371 replies to this topic

[chesta]

Here is another article on this:

http://www.washtimes...05449-9384r.htm

The article gives a more balanced view but still claims that astrology was debunked.  To me that makes it seem more likely that this claim comes from the researcher involved but I could be wrong because it may be this other writer of the articles bias again.  We either have 2 biased articles that don't speak for the scientists involved or a experiment that aparently was not very objective by jumping to such conclusions while we don't have the proper information to question the credibility of this study.  Are there any skeptics here who stand by this study with the information we have now about it?  

[MoonChild]

Quote

All the evidence I have seen indicates that Western Astrology doesn't work at all.  You have evidence that Vedic astrology does?

Why in the hell should I come up with evidence? If someone need to disproove, it is their onus to find evidence why it is not working! It is my factual evidence that it works fine, and yes, there are rooms for errors as in any scientific cause! We can believe what we need to, or want to, life is simple and plain. This is not a BAD_WORD off comment from me. I am a person who didn't have enough belief in the science called astrology, but life makes you believe! The more you tend to disproove, the more life's uncertainities wrap you tight. Astrology, afterall, is a sign board, not the actual happennings.

[Gregory]

Quote

Why in the hell should I come up with evidence? If someone need to disproove, it is their onus to find evidence why it is not working!

Wrong.  The burden of proof is on the claimant.

Quote

It is my factual evidence that it works fine, and yes, there are rooms for errors as in any scientific cause!

So you do have evidence, but you won’t tell us what it is?

Quote

We can believe what we need to, or want to, life is simple and plain.

Yes, but if you’re going to state your belief as a fact on the skeptical portion of this board (or anywhere else, really), you ought to back it up.

Quote

This is not a BAD_WORD off comment from me. I am a person who didn't have enough belief in the science called astrology, but life makes you believe! The more you tend to disproove, the more life's uncertainities wrap you tight. Astrology, afterall, is a sign board, not the actual happennings.

I don’t know what you’re getting at here, but I can tell you with all the certainty in the world that life has not made me believe in astrology.  Just the opposite, really.  And while there are many things that I don’t know, I would not say that I am "wrapped in uncertainties."

[Gregory]

Quote

Are there any skeptics here who stand by this study with the information we have now about it?

I don't understand what you think the problem is.  Astrology makes certain claims about itself.  These scientists tested the claims, and found them to be false.  They therefore concluded that astrology was not a valid process.  What were they supposed to say?  "A two-decade, two-thousand person study failed to turn up any evidence for astrology, but that doesn't mean that it's wrong"?  Unless you can come up for an interpretation of this data other than "astrology has been debunked," I hardly think it's fair to criticize them for reporting their research in those terms.

[MoonChild]

not really, if as a believer I need to bring evidence, as a skeptic, you gotta bring evidence how it doesn't work it is a thi n line. As of now, time is too late and am sooooo tired (hehehe BUSYness) lol. Will take time to put down my experience in the best way here.








whatever, I still believe Astrology if interpreted properly is science at it's best. Keep Smiling Gregory

[Gregory]

The person who makes a claim must provide evidence for that claim.  You are making a claim: that Vedic astrology is effective.  Therefore, you must provide evidence for that claim.  If I declaired that Vedic astrology doesn't work, I would also have to provide evidence for that claim, but  I didn't say that; I simply asked what evidence you had that it works.  The only claim I will ever make about Vedic astrology--in fact, the only claim I am qualified to make--is that I have never seen or heard anything to support Vedic astrology, and therefore I will not accept it as true, any more than I would accept as true any scientific (not just paranormal) claim that is presented without evidence.

In short, I'm not claiming that it's false; I'm just saying that I don't have any reason to believe that it's true.

[chesta]

Quote

I don't understand what you think the problem is.  Astrology makes certain claims about itself.  These scientists tested the claims, and found them to be false.  They therefore concluded that astrology was not a valid process.  What were they supposed to say?  "A two-decade, two-thousand person study failed to turn up any evidence for astrology, but that doesn't mean that it's wrong"?  Unless you can come up for an interpretation of this data other than "astrology has been debunked," I hardly think it's fair to criticize them for reporting their research in those terms.

How do we know they tested these claims properly?  When a experiment is done it's credibility and methods need to be analyzed before being accepted but there in very little information about this particular study but I understand why disbelievers may want to accept it without questioning it.  How do we know that their methods of testing and gathering data were inline with the claims made by astrology?  We don't since there is not much information on this.  If this was a study that turned up results for the paranormal skeptics would demand all the data and analyze it down to the last detail whether or not if there are any flaws.  Why should I consider interpreting the seemingly biased conclusions when we have insuficient information about the credibility of this test?  Why should this be accepted when we only have a short article on it and what happened to the need for replication?  

[Gregory]

Quote

Why should I consider interpreting the seemingly biased conclusions when we have insuficient information about the credibility of this test?  Why should this be accepted when we only have a short article on it and what happened to the need for replication?

You shouldn't assume that this experiment is valid based on a news article; I never said you should, but I apologize if I gave that impression.  On the other hand, you shouldn't accuse the experimenters of bias based on a news article, either.

I do not know what, if anything, happened to the need for replication.

[rustypouch]

On this same topic, I came accross a rather long, but quite good discussion on the subject.

http://www.astrology...lintv-vsrhs.pdf

It seems to be objective, not saying that astrology is impossible, but that there is no valid reason to believe that it is effective.

Quote

If the aim is to prove that astrologic claims are true, the chance of a postive result strong enough to overturn the present predominantly negative evidence seems remote.

[MoonChild]

Astrology is itself based on complex mathematical calculations. So naturally it doesn't work with people who takes it litely, or with the people who just wanna make money out of it. It also will not work when the calculations do have mistakes.

I was mylself not inclined to believe in astrology. My father always used to tell me that astrology is not the end by itself. It is a guide post. When we see the times are good, well, little effort could do wonders. But if the time is bad, we need to put in extra effort.

I am not going to put in my experience here since the way western astrology is interpreted is very different than the Indian ways, so that means I need to be an expert in explaining all the terms and making it understandable to GV friend. As of now, I am not that good in making things understandable. So that means, I still believes in Astrology and still consideres it a science!

[Gregory]

Quote

Astrology is itself based on complex mathematical calculations.

But astrology is older than most advanced mathematics.  At the very least it must be older than calculus, since Newton is quotes as believing in it.

[rustypouch]

But astrology cannot be considered a science because it is unfalsifiable.  The ability to be proven wrong is one of the major principles of the scientific method.

[MoonChild]

Most of the what we call science today was faux in the yester years! and also, there is something called "forgotten - wisdom". Different cultures, different values has made lot of age old wisdom and knowledge to disappear from modern mans reach. Lot of things in the modern world itself is a probability. You dont know why the computer crashes! You dont know why the automobile breaks down! well, these are all "systems" that were meant to work.

Mostly people dont TRUST astrology because it is misinterpreted by people who wants to HEAR the good things, want to make quick bucks. The same is the case with any esoteric stuff. Forget GV and get into any other "ghost" sites, and you will know what I mean.

Basucally people wanna hear what they wanna hear, and do what they wanna do. But then, where is the morals? where is the ethics?

[MoonChild]

and............talking about Astrology, we need to talk about Karma, re-birth, life, death, hmmmmmmmm is it getting complex? We cannot talk about English Language without knowing ALL THE alphabets! And then comes less important thigns like Grammer, Structure et al. This is the same case with esoteric matters.


We all know tides are influenced by the moon, so obviously the larger planets have bigger influence. This surely affect our body rythms, thought process, without doubt. Astrology can never be attributed wrong, but the human factor in deriving the process can be.

[Gregory]

Quote

Most of the what we call science today was faux in the yester years!

True.  But it doesn't work the other way; most of what was faux in the yester years is not science today.

Quote

And also, there is something called "forgotten - wisdom". Different cultures, different values has made lot of age old wisdom and knowledge to disappear from modern mans reach.

So I've heard.  I have never, however, heard convincing evidence of this.

Quote

Lot of things in the modern world itself is a probability. You dont know why the computer crashes! You dont know why the automobile breaks down! well, these are all "systems" that were meant to work.

I don't, you don't, but thousands of people do.  And what does that have to do with anything?

Quote

Mostly people dont TRUST astrology because it is misinterpreted by people who wants to HEAR the good things, want to make quick bucks. The same is the case with any esoteric stuff. Forget GV and get into any other "ghost" sites, and you will know what I mean.

I distrust astrology because I've seen no convincing evidence that it works and quite a bit of evidence that it doesn't.  I can't speak for most people, though.

Quote

Basucally people wanna hear what they wanna hear, and do what they wanna do. But then, where is the morals? where is the ethics?

I have no idea what this has to do with astrology.