Comprehensive study of 'time twins' debunks astrology

Washington Times ^ | 8/18/03 | Robert Matthews

[SengirV]

please forgive me!!! I mispelled a word. I must be the first person to ever do that on FreeRepublic.

[DoctorMichael]

".........I think the debunkers conclusion is correct, but I have no faith at all in their methods.......considers the horoscopes of your parents and other family, which this "study" omits entirely.........common problem for skeptics - they redefine the arguments to fit their preconceptions........"

Its also a common problem for true believers - they keep redefining the arguments to fit their preconceptions, and then come up with answers that fit their old definitions (ie. there's always 'an out').

More importantly...............The onus of the situation is on the BELIEVER to prove the viability of his/her contention by good scientific methodologies to the satisfaction of the SKEPTIC, NOT for the SKEPTIC to prove try to prove the nonexisitence of something that he/she doesn't believe to exist in the first place. In addition, it is the BELIEVER that brought up the contention in the first place, the skeptic is minding their own business, so to speak.

To my knowledge, no believer of astrology has offered ANY scientific proof whatsoever of the viability of their belief.

".......so don't take any of this as a defense of the pseudoscience involved........."

OK.

[gcruse]

"Belief in astrology is the infallible sign of ignorance." - Voltaire

If God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him.—Francis M. Voltaire: A l’Auteur du Livre des trois Imposteurs, épître cxl. [back]

[theFIRMbss]

>"Belief in astrology is the infallible sign of ignorance." - Voltaire

"From times immemorial, astrology has been a determining factor in the decisions and actions of men of all ranks and stations. At the begin of the 17th century, great scientists as Tycho Brahe, Galileo Galilei, Johannes Kepler and Pierre Gassendi – now best remembered for their roles in the development of modern physics and astronomy – all held astrology in high esteem.

"However, at the end of the 17th century, the scientific community had completely turned away from astrology. For some the subject of derision, others preferred to ignore it completely – so, hardly a single word on astrology, either pro or contra, is to be found in the works of scientists as Christiaan Huygens (1629-1695)[2] or Isaac Newton (1642-1727)."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mainstream scientists
gave up on astrology
right about the time

mainstream scientists
started getting involved with
mainstream politics...

[theFIRMbss]

>NO CORRELATION. ABSOLUTELY NONE

Kind of a straw man...
Real astrology provides
real tools for thinking.

Keeping track of things
like orbital periods
and careful timelines

creates disiplined
thinking. And getting "answers"
about life problems

requires a person
to think hard to codify
the problem clearly.

An activity
that promotes disciplined, deep
thought is a good thing.

(Turtles don't do math,
but turtle math is a tool
for deep, deep thinking...)

[Quix]

The studies were well designed in a host of cases.

The connection, the correlation is simply NOT there.

There are a diversity of healthy, NOT REBELLION-AGAINST-GOD sorts of ways to learn great thinking skills.

Astrology is the straw devoid of substance.

Delusions can be fun, interesting even a dramatic ride. Doesn't make them constructive or life giving--especially when specifically and expressly forbidden of Almighty God.

[wideminded]

"Belief in astrology is the infallible sign of ignorance." - Voltaire

"From times immemorial, astrology has been a determining factor in the decisions and actions of men of all ranks and stations. At the begin of the 17th century, great scientists as Tycho Brahe, Galileo Galilei, Johannes Kepler and Pierre Gassendi – now best remembered for their roles in the development of modern physics and astronomy – all held astrology in high esteem.

I had previously read that Kepler actually held astrology in low esteem. but wrote about it to please his patrons. Some research on the net indicates that the answer is more complex. He made seriously negative comments about astrology but also said that it shouldn't all be thrown out. Kepler on astrology

I noticed the statement by Voltaire in a volume on the history of France by Voltaire that I read many years ago. I don't remember the title of the book, but he talked a lot about the Prince de Conde. (Apparently this title applies to nine different persons.)

[theFIRMbss]

>especially when specifically and expressly forbidden of Almighty God

Job 38:31-33 --

"Can you bind the cluster of the Pleiades,
Or loose the belt of Orion?
Can you bring out Mazzaroth [the constellations] in its season?
Or can you guide the Great Bear with its cubs?
Do you know the ordinances of the heavens?
Can you set their dominion over the earth? ..."
----------------------------------------------------

Heavens and the earth
were created by God, so
don't dismiss the stars.

Constellations get
mentioned a lot in Scripture,
so we must know them.

Finally, although
astrology as known now
is pagan and base,

some Christian scholars
believe that the zodiac
was God's very first

Revelation. Then,
as with everything, Satan
corrupted knowledge

of the signs for his
purposes... It's good to learn,
bad to idolize.

[talleyman]

actually, I liked the typo - very expressive.

[dday76]

So what is astrology supposed to do again... convince you that no matter what you do, your life is already planned out for you? That's great. I hope it is right...--sarcasm

Only people too stupid to take control of their own lives put any stock in this sort of scam anyway.

That's the fallacy debunkers sometimes fall into. Because they deduce by reason they think everyone does. You can write novels, but if people don't read, you won't get your point across.

[DoctorMichael]

".......astrology.........your life is already planned out for you?........"

I think you've managed to distill down the essence of the arguement and the resulting danger.

Why act if the future is already predetermined? Whoa is me. It was already written in my stars. I'm a victim of the planets and their gravitational pulls.

[theFIRMbss]

>Why act if the future is already predetermined? Whoa is me. It was already written in my stars. I'm a victim of the planets and their gravitational pulls.

Do you believe in
DNA? Do you believe
DNA is myth

because if it were
real, then all your exercise
might not get you pumped

if you have flab genes...
Have you ever seen cloned cats?


Identical genes

do not result in
"identical" clone "copies."
But their DNA

is identical.
If something material
like DNA gets

this complicated --
profoundly influential,
yet variable --

then there's no reason
for something ephemeral --
like "influences"

of bizarre star fields --
to be sledge-hammer simple.
Doesn't mean they're false.