What is the evidence for and against the validity of astrology

[Sheldon]

I believe there is no magic. I believe God holds all things together in harmony.

Magic is defined as the power of apparently influencing events by using mysterious or supernatural forces. So if it is not magic please give a detailed explanation of how a deity is doing this, and demonstrate sufficient objective evidence for your explanation, otherwise it quite demonstrably is an appeal to magic.

 

[joelr]

No, you assume that you are not e.g. a Boltzmann Brain variation. So there might not be a we.
Further read the words: "It seems more beneficial to assume that an objective reality exists than to live with solipsism, and so people are quite happy to make this assumption.". That is not evidence, that is first person singular psychology.
Here is a variation - "It seems more beneficial to assume that God exists than to live without the comfort of the belief in God, and so people are quite happy to make this assumption."
It is the same as it ends as psychology as first person singular.

It's not a great assumption though. To assume there are many more parts to my consciousness. That I invented relativity and wrote all the Beatles and Jinjer songs?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

It's not a great assumption though. To assume there are many more parts to my consciousness. That I invented relativity and wrote all the Beatles and Jinjer songs?

Can you rephrase that?

 

[joelr]

Can you rephrase that?

The idea of solipsism, that my mind created all the physics and music I hear, seems like a poor theory.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

The idea of solipsism, that my mind created all the physics and music I hear, seems like a poor theory.

Well, that is not what a Boltzmann Brain is, so that is not relevant. Try again.

 

[Luchito Prays]

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."

NASA is full of ignorant people.

Think about this.

People in the past, not only worshiped the planets (Mercury, Mars, Venus, Jupiter, Saturn, etc) but also offered them sacrifices "to calm their fury".

But today, when you see the planets, these are just like the far away stars for us. They do are not any threat for us.

The only answer for this, is that something has changed.

According to ancient writings, those people saw and experienced the close encounters with planets. The claims of those people are that at some points in history, something perturbed the orbits of the planets.

It was a book describing the close encounter with planet Venus the cause of the plagues of Egypt, And the Bible itself supports that the events of the exodus weren't of the territory of Egypt alone but was a worldwide event. The Aztecs also mentioned Venus close to earth, The Mayans even monitored Venus new orbit jut in case comes out of it in the future. Greeks, Chinese, all of them mention the encounters of Mars against Venus and also the consequences in their lands due to such cosmic event with Venus. Like mentioning floods, invasion of insects, changes in the environment, etc.

This is how astrology was born.

People connected the behavior of the cosmic bodies and their influence on earth, both of them with the birth of a person.

This is how they saved such information. An example is the Bible with the breaking of Pangaea. The Bible says that in the days of Peleg the earth was divided. This is the use of the chronological worldwide event having Peleg as the reference, giving him a name that means division.

NASA knows about Venus encounter with earth, but won't admit it, because by doing so, all their good for nothing theory of a solar system being the same for millions of years, goes automatically to the trash. By accepting the real past in our solar system, NASA knows religious people will be vindicated.

Those people in the past were indeed very superstitious, but they have a good reason for to be like that. And surely they weren't crazy or ignorant.

On the other hand, NASA people are as ignorant as Catholic dude reading the Tanach from left to right... they don't know what they are talking about.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

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."

You might want to read the following article in Scientific American: Is Astrology Real? Here’s What Science Says

 

[Sheldon]

NASA is full of ignorant people.

 

[joelr]

Well, that is not what a Boltzmann Brain is, so that is not relevant. Try again.

Was talking about solipsism. B brains are a type but slightly different.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Was talking about solipsism. B brains are a type but slightly different.

Boltzmann Brains are not a case of metaphysical solipsism.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

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."

To my knowledge, there is no evidence in support of astrology.

The evidence against it, is the lack of evidence for it and the failing of any and every time one attempts to test it.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

In what way?

You have to appeal to "faith" to believe in it.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

professional astrologers.

Legalized con-men.

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

I'ld love to see the textbook.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I believe that shows that you completely do not understand astrology.

Always the same with these faith-based beliefs.
It's like Dr House said: "you can't reason someone out of a position that he didn't reason himself into in the first place".

In your mind, the options are no more or less then either one believes it or one isn't reading it correctly / understanding it.

Counter evidence is ignored and supportive positive evidence isn't anywhere to be found.

 

[ajay0]

I was a skeptic-rationalist myself with respect to astrology till a chance meeting with an old astrologer changed my mind.

He was able to ferret out all the details of my life easily. I have similarly met other astrologers and enlightened masters too who was able to intuit correctly many facts which they were not in any position to know,

Science at this point of time do not have all the facts and knowledge at its disposal to make an informed opinion of astrology. It is actually limited in its scope in terms of informed decision making, and under the wrong people and mindset, can be catastrophic to humanity.

 

[Sheldon]

To my knowledge, there is no evidence in support of astrology.

The evidence against it, is the lack of evidence for it and the failing of any and every time one attempts to test it.

Actually I linked a thorough refutation of astrology from NASA using astronomy.

Muffled has just ignored it with vapid handwaving.

 

[Sheldon]

I was a skeptic-rationalist myself with respect to astrology till a chance meeting with an old astrologer changed my mind.

He was able to ferret out all the details of my life easily. I have similarly met other astrologers and enlightened masters too who was able to intuit correctly many facts which they were not in any position to know,

Science at this point of time do not have all the facts and knowledge at its disposal to make an informed opinion of astrology. It is actually limited in its scope in terms of informed decision making, and under the wrong people and mindset, can be catastrophic to humanity.

Oh well that's different, now that someone has made a subjective unevidenced anecdotal claim that it's valid.

Astrology is complete hokum, unevidenced superstition.

"Back in 2011, as TIME reported, astronomers from the Minnesota Planetarium Society found that because of the moon’s gravitational pull on Earth, the alignment of the stars has shifted. As Earth’s axis changed direction, the disruption resulted in a big change for astrology believers and horoscope readers: the astrological signs of the western zodiac moved back approximately a month in the calendar. Following that line of thinking, people who had been reading the Virgo horoscopes might actually be Leo’s. Plus, there was more — a whole new astrological sign. Anyone born between Nov. 29 and Dec. 17 was now paired up with a new sign, Ophiuchus.

A few months ago, NASA released a statement aimed at kids, updating the birthday-constellation alignment, doing so based on the stars’ actual placement in space. According to the BBC, the updated calendar meant that a whopping 86% of the world now had a different star sign.
But NASA took to Tumblr in a statement last Tuesday to make a key distinction, and remind everyone that astrology and astronomy are not the same thing.
“Astronomy is the scientific study of everything in outer space,” wrote NASA. “Astrology is something else. It’s not science.”
The lengthy post explains that NASA made its update based on hard facts, pointing out that if you want to blame anyone for playing fast and loose with the stars, point the finger at the Babylonians for leaving out Ophiuchus entirely. “To make a tidy match with their 12-month calendar, the Babylonians ignored the fact that the sun actually moves through 13 constellations, not 12. Then they assigned each of those 12 constellations equal amounts of time,” NASA wrote. “So, we didn’t change any zodiac signs…we just did the math.”

Full statement HERE.

 

[ajay0]

Oh well that's different, now that someone has made a subjective unevidenced anecdotal claim that it's valid.

Astrology is complete hokum, unevidenced superstition.

"Back in 2011, as TIME reported, astronomers from the Minnesota Planetarium Society found that because of the moon’s gravitational pull on Earth, the alignment of the stars has shifted. As Earth’s axis changed direction, the disruption resulted in a big change for astrology believers and horoscope readers: the astrological signs of the western zodiac moved back approximately a month in the calendar. Following that line of thinking, people who had been reading the Virgo horoscopes might actually be Leo’s. Plus, there was more — a whole new astrological sign. Anyone born between Nov. 29 and Dec. 17 was now paired up with a new sign, Ophiuchus.

A few months ago, NASA released a statement aimed at kids, updating the birthday-constellation alignment, doing so based on the stars’ actual placement in space. According to the BBC, the updated calendar meant that a whopping 86% of the world now had a different star sign.
But NASA took to Tumblr in a statement last Tuesday to make a key distinction, and remind everyone that astrology and astronomy are not the same thing.
“Astronomy is the scientific study of everything in outer space,” wrote NASA. “Astrology is something else. It’s not science.”
The lengthy post explains that NASA made its update based on hard facts, pointing out that if you want to blame anyone for playing fast and loose with the stars, point the finger at the Babylonians for leaving out Ophiuchus entirely. “To make a tidy match with their 12-month calendar, the Babylonians ignored the fact that the sun actually moves through 13 constellations, not 12. Then they assigned each of those 12 constellations equal amounts of time,” NASA wrote. “So, we didn’t change any zodiac signs…we just did the math.”

Full statement HERE.

Astrology has more to do with intuitions than calculations. Intuition is related to the mind purified of its desires in form of cravings/aversions.

There are astrologers who do well in the beginning, but after getting corrupted by greed for money and fame, lose their intuitive abilities and make errors.

Through intuition one comprehends the whole rather than the parts and gets the necessary knowledge quickly.

Science always have partial truths.

For example, chemical fertilizers and pesticides were considered to be cool by scientists and policy makers, but spikes in cancer and birth defects convinced many later on that this was not sound enough.

Same goes for nuclear radiation emanating from nuclear weapon blasts and so on. I have seen pictures of american soldiers watching a mushroom cloud without protective gear, probably because scientists were not aware of radiation issues.

Because of partial knowledge limitations, science cannot have knowledge of the whole necessary to make informed decisions . This limitation of science can be catastrophic in the long run under foolish minds.

I repeat that my observations have found astrology to be a sound art in the hands of experts who rely on intuition.

 

[joelr]

Boltzmann Brains are not a case of metaphysical solipsism.

BB are related to solipsism.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

BB are related to solipsism.

Which kind of solipsism? There are 4 kinds.
And it doesn't make it a fact that you just say it. You have the actual burden of proof. Now live up to that.