Amazon Vehicles Up to 80 Percent Off Textbooks Amazon Fashion Learn more nav_sap_plcc_ascpsc $5 Albums Fire TV Stick Happy Belly Coffee Totes Amazon Cash Back Offer TheKicks TheKicks TheKicks  Amazon Echo  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Amazon Echo Starting at $49.99 All-New Kindle Oasis GNO Back to School
Customer Discussions > Religion forum

Evidence for/against the validity of astrology?


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 51-75 of 87 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on Jun 21, 2012 3:23:44 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jun 21, 2012 3:25:02 PM PDT
'probabilist says:
Jack Vix wrote:

> They have pots that they made out of blocks of stone.
> We can't even do that today.

What kind of stone? Alabaster? Marble? Serpentine? Soapstone?

Pots have been made from all of these.

There's strong evidence that First Peoples near Atlanta used quartzite hand tools (and lots of patience!) to carve pots from soapstone, for example.

See Traces on the Appalachians: A Natural History of Serpentine in Eastern North America, by Kevin T. Dann.

All the best,

'prob

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 21, 2012 3:23:48 PM PDT
ND

Do you know what cold reading is?

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 21, 2012 3:25:59 PM PDT
Astrocat says:
Mark, I don't play those kinds of games.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 21, 2012 3:32:24 PM PDT
ND

No, but astrologers and psychics do. And that's my point.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 21, 2012 3:32:50 PM PDT
[Deleted by the author on Jul 16, 2012 11:46:55 AM PDT]

Posted on Jun 21, 2012 3:38:23 PM PDT
jpl says:
Evidence for/against the validity of astrology?

jpl: I haven't read every debunking of astrology, but I know it's been debunked probably a hundred times or more. I've read about a few, but I prefer to keep my replies concise and on point.

Posted on Jun 21, 2012 3:46:22 PM PDT
Different cultures have found different cultures have different constellations. Different cultures have different names for their constellations. Regardless of culture, constellations contain stars of variable distances and amplitudes, they are not remotely in the same area. Many of the stars in constellations are, in fact, galaxies, not stars. Over time, the positions of the stars change relative to earth. There doesn't seem to be any reason to think of it as anything but the hardwiring that makes humans try to find patterns in everything.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 21, 2012 4:04:50 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jun 21, 2012 4:05:02 PM PDT
'probabilist says:
Jack Vix wrote:

> Nah, I'm just gonna go with that it was aliens. :)

"Beam me up, Fred!"

,.-)

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 21, 2012 4:13:02 PM PDT
Astrocat says:
Mark, in case you missed it, I am an astrologer, and have been for over 40 years. And I still don't play those kinds of games.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 2, 2012 5:11:49 PM PDT
roeselare says:
there's validity in knowing the astrological signs and then knowing where they are, day and night. Without the the signs it would be much more difficult to remember our orientation. It would be much more difficult to have such a quite precise system for referencing. Most people don't realize that we face almost the whole universe during every 24 hours.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 5, 2012 4:14:37 PM PDT
Jeff Marzano says:
Mark R. Allen says:

[You haven't answered the question asked of you: what is the basis of your belief and confidence in Cayce, especially when no science agrees with him and he makes insupportable claims ?]

There's a big difference between saying something is untrue and saying it cannot be proven scientifically. This is where the minds of some scientists take a major wrong turning.

The things Edgar Cayce said about the ancient past in places like Atlantis and Egypt match up with the writings of other people. What he said about Christ matches up with the bible and those other sources also.

Astrology, like religion and many other subjective areas, is not a scientific subject.

There are no reliable scientific theories about how for example the pyramids were built. Even the hypocrite Egyptologists admit this. Every theory they come up with to attempt to explain how the pyramids were built is stupider than the last. Science disproves rather than supports those theories.

For one thing Egyptologists usually do not understand mathematics, physics, etc., so they are the least qualified people to come up with theories of how these engineering marvels were created. If they understood science they would realize that these monuments were created using methods that are outside of any science that is in the public domain today.

But even if it was possible to pile millions and millions of massive stones on top of each other and place them with unimaginable accuracy, the questions remain about why was this done ? Not that these pyramids are just piles of rocks by any means.

That's where people like Cayce come into the picture. I say people like Cayce but really there never was anyone else like him. He provided a completely alternative explanation of Egypt's mysterious legacy and it was Cayce who identified the connection between Egypt and Atlantis. This gets into the idea that Cayce was the reincarnation of the Egyptian god Osiris. He was directly involved with doing all of this together with Thoth, Isis, and Horus.

Now we're getting into mythology and the mythological gods and goddesses. What does someone like Zeus really represent ? I don't know but Zeus and those others are very real.

Skepticism becomes a disease of the mind for some people. Atheism is the most extreme and cancerous form of this disease.

Jeff Marzano

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 6, 2012 7:32:49 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 6, 2012 7:36:19 AM PDT
Bubba says:
Jack Vix says: "They have pots that they made out of blocks of stone. We can't even do that today. Who knows what kind of technology they had."

It is far easier to clean pots made of ceramic, glass, or stainless steel. Stone pots can also damage dishwashers and dishwashers can damage stone pots.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 6, 2012 7:35:19 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 6, 2012 7:36:35 AM PDT
Bubba says:
Using the astrological signs for orientation or navigation is not astrology.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 6, 2012 10:07:17 AM PDT
Macaron says:
These were not the names of planets, but the names of the spirits or intelligences associated with those planets which the pagans called "gods" and "goddesses".

Posted on Jul 6, 2012 10:28:07 AM PDT
Astrocat says:
Venus, the brightest planet in our sky, was named after the Roman goddess of love and beauty.

Mercury, the fastest- moving planet, was named after the fleet-footed messenger of the gods.

Mars was named after the Roman god of war.

Saturn was named after the Roman god of farming.

Jupiter, the largest planet, took its name from the Romans' chief god.

The planet Uranus wasn't discovered until 1781, and was originally called Georgium, after King George III, who ruled England at the time. But it was soon decided that since all the other planets took their names from ancient gods, the new planet should also. It was then named after the Greek god of the sky.

Next to be discovered was Neptune, in 1846. It was originally called Leverrier after the man who first sighted it, but was later named after the Roman god of the sea.

And Pluto, discovered in 1930, was named after the Roman god of the dead.

Posted on Jul 6, 2012 10:29:07 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 6, 2012 11:11:50 AM PDT
Macaron says:
Copernicus, Kepler, Newton, Tycho Brahe, Francis Bacon, Shakespear, and many another learned individual who studied astrology, acknowledged the validity of much of what ancient astrology taught.

Moshe Chaim Luzzatto, a great kabbalist, wrote that every thing material that exists in the world has it's roots in the celestial agencies above, meaning the stars.

Anyone who will take the time to study the symbolism of the 4 elements and 12 zodiacal signs, can then determine the truth of that knowledge by guessing, 1st, the element which a person is born under, whenever he meets a new person. After a period of time, the success rate on guessing will surpass 85 to 90 percent. At that point, the person can go on to then guess the persons zodiacal sun sign (tropical) and ultimately achieve the same success rate. The same for the moon sign and rising sign.

It is NOT a "science", but more of an "ART", that must be understood intuitively, besides all the other material regarding symbolism and geometrical relationships between the planets.

Carl Jung, the famous Swiss psychotherapist, in his book, SYNCHRONICITY, AN ACAUSAL CONNECTING PRINCIPLE, wrote that a psychotherapist could not accurately diagnose, nor properly treat, a mental/emotional disorder of a client without having their accurate and complete astrological natal horoscope. He also wrote that the universe is like one great cosmic clock, where when one thing moves "here" and another thing moves "there", they are connected by what he called "synchronicity", not that a planet "out there" causes a person to behave a certain way "here" by direct invisible and causal influence.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 6, 2012 10:39:40 AM PDT
Astrocat says:
Macaron, it is an art, that's true, but an art that demands the development of the intuition. When I do a chart I get in contact with the soul consciousness of that individual, and combining that energy with the keywords for the signs, aspects, elements, qualities, rays and so on, give a completely personalized picture of that person. Recognizing that the soul consciousness exists and is individualized, not getting into theosophy here, has been the greatest help.

I have no air in my chart, as far as planets in air signs, so I am eminently practical, but my Ascendant energy is much stronger than the Sun energy of Leo. My thinking is, and has been borne out, that when a person begins to transcend the personality, the quality of the Ascendant becomes foremost, like the yeast that makes the bread rise, while the Sun sign energy is like the icing on the cake. For me, Leo provides me with a sense of humor and irony, while Cancer ascending gives me the compassion and understanding I need to get along with just about everyone.

Posted on Jul 7, 2012 1:36:03 PM PDT
Macaron says:
The people that got the most votes here are the ones with the least knowledge or awareness on the subject, and the people with the MOST knowledge and awareness of the subject received the least votes (or even no votes).........go figure......this is not any real forum for reaching brain-dead individuals ignorant of the inner worlds, also known as so-called "scientific materialists" who vote positively on irrelevant and uneducated material and individuals.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 7, 2012 2:00:51 PM PDT
AxeGrrl says:
Macaron wrote: "brain-dead individuals ignorant of the inner worlds, also known as so-called "scientific materialists"
~~~~

I'm curious, what does astrology have to say about tossing out arrogance-based insults?

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 7, 2012 2:55:49 PM PDT
Yes, yes, exactly. What happens when Georgium is in the 10th house?

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 7, 2012 6:01:15 PM PDT
Astrocat says:
When Uranus is in the 10th house? Depends on the sign it's in, for one thing, but since Uranus is about the unexpected, rebellion, liberation from old, tired ways and methods, and the 10th house is the house of career, ambition, externalised service, the career choices are usually not the most traditional, and the individual is not conducive to being told what to do. S/he might take suggestions but will not enjoy taking orders, at least not in the orthodox sense.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 7, 2012 8:17:13 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 7, 2012 8:43:14 PM PDT
Macaron says:
Actually, you're not curious at all, merely telling me I'm "arrogant" for stating the obvious. If the shoe fits...........in your case........

BTW, I posted the names of only a few of the scientists who were much greater in the realm of SCIENCE than ANY who have posted here, and, who studied the art and science of Astrology, and found the truth of it, although anyone knows it's not an EXACT science, but neither are a number of "sciences" not mathematically based. Astrology is BOTH a mathematically based Science, AND an Art, which requires BOTH knowledge and intuition to interpret it's calculations and symbols.

Anyone who has had her/his natal horoscope erected correctly according to Tropical Astrology and Placidus houses, will come to the certain conclusion that astrology is an extremely valuable Art and Science which can describe every single thing about a person's character, personality, individuality, intelligence, life, health and every other facet of their nature and life (except certain concealed factors regarding their soul).

In kabbalah, Astrology is called "the illumination from the left side", meaning it does NOT encompass the concept that the decree of G-d can overcome any fatalistic determination in Astrology, therefore Avraham was told by G-d to "get yourself OUT of THERE", meaning out of that mind-set that astrology is the ultimate knowledge of a person or event.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 7, 2012 8:48:59 PM PDT
AxeGrrl says:
Macaron wrote: "merely telling me I'm "arrogant" for stating the obvious"
~~~~

What is "obvious" _is_ your insulting arrogance in asserting that scientific materialists are "brain-dead".

Sorry if me pointing it out is irksome to you.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 7, 2012 9:09:45 PM PDT
Yog-Sothoth says:
JM: ""Nothing the Mayans did is contradicted by any scientific evidence."

One SIMPLE thing they got wrong - and "contradicted by science" is *Leap Year". The Maya had no concept of it. They just "added days" when it was convenient to re-synch the count to match the astronomical "alignments" (solstices, equinoxes, etc.)

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 7, 2012 9:26:25 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 7, 2012 9:29:08 PM PDT
Yog-Sothoth says:
Macaron: "Copernicus, Kepler, Newton, Tycho Brahe, Francis Bacon, Shakespear, and many another learned individual who studied astrology, acknowledged the validity of much of what ancient astrology taught."

These men were "astrologers" which is true - in that they often cast charts for nobles and affluent folks as a means of support for themselves. In those days society was still immersed in superstition and belief in "majick". It was their discoveries that separated the bunkum of astrology from fact - from this came the the *science* of astronomy. Much of "what ancient astrology taught" WAS scientific - and a lot of it was pure B.S. They proved to thinking people of the world that those moving lights in the sky were NOT literally "heavenly bodies", whose movements were ordained by Fate or the Will of God - and that they had absolutely NO influence on the lives of man.
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


Recent discussions in the Religion forum

 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Religion forum
Participants:  26
Total posts:  87
Initial post:  Jun 16, 2012
Latest post:  Jul 9, 2012

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 2 customers

Search Customer Discussions