Cool game, but I already know it too so I cant play
What I know is that my father is a typical taurus, maybe luck, maybe not, dont know...
I've arranged it so that you all can play it, knowing your sign doesn't help you choose the 'right' option.
If you believe that astrology has any truth to it , please explain how it works. By what physical processes do sun signs etc. affect humans? I'm an aquarius, so aquarius was on the horizon at my birth. How does its position there, rather than 25 degrees higher, impact my personality? Radio waves? Aquarian neutrinos?
Syterion
Voodoo Economist
I think it is utter crap, but I must admit that the description for Carpicorn seems a little accurate. But then I realized that since practically everyone shares these traits to different degrees, it appeals to everyone, so it sounds right.
Poseidon Rising
Chieftain
First of, I would like to say hi to everyone. I am new here and this will be my first post on these forums. I must admit that I was quite surprised to see this topic here and could not resist posting.
I’m not alarmed at the level of scepticism regarding astrology. Given the way it is presented today I would not expect anyone to derive anything meaningful from the study of constellations. I definitely believe there is something to it however for it is the most ancient of all sciences. Regarded by some as the epitome of all that is worthy of human interest whilst to others and perhaps in greater numbers, little more than blind superstition. There is a great deal of ignorance surrounding astrology and it’s associated practices of numerology and sacred geometry. It is all to easy to dismiss such practices as opposed to taking the time to learn more about them.
Newspaper horoscopes hold nothing of interest to me as they are little more than cleverly worded pieces that can easily appeal to the mass numbers of any star sign. Wild and fanciful claims often made in it’s name do little other than discredit the study. I would not ask anyone to believe that when Jupiter tracks through the sign of their birth it will bring good fortune. However, once you get past the tabloid scribbling the study of astrology can be found to hold a lot greater promise than many would credit it to. In astrology science and mysticism have been so intertwined, and for so long, that to arrive at a simple conclusion one way or the other is no easy matter. Before I go any further I would just like to list the star signs below and their relative positive and negative traits. One should understand that these are only basic guidelines of a character and by no means set in stone. These are only rough dividers between the different signs. For example, a late born Virgo may share some of the traits of a Libra. This can only be explained to a greater extent the deeper you get.
Sign-------------- Astrological------- Positive-----------Negative
------------------Element----------- Trait--------------Trait
Aries................... Fire.....................Vital....................Impulsive
Taurus.................Earth..................Stable.................Stubborn
Gemini................. Air......................Adaptable.............Cursory
Cancer................Water..................Protective.............Jealous
Leo.....................Fire.....................Authority..............Autocratic
Virgo...................Earth...................Detailed...............Critical
Libra...................Air.......................Diplomatic............Vacillating
Scorpio...............Water...................Resurgent............Ruthless
Sagittarius............Fire.....................Discerning............Moralistic
Capricorn.............Earth...................Principled.............Miserly
Aquarius..............Air.......................Liberal.................Eccentric
Pisces.................Water..................Charity.................Anxiety
EDIT: Do excuse my poor excuse for a table. If it perists as a problem I might use a picture insert.
I came across a study in my recent research carried out at the Institute of Psychiatry by astrologer Jeff Mayo in co-operation with the renowned psychologist Professor Hans Eysenk. On the basis of two scientifically controlled studies carried out on 1795 and 2324 subjects respectively, they were able to show a correlation between astrological birth sign and extrovert/introvert tendencies. The results show that the positive signs (Fire and Air ; Aries, Gemini, Leo, Libra, Sagittarius, Aquarius) are predominantly extrovert and the alternating negative signs are predominantly introvert. I would like to point out that the report states ‘The odds against these results happening by chance are 10,000 to 1.’
I would like to explain a little bit about precession. Now changes in precession mean that whereas at the time of ancient Greece the sun would physically have been in the constellation of Aries at the spring equinox, at the time of the report Pisces framed the sun. The fact that astrologers still call the first sign in spring Aries and not the sign currently in line with the sun is a convention that has not changed and is one of the reasons scientists dismiss astrology as a pseudo-science. However the data gathered in the report indicate that the seemingly misplaced astrological cycle of signs works-people born under the ‘sign’ of Aries show marked extrovert characteristics even though the sun is not in the actual constellation of Aries. This is because what is of importance in astrology is not the background of the Zodiac but solar influence and the variations of the solar year.
Now I will have to leave you. It is half one in the morning and I am getting quite tired. I will continue to explain astrology at a latter time. I hope this has given you non-believers something to think about. Do come back and check here as I have many areas to delve into, from sun spots to the twisting of solar magnetic flux to the earth’s magnetosphere and the Van Allen Belts!
Plotinus: Ouch! I hope you at least read what I have to say before any remarks of that nature start getting aimed at me!
I’m not alarmed at the level of scepticism regarding astrology. Given the way it is presented today I would not expect anyone to derive anything meaningful from the study of constellations. I definitely believe there is something to it however for it is the most ancient of all sciences. Regarded by some as the epitome of all that is worthy of human interest whilst to others and perhaps in greater numbers, little more than blind superstition. There is a great deal of ignorance surrounding astrology and it’s associated practices of numerology and sacred geometry. It is all to easy to dismiss such practices as opposed to taking the time to learn more about them.
Newspaper horoscopes hold nothing of interest to me as they are little more than cleverly worded pieces that can easily appeal to the mass numbers of any star sign. Wild and fanciful claims often made in it’s name do little other than discredit the study. I would not ask anyone to believe that when Jupiter tracks through the sign of their birth it will bring good fortune. However, once you get past the tabloid scribbling the study of astrology can be found to hold a lot greater promise than many would credit it to. In astrology science and mysticism have been so intertwined, and for so long, that to arrive at a simple conclusion one way or the other is no easy matter. Before I go any further I would just like to list the star signs below and their relative positive and negative traits. One should understand that these are only basic guidelines of a character and by no means set in stone. These are only rough dividers between the different signs. For example, a late born Virgo may share some of the traits of a Libra. This can only be explained to a greater extent the deeper you get.
Sign-------------- Astrological------- Positive-----------Negative
------------------Element----------- Trait--------------Trait
Aries................... Fire.....................Vital....................Impulsive
Taurus.................Earth..................Stable.................Stubborn
Gemini................. Air......................Adaptable.............Cursory
Cancer................Water..................Protective.............Jealous
Leo.....................Fire.....................Authority..............Autocratic
Virgo...................Earth...................Detailed...............Critical
Libra...................Air.......................Diplomatic............Vacillating
Scorpio...............Water...................Resurgent............Ruthless
Sagittarius............Fire.....................Discerning............Moralistic
Capricorn.............Earth...................Principled.............Miserly
Aquarius..............Air.......................Liberal.................Eccentric
Pisces.................Water..................Charity.................Anxiety
EDIT: Do excuse my poor excuse for a table. If it perists as a problem I might use a picture insert.
I came across a study in my recent research carried out at the Institute of Psychiatry by astrologer Jeff Mayo in co-operation with the renowned psychologist Professor Hans Eysenk. On the basis of two scientifically controlled studies carried out on 1795 and 2324 subjects respectively, they were able to show a correlation between astrological birth sign and extrovert/introvert tendencies. The results show that the positive signs (Fire and Air ; Aries, Gemini, Leo, Libra, Sagittarius, Aquarius) are predominantly extrovert and the alternating negative signs are predominantly introvert. I would like to point out that the report states ‘The odds against these results happening by chance are 10,000 to 1.’
I would like to explain a little bit about precession. Now changes in precession mean that whereas at the time of ancient Greece the sun would physically have been in the constellation of Aries at the spring equinox, at the time of the report Pisces framed the sun. The fact that astrologers still call the first sign in spring Aries and not the sign currently in line with the sun is a convention that has not changed and is one of the reasons scientists dismiss astrology as a pseudo-science. However the data gathered in the report indicate that the seemingly misplaced astrological cycle of signs works-people born under the ‘sign’ of Aries show marked extrovert characteristics even though the sun is not in the actual constellation of Aries. This is because what is of importance in astrology is not the background of the Zodiac but solar influence and the variations of the solar year.
Now I will have to leave you. It is half one in the morning and I am getting quite tired. I will continue to explain astrology at a latter time. I hope this has given you non-believers something to think about. Do come back and check here as I have many areas to delve into, from sun spots to the twisting of solar magnetic flux to the earth’s magnetosphere and the Van Allen Belts!
Plotinus: Ouch! I hope you at least read what I have to say before any remarks of that nature start getting aimed at me!
Correlation studies aside, please explain how planets and stars effect human behavior. Not sun sign characteristics, but the physical mechanisms by which Jupiter and Pluto effect personality or behavior.
And welcome to OT and CFC!
And welcome to OT and CFC!
da_greatest
deity
Ever notice how people ask you what sign you are and always say "I knew it" only after you tell them which one? That's because they're full of it. It doesn't matter what sign you tell them you are, they'll always say "yeah, you're totally a [fill in asinine symbol], I can tell."
FearlessLeader2
Fundamentalist Loon
I'm a Libra, and I like deep forest green.
Birdjaguar said:
I think you're asking for too much - if we're still trying to figure out the 'what' then the 'why' is obviously down the road a bit.
IglooDude said:
So, you are saying that it is like gravity before Newton and the mysterious forces that drive it are still undiscovered? Astrology is thousands of years old, but nobody knows (or is willing to tell) how it works? Lets go all you astrologers, get crackin'. I want answers.
[Poseidon Rising] Thank you for your explanation - of course I won't direct any comments at you! At least I hope not.
It seems to me that what you're saying is that the "signs" of astrology really have nothing to do with constellations, and that it's essentially a historical accident that they share some of their names. That might be reasonable. But it would be good if you filled us in a bit more on what those signs really are in that case, and also what role, if any, celestial bodies have in the whole thing. If constellations have nothing to do with astrology, do planets? What, then, actually *is* astrology? Do you think it is about predicting the future or simply analysing personality traits?
I might add that I am the absolute opposite of my own "star sign". Every trait that is supposed to go with Aries, I have in reverse. Perhaps I'm a changeling.
It seems to me that what you're saying is that the "signs" of astrology really have nothing to do with constellations, and that it's essentially a historical accident that they share some of their names. That might be reasonable. But it would be good if you filled us in a bit more on what those signs really are in that case, and also what role, if any, celestial bodies have in the whole thing. If constellations have nothing to do with astrology, do planets? What, then, actually *is* astrology? Do you think it is about predicting the future or simply analysing personality traits?
I might add that I am the absolute opposite of my own "star sign". Every trait that is supposed to go with Aries, I have in reverse. Perhaps I'm a changeling.
boogaboo
Josef Popper 4ever
febv
I second that.
The only thing that can somehow be combined to create affects are the seasons and the tide, but these happen too often, and we don't really understand their affect.
Perhaps in the long run it will be a kind of forcasting science (and genes matter much more..).
Now it's bull to the pi'sh root.
[Aquarius - 18/Feb , still love my birthday
]
luiz said:
I second that.
The only thing that can somehow be combined to create affects are the seasons and the tide, but these happen too often, and we don't really understand their affect.
Perhaps in the long run it will be a kind of forcasting science (and genes matter much more..).
Now it's bull to the pi'sh root.
[Aquarius - 18/Feb , still love my birthday
]Similar threads
