What is the evidence for and against the validity of astrology

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I won't speak on behalf of professional astrologers.

I study astrology and I don't take money. Is that ok?

Misleading other people, even for free, still isn't good.

If it's something you do on your own... if you want to be wrong, that's your own business, I guess.

 

[Father Heathen]

In what way?

In the hocus pocus kind of way.

 

[blü 2]

Evidence against was presented in another post as thus:

↑
"Scientific testing has found no evidence to support the premises or purported effects outlined in astrological traditions. Where astrology has made falsifiable predictions, it has been falsified. The most famous test was headed by Shawn Carlson and included a committee of scientists and a committee of astrologers." <CITATION>

"Astrology is bs. NASA's scathing takedown perfectly explains why."

"Astronomers have spent years patiently trying to explain why zodiac signs are not science, and NASA finally seems fed up with the public's obsession with them. NASA just dropped the ultimate astrology smackdown in a Tumblr post that's since gone viral."

Correct me if I'm wrong but no astrologer or fortune teller or psychic with any reputation in their trade foretold the collapse of the old Soviet Union ─ the fact behind "the fall of the Berlin wall" ─ back in 1989. It was arguably the most important event in the politics of the Western world since WW2.

(If memory serves, later it was claimed that some contributor to a regional US paper said something that might be in hindsight be considered to that effect, but sheesh.)

And as a question, why isn't it in the same general area as "psychic powers", as to which no one ever got to claim the prize, ultimately a million bucks, that Randi and his foundation were offering?

Can you lay a prediction out in this thread that's so precisely detailed and remote and unforeseeable that if it comes true we'll be forced to reconsider, and if it fails, we won't?

 

[Mock Turtle]

There might be an element of truth as to our being born at certain times of the year rather than at other times having some slight effect - as to seasons and such - and hence the 'effects' so often claimed by astrology, but that is about all probably. Plus, that many tend to take on the characteristics of their star sign once they know such - like my being a Libra and tending towards not having extreme views on anything but hopefully more balanced ones. But that is likely to have happened anyway.

 

[Muffled]

The majority of science had classed astrology as unscientific since the early islamic scientists over 1300 years ago.

Brian Cox, particle physicist, cern scientists and science educator is on record as calling astrology a load of bollocks - rubbish - nonsense during tv presentations.

I have no scientific background but i do agree with him ;-)

I believe anyone can call anything, anything they want but that is not valid evidence.

 

[Muffled]

The test was one that a believer in astrology thought that his science could pass.

The problem with the various woo woo beliefs is that there is no single model that is accepted by anywhere near a majority for any of them.

The fact is that there is no scientific evidence for astrology and that flaw in the belief is due to the inability of believers to produce any.

It always helps if one knows what scientific evidence is before one tries to claim that there is such evidence for their beliefs.


I assume from your posts that you do believe in astrology. What reasonable test, if any, could possibly refute astrology based upon the merits of astrology?

I believe this is so true. There is as much skill and inspiration as anything and that varies with the individuals.

I believe I am not saying that the evidence is scientific. LIke my belief in God my evidence is personal experience.

I believe astrology can be a useful tool.

I believe I know of none.

 

[Muffled]

The problem with astrology is that it is based on the placement of the stars as viewed from Earth. The problem with that is as the Earth rotates, it also wobbles making it impossible to predict the placement of the stars on a specific date in the past.

I can see where that might be a problem in particular very old charts. I once saw a chart of the birth of Jesus in an astrology magazine and it was more accurate than I expected.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Correct me if I'm wrong but no astrologer or fortune teller or psychic with any reputation in their trade foretold the collapse of the old Soviet Union ─ the fact behind "the fall of the Berlin wall" ─ back in 1989. It was arguably the most important event in the politics of the Western world since WW2.

(If memory serves, later it was claimed that some contributor to a regional US paper said something that might be in hindsight be considered to that effect, but sheesh.)

And as a question, why isn't it in the same general area as "psychic powers", as to which no one ever got to claim the prize, ultimately a million bucks, that Randi and his foundation were offering?

Can you lay a prediction out in this thread that's so precisely detailed and remote and unforeseeable that if it comes true we'll be forced to reconsider, and if it fails, we won't?

The Skeptic's Guide to the Universe podcast does something fun for their first episode every year: they compile all the predictions for the coming year from prominent "psychics" and astrologers, and the hosts make some themselves.

They also look back at the predictions for the previous year - their own and the "psychics" - and see how well they did.

The "psychics" generally do awfully, and often worse than the hosts themselves, who were making predictions based only on being pretty dialed-in to news and media.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I can see where that might be a problem in particular very old charts. I once saw a chart of the birth of Jesus in an astrology magazine and it was more accurate than I expected.

This implies that someone pinned down the date and time of Jesus's birth.

That would be a pretty amazing feat if it were to have happened.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I believe this is so true. There is as much skill and inspiration as anything and that varies with the individuals.

I believe I am not saying that the evidence is scientific. LIke my belief in God my evidence is personal experience.

I believe astrology can be a useful tool.

I believe I know of none.

It does not matter what one believes as much as it matters what one can support. When one has an irrational belief it is very easy to fool oneself and it appears that you admitted to having an irrational belief.

 

[ChristineM]

I believe anyone can call anything, anything they want but that is not valid evidence.

So true. I would love to see any valid evidence that astrology is anything more than woo.

 

[Sheldon]

Did nasa really write that?

Not the headline, at least I doubt it. Though I feel you're missing the point, it is bs, NASA just did the maths.

 

[Sheldon]

I believe anyone can call anything, anything they want but that is not valid evidence.

You keep ignoring the evidence??? Here it is again then, any chance you will have the integrity to even address one word of it?

I linked the evidence, you ignored it, then claimed it was not relevant to the OP, (see evasion), now you start a thread and omit it entirely?

Astrology vs. astronomy
Here's the math NASA used

 

[Sheldon]

I can see where that might be a problem in particular very old charts. I once saw a chart of the birth of Jesus in an astrology magazine and it was more accurate than I expected.

Compared to what, accurate how? What are you comparing it to?

Astrology is complete hokum, read the article I have now linked 3 or 4 times from NASA astronomers, look at the evidence.

 

[soulsurvivor]

Evidence against was presented in another post as thus:

↑
"Scientific testing has found no evidence to support the premises or purported effects outlined in astrological traditions. Where astrology has made falsifiable predictions, it has been falsified. The most famous test was headed by Shawn Carlson and included a committee of scientists and a committee of astrologers." <CITATION>

"Astrology is bs. NASA's scathing takedown perfectly explains why."

"Astronomers have spent years patiently trying to explain why zodiac signs are not science, and NASA finally seems fed up with the public's obsession with them. NASA just dropped the ultimate astrology smackdown in a Tumblr post that's since gone viral."

Astrology is like economics. It can not predict the future perfectly, there are too many variables. For an individual, his future depends not only on the time of his birth (and the position of the Earth/Planet/Stars), but also his past karma as well as all his actions in his present life. So with all these variables, it is almost impossible to predict his future accurately. But you can predict 'good' and 'bad' periods in his life and general trends during his lifetime.

The question is why should the position of planets and stars affect human beings? This is because each Planet and Star, far from being just a physical object in a fixed orbit, is also a 'God' (some may prefer 'angel' but they are really gods).

Saturn for instance is a powerful God and its position has a powerful effect on each human being (see Saturn return - Wikipedia or Sade Sati as it is known in India). This may be hard to believe for most 'scientific' people, but soon the Christ will Return to Earth and with him, he will bring much of this lost knowledge of astrology. We will still not be able to predict the future perfectly, but we will be able to understand astrology better.

 

[firedragon]

Evidence against was presented in another post as thus:

↑
"Scientific testing has found no evidence to support the premises or purported effects outlined in astrological traditions. Where astrology has made falsifiable predictions, it has been falsified. The most famous test was headed by Shawn Carlson and included a committee of scientists and a committee of astrologers." <CITATION>

"Astrology is bs. NASA's scathing takedown perfectly explains why."

"Astronomers have spent years patiently trying to explain why zodiac signs are not science, and NASA finally seems fed up with the public's obsession with them. NASA just dropped the ultimate astrology smackdown in a Tumblr post that's since gone viral."

I can give you an answer to this question, in my opinion.

First, out of curiosity, what version of astrology are you speaking of? Or let me say, what is your idea of astrology?

Let me ask you a direct and specific matter in astrology. Astrology is based on the sun. The path of the sun. Or at least the version I know of. In your idea of astrology, when does the cycle of the sun begin?

This is the crux of the matter. Nasa proving astrology is "not science" is plain obvious and does not prove anything about a belief in astrology.

Thanks. I look forward to your response.

@syo

I am tagging you in this post to understand your perspective since you said you study astrology. I look forward to your contribution.

 

[firedragon]

I won't speak on behalf of professional astrologers.

I study astrology and I don't take money. Is that ok?

What type of astrology do you study? Maybe I can ask you this question as well. So maybe I will tag you in a post.

 

[Sheldon]

Astrology is like economics. It can not predict the future perfectly, there are too many variables. For an individual, his future depends not only on the time of his birth (and the position of the Earth/Planet/Stars), but also his past karma as well as all his actions in his present life.

Astrology is superstitious hokum, read the link I posted. I find the notion of karma morally repugnant, the inference that people unfortunate to suffer have somehow brought it on themselves or deserve it is morally indefensible, and again it is naught but unevidenced superstition.

 

[syo]

What type of astrology do you study? Maybe I can ask you this question as well. So maybe I will tag you in a post.

Western and Chinese.

 

[firedragon]

Western and Chinese.

Okay. I dont know what western astrology is. Chinese, yes.

So in western astrology, does it differ from the Asian astrology where the suns path has a beginning? Which date does it start on?