BA's new Astrology article

[tracer]

In the Bad Astronomer's new article on astrology, at http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/misc/astrology.html , he writes:

the different kinds of astrology seem to outnumber the stars in the sky.
Well, maybe the stars visible to the naked eye in the sky. Even considering the proliferation of pseudoscience, tt'd be kind of hard to have 15 quintillion different kinds of astrology. ;)

they all operate under a very broad working assumption: there is some sort of force from the heavens that influences us here on Earth.

Actually, some forms of astrology claim there is no direct influence at all -- merely that events on Earth go in rhythms that are synchronized with the motions of the planets and stars in some way, e.g. there's some natural rhythm on Earth (personalities of babies born at the present time, f'rinstance) that coincides, by accident or by design, with the time it takes Mars to move from one zodiacal constellation to another. Yeah, that's it, that's the ticket.

[Swift]

Actually, some forms of astrology claim there is no direct influence at all -- merely that events on Earth go in rhythms that are synchronized with the motions of the planets and stars in some way, e.g. there's some natural rhythm on Earth (personalities of babies born at the present time, f'rinstance) that coincides, by accident or by design, with the time it takes Mars to move from one zodiacal constellation to another. Yeah, that's it, that's the ticket.
But even that is proven to be nonsense by studies that find that "time twins" are not similar.

[R.A.F.]

From the "table of contents"...

Inaccuracy we trust

I just love the BA's "bad" puns. :lol:

[A Thousand Pardons]

I just love the BA's "bad" puns. :lol:
The original BA pun thread (10003) :)

[lyndonashmore]

At the risk of being thrown off the board, i do not like the statement:
"There is no force, known or unknown"
How can we say that there are no unknown forces?
Furthermore.
I contested claims on this board some time ago that ladies periods go with the full moon. I believe that I was vindicated about this. If that doesn't affect moods what does.
It is still a great pickup line "what star sign are you?' So it can't all be bad.
There is a nice lign in R Kirshners Book "the extravagant Universe" when he is sitting on a plane and the woman asks him "What do you do?"
I'm an astrophysicist!"
"Oh, what sign are you?"

Lastly, I don't believe in horoscopes but I look at them every day.
Lets ask!
When was the last time BA looked at his horoscope?
Cheers
lyndon

[The Bad Astronomer]

Read the whole page. I show that there can be no force that acts the way astrologers claim. It doesn't matter if we know about this force or not, it cannot act as they claim, or else we would see other effects.

[lyndonashmore]

Read the whole page. I show that there can be no force that acts the way astrologers claim. It doesn't matter if we know about this force or not, it cannot act as they claim, or else we would see other effects.
I will do that now (I thought I had done it) but that quote was a 'cut and paste'.
In the meantime, when was the last time you read your horoscope?
I agree with you, but come on, to be unbiased one has to read all twelve of them. When was the last time you just read your own?
Cheers
Lyndon.
P.S. what star sign are you?

[lyndonashmore]

"So it can't be a known or unknown force. That leaves nothing. Astrology doesn't work.
one cannot say this.
Followers of the Big Bang have dreampt up inflation and scalar fields which can only be found in a theorists head. these are 'unknown'.
one cannot say this with astrology.
i don't want to into anything big here, we agree that astrology is a load of whatnot. but one cannot discount 'unknown forces'.
By the way , what star sign are you?
Cheers Lyndon

[TravisM]

You can discount unknown forces lyndon.
You must not have read the whole article.

If there is an unknown force, the moon would overwelm all other 'planets.' Aslo, they don't use asteroids, comets, etc...

[lyndonashmore]

You can discount unknown forces lyndon.
You must not have read the whole article.

If there is an unknown force, the moon would overwelm all other 'planets.' Aslo, they don't use asteroids, comets, etc...
we have been through this before travism, the moon has an effect on womens periods. Fact.
It was a full moon (or near enough when the tsunami struck at Xmas. Fact.
The Moon controls the tides. We are mainly water.
I know it is a load of nonsense but one cannot discount 'unknown forces'. What bit of the unknown don't you know?
At the start of the nineteenth century, they said the whole of physics was known apart from these three 'unknown' parts.... and these three unknown parts turned the whole of physics upside down!
Sorry, but when one has an article rejecting astrology on the basis of rejecting 'unknown forces' one loses ones case.
Great article, edit it.
cheers Lyndon.

[JohnW]

The Moon controls the tides. We are mainly water.
Gravitation controls the tides. Are you suggesting the tides are an "unknown force" which only affects water?

[lyndonashmore]

The Moon controls the tides. We are mainly water.
Gravitation controls the tides. Are you suggesting the tides are an "unknown force" which only affects water?
No, I am repeating the response of astrologers when some scientist or other said that there was something in astrology. Few months ago?
All I am am saying "is give peace a chance' no not the song.
Let me give you a long answer
I live in the backwoods.
I post here because I respect the comments I get.
I hate to say this, but I don't really ) but I respect Papagenos comments and others. I post here to get feedback on my ideas - not to promote a website but to get informed feedback.
To discount "forces unknown" loses ones case. I am giving feedback as a believer, that is all.
Cheers lyndon

[frogesque]

lyndonashmore wrote:

The Moon controls the tides. We are mainly water.

No that was Tethis, the sea troll in The Colour of Magic, Terry Pratchet Discworld series, (and Tethis was composed entirely of water, suffered terrribly from tides))

#-o I do wish people would get it right ... mutters ... wanders off-stage.

[lyndonashmore]

lyndonashmore wrote:

The Moon controls the tides. We are mainly water.

No that was Tethis, the sea troll in The Colour of Magic, Terry Pratchet Discworld series, (and Tethis was composed entirely of water, suffered terrribly from tides))

#-o I do wish people would get it right ... mutters ... wanders off-stage.
OK But what star sign are you?
Lyndon

[JohnW]

OK Lyndon, I see what you were saying. I disagree with you about unknown forces - I don't see how a force can exist which can be compatible with both the laws of physics and the "laws" of astrology.

In any case, the point is moot. There are no data to explain. Therefore, we don't need to postulate any sort of "unknown force" to explain them.

[lyndonashmore]

OK Lyndon, I see what you were saying. I disagree with you about unknown forces - I don't see how a force can exist which can be compatible with both the laws of physics and the "laws" of astrology.

In any case, the point is moot. There are no data to explain. Therefore, we don't need to postulate any sort of "unknown force" to explain them.
No, one might say that there is no 'known force' that can explain things but one would not discount all 'unknown forces'
Thats all.
Its late , going to bed
See yah!
lyndon

[frogesque]

lyndenashmore wrote:

OK But what star sign are you?
Lyndon


Summer - Pegasus, Winter - Orion, Solstice - the balance between night and day.

Astrology? Save it for the Tooth Fairy.

[JohnW]

No, one might say that there is no 'known force' that can explain things...
Lyndon, I think you missed my point. Explain what things?

[Frog march]

Wouldn't the time of year that you are born affect which proportion of the night sky you would have seen at night when you were born?
Even if astrology had something to it, it would be far too complicated for someone with a bunch of charts and a downloaded astorythumthing software to make anything of.
But you can't dismiss the Unknown, for as Lyndon said "which part of unknown" do you not know?.......not that astrology isn't just a load of hogwash.

[The Bad Astronomer]

The Moon controls the tides. We are mainly water.

These two statements are non sequitor.

Tides only work across bodies of water that are huge, with edges far enough apart that the differential gravity of the Moon is important.

I am less than two meters tall. When the Moon is overhead, the tidal force across the length of my body is so small it cannot be measured. The tidal force across my body from the Earth is about a millionth of a gravity, and the Earth is both much closer, and much more massive than the Moon.

If tides from the Moon affected our behavior, it would be swamped by the difference in terrestrial tides when you are standing up versus lying down.

[The Bad Astronomer]

I have not read my horoscope for probably 20 years. Why should I?

And if astrology works, then maybe you should tell me my star sign. My personality is clearly enunciated on this board and website.

And I still say you can discount an unknown force, for the reasons I state very clearly in my page about astrology.

[JohnW]

The Moon controls the tides. We are mainly water.
Umm... that was Lyndon, not Travis. Anyway, I think he was just playing devil's advocate.

[tracer]

I contested claims on this board some time ago that ladies periods go with the full moon. I believe that I was vindicated about this.
If you're talking about this thread (http://www.badastronomy.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=19680&start=0&), I'd hardly call that vindication. The only half-way decent study cited in that thread, at http://www.athenainstitute.com/lunarmpl.html , found that 69% of a sample of 312 women started their periods some time between the Lunar First Quarter and the Lunar Last Quarter, i.e. during the "light half" of the lunar month. If it were totally random, we should expect exactly 50% of the women in the sample to be in this group, instead of 69%. However, with a sample size of only 312 subjects, that tiny 19% overage is probably just noise.

[Frog march]

I think that any effect that the moon has on people on earth would be purely caused by the visual aspect of a full moon.
Evolution might favour certain types of behavior when it is a full moon, a full moon makes it easy to hunt at night.
Synchronizing periods might make couples more faithful to each other which would mean that the group of humans or primates would be more stable and therefore more likely to survive. So the full moon may just be a means that evolution has chosen to synchronize periods. There is a part of the brain which deals with light(eg SAD, seasonal affective disorder) isn't there?

[The Bad Astronomer]

Oops. Bad editing on my part. I fixed it.

[dgavin]

I'll have to chime in on the defense of the BA's Article here.

But from the point of view of a very -former- Occultist, Nemerologist, Astrologist, Tarot Card reader, Psionic nut case in training.

I've been there, done that, and can say as i've been there and done that.

It's -ALL- a bunch of malarkey, hooy, and felgercarb (to steal a word from Glalactica).

The trick to them all in making others swallow the hogwash, was to describe situations, predictions, etc... in such a vague manner, that they could fit one of any thousands of number of things.

To quote something I in a book once and it apply's well to all these things.

"Take one part truth, two parts lies, and mix it just right and they'll swallow the whole thing." - David & Leigh Eddings 'The Ruby Knight'

I'm just happy I woke up some decades ago and stopped inflicting this sort of felgercarb on unsuspecting people.

[Donnie B.]

Phil, here's a somewhat rocky sentence from the article:

Jupiter has about 25,000 times the mass of the Moon. That's a lot! But it's also about 1500 times farther away from the Moon at its closest.

I think you mean to say that Jupiter is 1500 times farther away than the Moon.


--------------


On a more whimsical note, I'd comment that you've overlooked one possible force that could, and sometimes does, make Astrology work: the power of suggestion!

[Charlie in Dayton]

The Moon's effect on humanity has been the subject of cogitation for uncounted eons.

Is there an effect?

You be the judge. (http://www.skepticreport.com/mystics/maninthemoon.htm)

[lyndonashmore]

I have not read my horoscope for probably 20 years. Why should I?

And if astrology works, then maybe you should tell me my star sign. My personality is clearly enunciated on this board and website.

And I still say you can discount an unknown force, for the reasons I state very clearly in my page about astrology.
Well you seem:

Diplomaitic and urbane
Romantic and charming
Easygoing and sociable
Idealistic and peaceable
sounds like Libra (http://www.astrology-online.com/libra.htm) to me.
Cheers
Lyndon

[lyndonashmore]

As I say, I am not getting deep into this cos I don't believe in astrology - but you have to know 'how your enemy thinks' if one is to beat them.
I am two metres tall and mainly water. As the BA says, the gravitational force from the Moon acting on me will be different standing up than lying down. So too am I. Standing up I am active and alive, lying down I am peaceful and restive.
One gets tides on bodies of water two metres deep, a woman is two metres deep so why not tides there. It could be said that one needs large bodies of water to get tidal effects, well a large body of water is like lots of small bodies side by side. Put lots of women together in a convent say, and we should get tidal effects. We do, their periods run in sink.
Cheers'
Lyndon
And I still say you can't say that there is "no force known or unknown" one can never discount the unknown.

[Frog march]

I suppose that there must be an atmospheric "tide" that makes the jet stream rise, although I have never heard of one.

[Fram]

As I say, I am not getting deep into this cos I don't believe in astrology - but you have to know 'how your enemy thinks' if one is to beat them.
I am two metres tall and mainly water. As the BA says, the gravitational force from the Moon acting on me will be different standing up than lying down. So too am I. Standing up I am active and alive, lying down I am peaceful and restive.
One gets tides on bodies of water two metres deep, a woman is two metres deep so why not tides there. It could be said that one needs large bodies of water to get tidal effects, well a large body of water is like lots of small bodies side by side. Put lots of women together in a convent say, and we should get tidal effects. We do, their periods run in sink.
Cheers'
Lyndon
And I still say you can't say that there is "no force known or unknown" one can never discount the unknown.
Emphasis mine.
Lyndon, are you serious? You haven't really thought this through, have you?
This is absolutely not true, as the water cannot get from one body to the other. Or do you really believe that the women at the outer rim of the convent will lose water, while those at the middle will gain some? Get real!
And I think you're misinterpreting what the BA said, but he can defend or clarify himself well enough

[R.A.F.]

OK, help me out here...

...the gravitational force from the Moon acting on me will be different standing up than lying down. So too am I. Standing up I am active and alive, lying down I am peaceful and restive.

You're saying that the Moon's gravitational force is the reason that you're "active" while standing and "restful" while lying??

One gets tides on bodies of water two metres deep, a woman is two metres deep so why not tides there. It could be said that one needs large bodies of water to get tidal effects, well a large body of water is like lots of small bodies side by side. Put lots of women together in a convent say, and we should get tidal effects. We do, their periods run in sink.

Pheronomes, Lyndon, Pheronomes... (http://www.ishipress.com/humanodo.htm)

...I still say you can't say that there is "no force known or unknown" one can never discount the unknown.

One certainly can if the "unknown force" doesn't do anything...and is simply used as an "excuse" for bad science.

[mid]

I contested claims on this board some time ago that ladies periods go with the full moon. I believe that I was vindicated about this. If that doesn't affect moods what does.

Do they expletive. If that were the case, then they would more reliably last the same length of time. It's only anecdotal, but of the women I know such details about, more have erratic periods than not.

[Tassel]

And I still say you can't say that there is "no force known or unknown" one can never discount the unknown.
BA was specific with what he said: unknown force

The force he is suggesting can be discounted is a force that would be generated by celestial bodies. But not by all celestial bodies. Stars don't produce this force. Asteroids do not produce this force. Moons (apparently) do not generate this force. Planets do, but only if they are within some undefined range. However, as long as they are within this undefined range, the amount of force does not vary with distance.

Again, taken in context, BA was specific regarding the "unknown" he was suggesting can be discounted. If you are going to argue with the statement in the article, you are arguing that the force described above is a possibility that can't be discounted. Do you believe the force described above is a possibility?

[Frog march]

what if someone was born on mars, surely the Earth then would become one of the planets in the astrology system, what say they to that future possibility, can they cope?

[Yorkshireman]

As I say, I am not getting deep into this cos I don't believe in astrology - but you have to know 'how your enemy thinks' if one is to beat them.


Lyndon, you doth protest too much methinks. All the rest of your arguments here are clearly saying you believe, or want to believe, there is something in it all. Why else would you be coming out with hoary old arguments like 'the Moon controls the tides, the human body is mostly water' if you weren't trying to justify an alleged astrological influence?

[JohnW]

Lyndon, may I suggest an experiment?

Fill a measuring cylinder or large glass with water. Put a lid on it to stop it evaporating. Measure the water's depth at high tide. Measure its depth at low tide. Any difference?

[lyndonashmore]

As I say, I am not getting deep into this cos I don't believe in astrology - but you have to know 'how your enemy thinks' if one is to beat them.


Lyndon, you doth protest too much methinks. All the rest of your arguments here are clearly saying you believe, or want to believe, there is something in it all. Why else would you be coming out with hoary old arguments like 'the Moon controls the tides, the human body is mostly water' if you weren't trying to justify an alleged astrological influence?
I didn't believe in astrology but the more one thinks about it.....
You see one has to take into account not only the masses of the planets but their positions also. When one looks up at a new moon the Earth is pulling you down with a constant force - your weight, but the Sun and Moon are at the same side of the earth and combining their efforts to pull in the same direction. On a full moon the Sun and Moon are on opposite sides of the earth so the Suns gravitational force acts in the oposite direction to the Moons.
All this squashing and stretching of you could affect one and certainly squeeze a little egg out of its nesting place.
Then of course, as the planets move one has to add the effects of their gravity which will also change with position.
We get used to constant large things so they have no effect - it is the small nuances that make the changes.
That is we are used to the Moon but the planets, now they are a different matter.
Cheers Lyndon

[Sticks]

I once heard somewhere that during WW2 the allies turned to astrologers, not because they believed in it, but because Hitler (or some other top officials) believed in it, and the allies wanted to know what the other sides astrologers were saying.

Any one got any more on this ? :-?

BTW, I once saw a TV programme where they tried to give some pseudo-scientific cudos to astrology by talking about resonance :o IIRC The planets rotate forming circles, as the solar system moves through space that becomes a helix - which by "resonance" affects the helix of DNA :-s


Any hue

I find Phil's demolition of astrology enthralling with some other things I can add to my "Why Astrology is bunk" =D>

The interesting irony, is that, if I have read Phil's personality correctly, he comes from atheism and I come from Christianity, yet we both are in agreement on this and would use the same arguments. From the Christian perspective, astrology is one of those things that is prohibited.

People ask where is the harm, but suppose someone says your horroscope fortells that you will die on a certain date (not that they usually give so accurate a prediction). How would you feel as that day dawned?

Returning to Newspaper Horroscopes, IIRC there was a case when one newspaper, by error published a horroscope from the previous week, and nobody noticed

Plus they are so vague, you could have the same waffle by each star sign and it would equally apply

[R.A.F.]

We get used to constant large things so they have no effect - it is the small nuances that make the changes.

So the "obvious" forces don't effect us, but the "subtle" forces do??

That's like reverse logic. [-X

[Sticks]

We get used to constant large things so they have no effect - it is the small nuances that make the changes.
That is we are used to the Moon but the planets, now they are a different matter.
Cheers Lyndon

So the Butterfly effect makes Astrology real and proper :-s

Now let me see, the Butterfly effect, is that not part of Chaos theory which says how things may not be predeicted

hmm. :-k

[JohnW]

As I say, I am not getting deep into this cos I don't believe in astrology - but you have to know 'how your enemy thinks' if one is to beat them.


Lyndon, you doth protest too much methinks. All the rest of your arguments here are clearly saying you believe, or want to believe, there is something in it all. Why else would you be coming out with hoary old arguments like 'the Moon controls the tides, the human body is mostly water' if you weren't trying to justify an alleged astrological influence?
I didn't believe in astrology but the more one thinks about it.....
You see one has to take into account not only the masses of the planets but their positions also. When one looks up at a new moon the Earth is pulling you down with a constant force - your weight, but the Sun and Moon are at the same side of the earth and combining their efforts to pull in the same direction. On a full moon the Sun and Moon are on opposite sides of the earth so the Suns gravitational force acts in the oposite direction to the Moons.
All this squashing and stretching of you could affect one and certainly squeeze a little egg out of its nesting place.
Then of course, as the planets move one has to add the effects of their gravity which will also change with position.
We get used to constant large things so they have no effect - it is the small nuances that make the changes.
That is we are used to the Moon but the planets, now they are a different matter.
Cheers Lyndon
I did a quick calculation. The gravitational force from Mars at its closest approach is about the same as that from a 50kg mass a metre away. In other words, whether I choose to sit at the front or the back of the bus this afternoon is going to affect me about as much as the positions of the planets. I'd certainly agree that they're "small nuances".

[A Thousand Pardons]

As I say, I am not getting deep into this cos I don't believe in astrology - but you have to know 'how your enemy thinks' if one is to beat them.
I am two metres tall and mainly water. As the BA says, the gravitational force from the Moon acting on me will be different standing up than lying down. So too am I. Standing up I am active and alive, lying down I am peaceful and restive.
One gets tides on bodies of water two metres deep, a woman is two metres deep so why not tides there. It could be said that one needs large bodies of water to get tidal effects, well a large body of water is like lots of small bodies side by side. Put lots of women together in a convent say, and we should get tidal effects. We do, their periods run in sink.
Cheers'
Lyndon
And I still say you can't say that there is "no force known or unknown" one can never discount the unknown.
Emphasis mine.
Lyndon, are you serious? You haven't really thought this through, have you?
This is absolutely not true, as the water cannot get from one body to the other.
Right.

The tidal force is proportional to the inverse cube of distance, but it is proportional to the size of the body too, measured as a distance from the tide-raising body. A two meter tall woman is not going to have much of a tide, and placing two or more of them side by side does not change it.

[wedgebert]

The planets have been around longer than the moon has, so why wouldn't be used to them?

You must have missed the part where the BA explained how strong an effect the planet's gravity exerts on us. That amount is only able to determined mathematically because it's too small to measure.

If the moon exerted tides on us, then you should feel "active and alive" when the moon is on the horizon if you lay down with your head towards it.

Using the google calculator, I calcuate the effect Luna has on my head as being 0.00266456597 newtons. This is using an the 384,000 km average orbital distance, my mass as 80 kg and Luna's mass as 7.36 * 10^22 kg.
Using a height of 1.8 meters, I get a force of 0.00266456595 newtons on ny feet.

So doing the math you get
0.00266456597
-0.00266456595
-------------------
0.00000000002 newtons

This translates into 4.49617886 × 10^-12 pounds force. Not what I'd call a very large amount of force.

*** Edit - Added the negative sign...

[Tensor]

This translates into 4.49617886 × 10^12 pounds force. Not what I'd call a very large amount of force.

You missed a negative sign here, right? 8)

[Yorkshireman]

I didn't believe in astrology but the more one thinks about it.....
...the more unbelievable it gets? :)


You see one has to take into account not only the masses of the planets but their positions also. When one looks up at a new moon the Earth is pulling you down with a constant force - your weight, but the Sun and Moon are at the same side of the earth and combining their efforts to pull in the same direction. On a full moon the Sun and Moon are on opposite sides of the earth so the Suns gravitational force acts in the oposite direction to the Moons.

Yes it does - by about a ten-millionth of a g.

All this squashing and stretching of you could affect one and certainly squeeze a little egg out of its nesting place.
Then of course, as the planets move one has to add the effects of their gravity which will also change with position.
These 'stretching and squashing' effects will be swamped by differences in the weight of material of the clothes you have on that day, whether you have had a haircut recently (the weight of the hair on your head will be a few grams, about a hundred thousandth of your weight). Why don't horoscopes advise having a short back and sides to counter the effect of Mars?

We get used to constant large things so they have no effect - it is the small nuances that make the changes.
That is we are used to the Moon but the planets, now they are a different matter.
Cheers Lyndon

So now you're saying the Moon doesn't influence us, but the rest of the planets do? What is your thesis here?

[wedgebert]

This translates into 4.49617886 × 10^12 pounds force. Not what I'd call a very large amount of force.

You missed a negative sign here, right? 8)

Yeah, whoops. Fixed it...

[Sinanju]

I have not read my horoscope for probably 20 years. Why should I?

And if astrology works, then maybe you should tell me my star sign. My personality is clearly enunciated on this board and website.

And I still say you can discount an unknown force, for the reasons I state very clearly in my page about astrology.

Taurus or Scorpio?

Pisces here... and while I do not believe astrology.. I always find it amusing to read how I am "supposed" to order my life each day...

[The Bad Astronomer]

Diplomaitic and urbane
Romantic and charming
Easygoing and sociable
Idealistic and peaceable
sounds like Libra (http://www.astrology-online.com/libra.htm) to me.


That's funny. I would say that maybe two or three of those eight characteristics describe me.

And I'd be more impressed with your guess if my sign weren't listed on page 216 of my book.

[Christopher Ferro]

... I always find it amusing to read how I am "supposed" to order my life each day...

Which is exactly how astrology "works." You read how you are "supposed" to be, and what you are "supposed" to do. So you DO those things and after a while, guess what? You BECOME your sign!

A problem I have with astrology is that it's bigotry. Replace "Leo" or "Capricorn" with "Asian" or "Blonde" or "Black" and what would you have? How is saying "Oh, you're a Virgo, so of couse you'd react that way" any different than saying "Oh, you're [insert group], so that's why you can't do that" or similar?

CJSF

[Sinanju]

... I always find it amusing to read how I am "supposed" to order my life each day...

Which is exactly how astrology "works." You read how you are "supposed" to be, and what you are "supposed" to do. So you DO those things and after a while, guess what? You BECOME your sign!

A problem I have with astrology is that it's bigotry. Replace "Leo" or "Capricorn" with "Asian" or "Blonde" or "Black" and what would you have? How is saying "Oh, you're a Virgo, so of couse you'd react that way" any different than saying "Oh, you're [insert group], so that's why you can't do that" or similar?

CJSF

No kidding, it is all an assumption... although, when i was single i picked up a lot of ladies who thought i was "sensitive" because I was a Pisces...




Talk about a reality check!

[R.A.F.]

Diplomaitic and urbane
Romantic and charming
Easygoing and sociable
Idealistic and peaceable
sounds like Libra (http://www.astrology-online.com/libra.htm) to me.


That's funny. I would say that maybe two or three of those eight characteristics describe me.

Hmmm...now to figure out which 2 or 3. :)

And I'd be more impressed with your guess if my sign weren't listed on page 216 of my book.

Yep...the BA says it right in the "book". Does that prove that's where Lyndon got that information? No...but we do know that there were "other" means of gathering that information which have nothing to do with "astrology".

[01101001]

Diplomaitic and urbane
Romantic and charming
Easygoing and sociable
Idealistic and peaceable
sounds like Libra (http://www.astrology-online.com/libra.htm) to me.


That's funny. I would say that maybe two or three of those eight characteristics describe me.

And I'd be more impressed with your guess if my sign weren't listed on page 216 of my book.
Dang. It describes me perfectly, and I'm an Aries. I must have been born 6 months premature! Fascinating stuff.

[zebo-the-fat]

As I have said before, if I give my birth date, time and location to 50 astrologers will they all give the same predictions for me? If not why not?

If I give a sample of copper to 50 chemists they will all give the same results for mass, purity, density etc.

(Chemistry works, astrology doesn't)

(My birth sign is a beer glass :D )

[Swift]

Diplomaitic and urbane
Romantic and charming
Easygoing and sociable
Idealistic and peaceable
sounds like Libra (http://www.astrology-online.com/libra.htm) to me.


That's funny. I would say that maybe two or three of those eight characteristics describe me.

And I'd be more impressed with your guess if my sign weren't listed on page 216 of my book.
Dang. It describes me perfectly, and I'm an Aries. I must have been born 6 months premature! Fascinating stuff.
Well, there are people who say they are really a woman, but were born in a man's body (and visa versa). There are surgical means to correct this.

Maybe you can get the surgery to change you into a Libra?
:o
8-[
:lol:

[lyndonashmore]

Diplomaitic and urbane
Romantic and charming
Easygoing and sociable
Idealistic and peaceable
sounds like Libra (http://www.astrology-online.com/libra.htm) to me.


That's funny. I would say that maybe two or three of those eight characteristics describe me.

And I'd be more impressed with your guess if my sign weren't listed on page 216 of my book.
Does that mean I got it right?
cheers lyndon.

[lyndonashmore]

You see, the Moon is so close that it affects us all equally. That is why it is not included in astrologists books. why bother telling us all what everyone is going to do? Boring. What we need is how individuals differ. In fact anyone whose characteristics don't change with the Moon is called a 'lunatic'.
So it is the other nuances that make the differences between us. where the Sun was when we were born, the vector addition of the graitational pulls of the planets. this is what matters.
Cheers lyndon
Nope, the more I think about it the more I think there is in astrology!

[tjm220]

Diplomaitic and urbane
Romantic and charming
Easygoing and sociable
Idealistic and peaceable
sounds like Libra (http://www.astrology-online.com/libra.htm) to me.


That's funny. I would say that maybe two or three of those eight characteristics describe me.

And I'd be more impressed with your guess if my sign weren't listed on page 216 of my book.
Does that mean I got it right?
cheers lyndon.

Not by any mystical means. :D

[The Bad Astronomer]

You see, the Moon is so close that it affects us all equally.

So being farther away means Jupiter affects us differently? That makes no sense whatsoever, and is in fact opposite of how the Universe works. Things that are closer affect you more.

[R.A.F.]

That makes no sense whatsoever...

It's Bizarro. :)

[Swift]

You see, the Moon is so close that it affects us all equally.

So being farther away means Jupiter affects us differently? That makes no sense whatsoever, and is in fact opposite of how the Universe works. Things that are closer affect you more.
And if by some weird set of rules was how this worked, then planets around other stars would have an even bigger effect!

[TravisM]

Maybe you mean "The" force... luke... :wink:

Realy, I think we can discount/throw out/dismiss/reject/over-look/not pay attention to unknown forces, per. the rules the 'professional' astrologers use.

[tracer]

That makes no sense whatsoever, and is in fact opposite of how the Universe works. Things that are closer affect you more.
With the exception of the Strong Nuclear Force at intranuclear distances, of course.

[Psi-less]

In fact anyone whose characteristics don't change with the Moon is called a 'lunatic'.

Nitpick: from the OED: "lunatic--Originally, affected with the kind of insanity that was supposed to have recurring periods dependent on the changes of the moon." People supposedly affected by the moon were considered "lunatic", those unaffected were "normal". /Nitpick

Psi-less

[Sock puppet]

So, what happens when people go to the moon? I mean, if the moon is having some influence (even the same one) on everyone, would that change when they get to the moon? Would they be a sufficient distance away that the Earth would become relevant? If not, why not? There is a substantial change in the gravitational and tidal forces experienced.

Does Sedna affect us? Do the KBO's(Kuiper Belt Objects)? If not, why not?

[lyndonashmore]

You see, the Moon is so close that it affects us all equally.

So being farther away means Jupiter affects us differently? That makes no sense whatsoever, and is in fact opposite of how the Universe works. Things that are closer affect you more.
Ashmore’s Scientific Proof Of Astrology.
There are forces, gravitational ones that act upon us and change with the positions of the planets, Sun, Moon and constellations. As to whether these ‘nuances’ are strong enough to affect us and change our outlook on life is the only thing left open to question - astrologers say it does, one or two on this board say it doesn’t.
Imagine yourself stood up on the Earth. There is a constant force of gravity acting on you due to the Earth. Since it is constant then it will not affect changes in your life so let’s leave this out. Mind you, when we travel there will be slight changes in the ‘local gravity’ and this is what probably affects our moods when we travel. As people here know, I am a great fan of Feynman so lets imagine one of his ‘little arrows’ on the top our head to represent the magnitude and direction of the gravitational forces due to everything but the earth.
The Moon is the next big effect due to its closeness but the Earth turns under the Moon once a day and so any effects due to the Moon will change hourly and so in any daily horoscope one cannot include the Moon. Over the day its effects average out. Of course, lunar eclipses affect our horoscopes like the one due on April 24th which will “trigger powerful insights” for Aquarians like myself. However, this is not the Moon but the Sun – the eclipse tells us that they are in line and tugging in opposite directions. So we will leave the Moon out of our ‘little arrow’ as well.
So lets look at the Sun next. This is big, near enough to have an effect and varies over a period greater than a day. This will be the first contributor to our ‘little arrow’.
Next, we have the planets each one providing a ‘little tug’ on us due to their gravity- the direction and magnitude of the tug changing with the relative position of the planets.
Lastly, we have the constellations of the zodiac. A constellation is a group of stars forming a pattern and so these ‘clumps of stars’ will have their own force of gravity which will be different for different constellations and thus the ‘little tugs’ will differ according to the mass and distances of the stars involved. Now in astrology instead of just looking at a particular constellation they divide the zodiac into twelve equal parts and the little tugs will depend upon the stars within that chunk of space. The constellations too will affect the magnitude and direction of the ‘little arrow’ on our head.
So we see that the ‘little arrow’ on our head that represents the resultant gravitational force due to the variables in the universe will change in length and direction as the Sun, planets and so on change position. Just as the Moon affects the water on earth and forms the tides, we are mainly water and so the organs in our body will be pulled ‘this way and that’ and thus change our outlook on life.
When we are born our star sign is set by the combined gravitational tug of the Sun and our zodiac sign – I am Aquarius so the Sun and the constellation Aquarius were both tugging in the same direction when I was born and thus programmed me for life.
So you see, there are ‘known forces’ acting on us that do vary with the positions of the heavenly bodies – astrology predicts what the magnitude and direction of the forces will be in the future and associates them with changes in life style.
You know, amongst my many talents I also write, professionally, magazine articles. I think I will write this up for an astrology magazine. I hadn’t really thought about this in depth before.
Cheers
Lyndon.
P.S. your birth sign is in your article on ‘debunking astrology’ - when you talk about precession.

[Ari Jokimaki]

...Earth turns under the Moon once a day and so any effects due to the Moon will change hourly and so in any daily horoscope one cannot include the Moon.

Ok...

So lets look at the Sun next. This is big, near enough to have an effect and varies over a period greater than a day.

No, Earth turns also under the Sun once a day and so any effects due to the Sun will change hourly and so in any daily horoscope one cannot include the Sun.

Next, we have the planets each one providing a ‘little tug’ on us due to their gravity- the direction and magnitude of the tug changing with the relative position of the planets.

Earth turns under any planet once a day and so any effects due to any planet will change hourly and so in any daily horoscope one cannot include any planet.

Lastly, we have the constellations of the zodiac.

Earth turns under any constellation once a day and so any effects due to any constellation will change hourly and so in any daily horoscope one cannot include any constellation.

Sorry for using your own argument against you. :P

[lyndonashmore]

...Earth turns under the Moon once a day and so any effects due to the Moon will change hourly and so in any daily horoscope one cannot include the Moon.

Ok...

So lets look at the Sun next. This is big, near enough to have an effect and varies over a period greater than a day.

No, Earth turns also under the Sun once a day and so any effects due to the Sun will change hourly and so in any daily horoscope one cannot include the Sun.

Next, we have the planets each one providing a ‘little tug’ on us due to their gravity- the direction and magnitude of the tug changing with the relative position of the planets.

Earth turns under any planet once a day and so any effects due to any planet will change hourly and so in any daily horoscope one cannot include any planet.

Lastly, we have the constellations of the zodiac.

Earth turns under any constellation once a day and so any effects due to any constellation will change hourly and so in any daily horoscope one cannot include any constellation.

Sorry for using your own argument against you. :P
Yeh, Ari but it is the way that they 'line up' that changes throughout the year and thus change the magnitude and direction of the 'little arrow'.
Cheers,
lyndon

[captain swoop]

Dave Gorman (http://www.davegorman.com/) lived his life by exactly following newspaper astrologists for a month. He ended up in New York at one point. Sometimes he had to do things that directly contrasdicted each other. It was featured as an insert on a comedy chat/sketch show.

[lyndonashmore]

Dave Gorman (http://www.davegorman.com/) lived his life by exactly following newspaper astrolegers for a month. He ended up in New York at one point. Sometimes he had to do things that directly contrasdicted each other. It was featured as an insert on a comedy chat/sketch show.
Maybe the local gravitational pull of the skyscrapers in NY affected his 'little arrow'?
Cheers
Lyndon

[captain swoop]

You see, the Moon is so close that it affects us all equally.

So being farther away means Jupiter affects us differently? That makes no sense whatsoever, and is in fact opposite of how the Universe works. Things that are closer affect you more.

Homeopathic Gravity?

[Ari Jokimaki]

Yeh, Ari but it is the way that they 'line up' that changes throughout the year and thus change the magnitude and direction of the 'little arrow'.

Moon's part in the line-up also changes throughout the year (being close to same place roughly once a month), so why the fact that Earth turns under it once a day is significant for the Moon but not for the other objects?

[captain swoop]

Maybe the local gravitational pull of the skyscrapers in NY affected his 'little arrow'?
Cheers
Lyndon

He went because the newspaper astrologer told him he had to go.

[papageno]

Ashmore’s Scientific Proof Of Astrology.
There are forces, gravitational ones that act upon us and change with the positions of the planets, Sun, Moon and constellations. As to whether these ‘nuances’ are strong enough to affect us and change our outlook on life is the only thing left open to question - astrologers say it does, one or two on this board say it doesn’t.
JohnW provided a quantitative estimate.
People walking around me have a stronger gravitational effect on me, than the planets.
Also, there is no evidence that these gravitational forces have an effect on the behavior of people.


Imagine yourself stood up on the Earth. There is a constant force of gravity acting on you due to the Earth. Since it is constant then it will not affect changes in your life so let’s leave this out.
Except that it is not constant.
It changes if you walk around. It changes if you stand near a building or in the open countryside. It changes if you climb a ladder or go into the basement.



Mind you, when we travel there will be slight changes in the ‘local gravity’ and this is what probably affects our moods when we travel. As people here know, I am a great fan of Feynman so lets imagine one of his ‘little arrows’ on the top our head to represent the magnitude and direction of the gravitational forces due to everything but the earth.
No, you have to include the little variations in the Earth's gravitational pull, because these variations are at least of the same order of magnitude as the gravitational pull of the other planets.


The Moon is the next big effect...
What about the Sun?


.... due to its closeness but the Earth turns under the Moon once a day and so any effects due to the Moon will change hourly and so in any daily horoscope one cannot include the Moon.
No, since it is so close, you have to include it.
The gravitational force due to the Moon is stronger than the gravity from the other planets.
The variations of the gravity from the Moon, even averaging over a day, are not necessarily negligible.
You to show that the effects are negligible, but so far you are only hand-waving.



Over the day its effects average out. Of course, lunar eclipses affect our horoscopes like the one due on April 24th which will “trigger powerful insights” for Aquarians like myself. However, this is not the Moon but the Sun – the eclipse tells us that they are in line and tugging in opposite directions. So we will leave the Moon out of our ‘little arrow’ as well.
Where are your calculations that show that the variations in the gravity of the Earth and the effect of the Moon are negligible?
You have to provide quantitative estimates, otherwise you no justification to neglect these effects.


So lets look at the Sun next. This is big, near enough to have an effect and varies over a period greater than a day. This will be the first contributor to our ‘little arrow’.
Why "period greater than a day"?
You "averaged" the effect of the Moon because "the Earth turns under the Moon once a day".
Exactly the same happens with the Sun, so you should "average out" the effect of the Sun as well.
You cannot be this incoherent and expect to be taken seriously.


Next, we have the planets each one providing a ‘little tug’ on us due to their gravity- the direction and magnitude of the tug changing with the relative position of the planets.
You are supposed to provide quantitative estimates of these "tugs".


Lastly, we have the constellations of the zodiac. A constellation is a group of stars forming a pattern and so these ‘clumps of stars’ will have their own force of gravity which will be different for different constellations and thus the ‘little tugs’ will differ according to the mass and distances of the stars involved. Now in astrology instead of just looking at a particular constellation they divide the zodiac into twelve equal parts...
Let me add "chosen arbitrarily".
Also, astrology seems to neglect constellations far from our orbital plane: why?
Are these stars negligible? If so, why?


... and the little tugs will depend upon the stars within that chunk of space. The constellations too will affect the magnitude and direction of the ‘little arrow’ on our head.
So we see that the ‘little arrow’ on our head that represents the resultant gravitational force due to the variables in the universe will change in length and direction as the Sun, planets and so on change position.
"And so on" includes people, cars, buildings, airplanes, red hot magma*, asteroids, comets, sunspots, and all the things that move around in the Solar System.



Just as the Moon affects the water on earth and forms the tides, ...
Don't forget the Sun.


...we are mainly water and so the organs in our body will be pulled ‘this way and that’ and thus change our outlook on life.
Except that the tides are of the order meters or dozens of meters compared to about 12000 km (the Earth's diameter), which is 1:10^6.
So, over the height of a body, the displacement would be of the order of microns in the best case.
I think that microbes in the bodies have a larger effect than the Moon.


When we are born our star sign is set by the combined gravitational tug of the Sun and our zodiac sign...
And the positions of the people around you, the cars outside the building, the planes flying over your head, the red hot magma in the mantle, all the stars and galaxies that are not part of the zodiac...



– I am Aquarius so the Sun and the constellation Aquarius were both tugging in the same direction when I was born and thus programmed me for life.
So you see, there are ‘known forces’ acting on us that do vary with the positions of the heavenly bodies...
And terrestrial bodies.


– astrology predicts what the magnitude and direction of the forces will be in the future and associates them with changes in life style.
Except that it fails when it comes to predictions.


You know, amongst my many talents I also write, professionally, magazine articles.
But you don't do any quantitative estimates to support your ideas about astrology, not a single lonely number.


I think I will write this up for an astrology magazine.
Of course, it would be rejected by any self-respecting scientific magazine.


I hadn’t really thought about this in depth before.
And you still have not done so.




* A cookie for who gets the reference.

[Grey]

...Scientific Proof...
[Inigo Montoya accent]
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
[/Inigo Montoya accent]

[Fram]

[size=18]
There are forces, gravitational ones that act upon us and change with the positions of the planets, Sun, Moon and constellations. As to whether these ‘nuances’ are strong enough to affect us and change our outlook on life is the only thing left open to question - astrologers say it does, one or two on this board say it doesn’t.

Umm, 99 % of the scientists in the world, most intelligent people everywhere, and most people on this board say it doesn't, not 'one or two people on this board'. The rest of your extremely unscientific proof is already rejected by one or two other people. I have a feeling you're just pulling our leg, and I sincerely hope for your grasp on reality that that is what you are doing.

[Nicolas]

If the "universe force vector" determines so much, the differences in gravitational field of the earth would do so as well. That would mean that there were clear differences in behaviour according to plcae on earth. That would also mean that on different places on earth with the same gravitation, we woul see the same general behaviour. Also people who regularly get G forces (rollercoasers, jet pilots, race drivers...) should have their behaviour being changed by it? If they get a headache or backache from it, sure :).

[lyndonashmore]

If the "universe force vector" determines so much, the differences in gravitational field of the earth would do so as well. That would mean that there were clear differences in behaviour according to plcae on earth. That would also mean that on different places on earth with the same gravitation, we woul see the same general behaviour. Also people who regularly get G forces (rollercoasers, jet pilots, race drivers...) should have their behaviour being changed by it? If they get a headache or backache from it, sure :).
I included this in my proof - when we go away on holiday don't you feel different? You see it is not what the Universal force vector (i like that) is but how it varies. When we are born we are pre programmed by local gravity and the Tugs due to the Sun and the stars in our our star sign. From then on it is the changes or 'nuances' that make the diference. Don't you feel different on a rollercoaster? But when you get off your universal force vector quickly aligns itself with the planets etc to bring you back to normal.
Cheers,
Lyndon

[Fram]

If the "universe force vector" determines so much, the differences in gravitational field of the earth would do so as well. That would mean that there were clear differences in behaviour according to plcae on earth. That would also mean that on different places on earth with the same gravitation, we woul see the same general behaviour. Also people who regularly get G forces (rollercoasers, jet pilots, race drivers...) should have their behaviour being changed by it? If they get a headache or backache from it, sure :).
I included this in my proof - when we go away on holiday don't you feel different? You see it is not what the Universal force vector (i like that) is but how it varies. When we are born we are pre programmed by local gravity and the Tugs due to the Sun and the stars in our our star sign. From then on it is the changes or 'nuances' that make the diference. Don't you feel different on a rollercoaster? But when you get off your universal force vector quickly aligns itself with the planets etc to bring you back to normal.
Cheers,
Lyndon

#-o If this was true, imagine the huge difference in behaviour, character, ... due to the position of the moon and sun. That would completely overrule any change by Saturn slowly moving across its orbit...
Can you give one good reason why we would be so heavily influenced by the very very small changes, but not by the big changes?

[Nicolas]

If the "universe force vector" determines so much, the differences in gravitational field of the earth would do so as well. That would mean that there were clear differences in behaviour according to plcae on earth. That would also mean that on different places on earth with the same gravitation, we woul see the same general behaviour. Also people who regularly get G forces (rollercoasers, jet pilots, race drivers...) should have their behaviour being changed by it? If they get a headache or backache from it, sure :).
I included this in my proof - when we go away on holiday don't you feel different? You see it is not what the Universal force vector (i like that) is but how it varies. When we are born we are pre programmed by local gravity and the Tugs due to the Sun and the stars in our our star sign. From then on it is the changes or 'nuances' that make the diference. Don't you feel different on a rollercoaster? But when you get off your universal force vector quickly aligns itself with the planets etc to bring you back to normal.
Cheers,
Lyndon

I also feel different on a rock concert next to my door. I feel different when my s.o. is around. Her gravity field is minimal.

[R.A.F.]

You keep saying things like...

...when we go away on holiday don't you feel different?..snip..Don't you feel different on a rollercoaster?

...as if they were "some kind" of material proof of the viability of the astrology.

...they are not...

[lyndonashmore]

papageno wrote
JohnW provided a quantitative estimate.
People walking around me have a stronger gravitational effect on me, than the planets.
Also, there is no evidence that these gravitational forces have an effect on the behavior of people.
People next to me always have an effect on me. Besides this is a random variation. You have to remember that a daily horoscope is an average for the whole day. People moving around randomly will have effects that, over the day, cancel out so wil not be included in a horoscope for the whole day. Tides are evidence that gravity affects water, we are two thirds water QED.


Imagine yourself stood up on the Earth. There is a constant force of gravity acting on you due to the Earth. Since it is constant then it will not affect changes in your life so let’s leave this out.
Except that it is not constant.
It changes if you walk around. It changes if you stand near a building or in the open countryside. It changes if you climb a ladder or go into the basement.
Do you not feel different in the open country than you do near a building?


No, you have to include the little variations in the Earth's gravitational pull, because these variations are at least of the same order of magnitude as the gravitational pull of the other planets.
As I said when you go on holiday you feel different because the pull is different


The Moon is the next big effect...
What about the Sun?


.... due to its closeness but the Earth turns under the Moon once a day and so any effects due to the Moon will change hourly and so in any daily horoscope one cannot include the Moon.
No, since it is so close, you have to include it.
The gravitational force due to the Moon is stronger than the gravity from the other planets.
The variations of the gravity from the Moon, even averaging over a day, are not necessarily negligible.
You to show that the effects are negligible, but so far you are only hand-waving.
The tug of the Moon on our universal force vector affects our behaviour on an hourly/minutes/seconds basis. Horoscopes are for a period of a whole day, I feel diffent from hour to hour do you not?


Where are your calculations that show that the variations in the gravity of the Earth and the effect of the Moon are negligible?
You have to provide quantitative estimates, otherwise you no justification to neglect these effects.
not negligible, cancel out over the period of 24 hours so cannot be included in a daily horoscope

Exactly the same happens with the Sun, so you should "average out" the effect of the Sun as well.
You cannot be this incoherent and expect to be taken seriously.
It is the position of the Sun etc and how it lines up.



Lastly, we have the constellations of the zodiac. A constellation is a group of stars forming a pattern and so these ‘clumps of stars’ will have their own force of gravity which will be different for different constellations and thus the ‘little tugs’ will differ according to the mass and distances of the stars involved. Now in astrology instead of just looking at a particular constellation they divide the zodiac into twelve equal parts...
Let me add "chosen arbitrarily".
Also, astrology seems to neglect constellations far from our orbital plane: why?
Are these stars negligible? If so, why?
Not chosen arbitrarily, divided into twelve equal sections. The rest of the stars not in the equatorial plane are spread over a sphere and so there effect on universal force vector cancel.


"And so on" includes people, cars, buildings, airplanes, red hot magma*, asteroids, comets, sunspots, and all the things that move around in the Solar System.
Stand near red hot magma and you will feel different. (is it a chocolate cookie?)



...we are mainly water and so the organs in our body will be pulled ‘this way and that’ and thus change our outlook on life.
Except that the tides are of the order meters or dozens of meters compared to about 12000 km (the Earth's diameter), which is 1:10^6.
So, over the height of a body, the displacement would be of the order of microns in the best case.
I think that microbes in the bodies have a larger effect than the Moon.
And they affect how you feel too.


I think I will write this up for an astrology magazine.
Of course, it would be rejected by any self-respecting scientific magazine.
I am talking money here papageno, I have my Tired Light theory of redshifts and the CMb for my scientific acclaim.

Cheers,
lyndon
P.S. what star sign are you, Leo?

[lyndonashmore]

If the "universe force vector" determines so much, the differences in gravitational field of the earth would do so as well. That would mean that there were clear differences in behaviour according to plcae on earth. That would also mean that on different places on earth with the same gravitation, we woul see the same general behaviour. Also people who regularly get G forces (rollercoasers, jet pilots, race drivers...) should have their behaviour being changed by it? If they get a headache or backache from it, sure :).
I included this in my proof - when we go away on holiday don't you feel different? You see it is not what the Universal force vector (i like that) is but how it varies. When we are born we are pre programmed by local gravity and the Tugs due to the Sun and the stars in our our star sign. From then on it is the changes or 'nuances' that make the diference. Don't you feel different on a rollercoaster? But when you get off your universal force vector quickly aligns itself with the planets etc to bring you back to normal.
Cheers,
Lyndon

#-o If this was true, imagine the huge difference in behaviour, character, ... due to the position of the moon and sun. That would completely overrule any change by Saturn slowly moving across its orbit...
Can you give one good reason why we would be so heavily influenced by the very very small changes, but not by the big changes?

But this huge difference in behaviuo is what we call 'normal behaviour'. People who are out of tune are called Lunatics not because they follow the Moon but because they are out of sync with it. Periods in women have been shown to follow the Moon.
Cheers
Lyndon

[Yorkshireman]

Ashmore's Scientific Proof Of Astrology.

This promises a great deal! I'm very excited! You will be giving us unambiguous evidence that the position of the planets at people's birth really does affect their personalities and their daily lives! You will be pointing us to strong statistical surveys that not only support this, but overwhelmingly indicate astrology is the _best_ possible explanation!

Not only this, but you will be providing a well-constructed theory, rationally argued with supporting evidence, as to _how_ this mechanism works. Your theoretical mechanism will demolish all of our counter-arguments as fatally flawed! This is incredible news! This is far too important for this mere board - this should go in to a peer-reviewed journal as soon as possible!

Let's read on...


There are forces, gravitational ones that act upon us and change with the positions of the planets, Sun, Moon and constellations. As to whether these 'nuances' are strong enough to affect us and change our outlook on life is the only thing left open to question - astrologers say it does, one or two on this board say it doesn't.

So - your proposed mechanism is gravity. Well, this is a well-understood force at solar system scales, so we should be able to quantify a lot of these nuances. But wait - do all astrologers say that gravity is the responsible force? I've looked round www.astrology-online.com, and there is no mention of gravity being the underlying mechanism. Instead, we have -
"A birthchart is a set of probabilities that a soul will likely act out through forming a parting of higher conscious within the physical in order to fulfill its most likely course. Also considered is "Karma," which may be the reason for a variety of negative aspects and influences. A soul enters a fetus, knowing that at birth a particular physical consciousness and environment will be formed. It is now known that the neurons of the brain form a distinct pattern at the moment of birth, which influences your emotions and disposition. "


Imagine yourself stood up on the Earth. There is a constant force of gravity acting on you due to the Earth. Since it is constant

But it's not constant. I live 1100 feet above sea level - when I go the the beach, gravity will be different. If I climb to the top of Ingleborough at 2373 feet, it will be different again won't it?


then it will not affect changes in your life so let's leave this out.

OK - we'll leave it out.


Mind you, when we travel there will be slight changes in the 'local gravity' and this is what probably affects our moods when we travel.

No hang on, you just told me to leave it out. Is it's constant or isn't it? Are we to leave it out or not to leave it out? What if I don't travel, and simply were born on a hospital bed which had a slight slope? Won't that have changed the gravity vector acting on me?


As people here know, I am a great fan of Feynman so lets imagine one of his 'little arrows' on the top our head to represent the magnitude and direction of the gravitational forces due to everything but the earth.

OK. Arrow in place on my head. My friends are looking at me strangely. (No change there).


The Moon is the next big effect due to its closeness but the Earth turns under the Moon once a day and so any effects due to the Moon will change hourly and so in any daily horoscope one cannot include the Moon.

OK. Moon ruled out. Earth, I think, ruled out, but I'm not sure (see above). I like this, a process of elimination. This will get us to what the remaining influential astronomical bodies are.


Over the day its effects average out. Of course, lunar eclipses affect our horoscopes like the one due on April 24th which will "trigger powerful insights" for Aquarians like myself.

So you haven't had the powerful insight yet then?


However, this is not the Moon but the Sun – the eclipse tells us that they are in line and tugging in opposite directions. So we will leave the Moon out of our 'little arrow' as well.

Why don't we leave the Sun out as well?


So lets look at the Sun next. This is big, near enough to have an effect and varies over a period greater than a day. This will be the first contributor to our 'little arrow'.

How does it vary? And doesn't the Moon vary more though - the Moon is not in a completely circular orbit, neither is it exactly aligned with the ecliptic. And it is a _lot_ nearer, and the gravity from it is twice as powerful as from the Sun. If we neglect that, why don't we neglect the Sun?


Next, we have the planets each one providing a 'little tug' on us due to their gravity- the direction and magnitude of the tug changing with the relative position of the planets.

Where is the quantification I was expecting? I was looking forward to quantifiable effects.


Lastly, we have the constellations of the zodiac. A constellation is a group of stars forming a pattern and so these 'clumps of stars' will have their own force of gravity which will be different for different constellations and thus the 'little tugs' will differ according to the mass and distances of the stars involved.

Where is the quantification? Where is the scientific analysis?


Now in astrology instead of just looking at a particular constellation they divide the zodiac into twelve equal parts and the little tugs will depend upon the stars within that chunk of space. The constellations too will affect the magnitude and direction of the 'little arrow' on our head.

But - no - wait - help - why only the zodiac? You clearly stated that all constellations should affect us. Why isn't Orion in my horoscope? Or Ursa Major? Or Draco? Or Ophiuchus? Why have you just eliminated all of the non-zodiacal constellations?


So we see that the 'little arrow' on our head that represents the resultant gravitational force due to the variables in the universe will change in length and direction as the Sun, planets and so on change position. Just as the Moon affects the water on earth and forms the tides, we are mainly water and so the organs in our body will be pulled 'this way and that' and thus change our outlook on life.

Have you measured this effect? Can I see the table of results?


When we are born our star sign is set by the combined gravitational tug of the Sun and our zodiac sign – I am Aquarius so the Sun and the constellation Aquarius were both tugging in the same direction when I was born and thus programmed me for life.
So you see, there are 'known forces' acting on us that do vary with the positions of the heavenly bodies – astrology predicts what the magnitude and direction of the forces will be in the future

No it doesn't - doesn't physics and astronomy do that? Where is your reference for an astrological prediction of the magnitude and direction of the 'little arrow'?


and associates them with changes in life style.
You know, amongst my many talents I also write, professionally, magazine articles. I think I will write this up for an astrology magazine. I hadn't really thought about this in depth before.

I must have missed something - where was the scientific proof?

[Nicolas]

People next to me always have an effect on me. Besides this is a random variation. You have to remember that a daily horoscope is an average for the whole day. People moving around randomly will have effects that, over the day, cancel out so wil not be included in a horoscope for the whole day. Tides are evidence that gravity affects water, we are two thirds water QED.

nothing D in my opinion.

gravity affects anything from a force/load perspective. Even if we were 0% water, and the moon would cause huge tides, gravity would still put a load on us. But does it therefore alter our feelings?

[Nicolas]

Periods in women have been shown to follow the Moon.

With huge differences in period, and in many cases out of sync and not with a constant period. And why don't other animals have that effect? Are they less sensitive to those astrological forces?

[papageno]

JohnW provided a quantitative estimate.
People walking around me have a stronger gravitational effect on me, than the planets.
Also, there is no evidence that these gravitational forces have an effect on the behavior of people.
People next to me always have an effect on me. Besides this is a random variation. You have to remember that a daily horoscope is an average for the whole day. People moving around randomly will have effects that, over the day, cancel out so wil not be included in a horoscope for the whole day. Tides are evidence that gravity affects water, we are two thirds water QED.
Except that gravity affects every material.
We see tides in water because water is fluid and covers most of the Earth's surface, not because gravity has a special effect on water.




Imagine yourself stood up on the Earth. There is a constant force of gravity acting on you due to the Earth. Since it is constant then it will not affect changes in your life so let’s leave this out.
Except that it is not constant.
It changes if you walk around. It changes if you stand near a building or in the open countryside. It changes if you climb a ladder or go into the basement.
Do you not feel different in the open country than you do near a building?
You are avoiding the point.


No, you have to include the little variations in the Earth's gravitational pull, because these variations are at least of the same order of magnitude as the gravitational pull of the other planets.
As I said when you go on holiday you feel different because the pull is different
Didn't you say that the variations are negligible?



The Moon is the next big effect...
What about the Sun?


.... due to its closeness but the Earth turns under the Moon once a day and so any effects due to the Moon will change hourly and so in any daily horoscope one cannot include the Moon.
No, since it is so close, you have to include it.
The gravitational force due to the Moon is stronger than the gravity from the other planets.
The variations of the gravity from the Moon, even averaging over a day, are not necessarily negligible.
You to show that the effects are negligible, but so far you are only hand-waving.
The tug of the Moon on our universal force vector affects our behaviour on an hourly/minutes/seconds basis. Horoscopes are for a period of a whole day, I feel diffent from hour to hour do you not?

Avoiding the issue, again.


Where are your calculations that show that the variations in the gravity of the Earth and the effect of the Moon are negligible?
You have to provide quantitative estimates, otherwise you no justification to neglect these effects.
not negligible, cancel out over the period of 24 hours so cannot be included in a daily horoscope
I see, no quantitative estimates.


Exactly the same happens with the Sun, so you should "average out" the effect of the Sun as well.
You cannot be this incoherent and expect to be taken seriously.
It is the position of the Sun etc and how it lines up.
And why is it different from the Moon?



Lastly, we have the constellations of the zodiac. A constellation is a group of stars forming a pattern and so these ‘clumps of stars’ will have their own force of gravity which will be different for different constellations and thus the ‘little tugs’ will differ according to the mass and distances of the stars involved. Now in astrology instead of just looking at a particular constellation they divide the zodiac into twelve equal parts...
Let me add "chosen arbitrarily".
Also, astrology seems to neglect constellations far from our orbital plane: why?
Are these stars negligible? If so, why?
Not chosen arbitrarily, divided into twelve equal sections. The rest of the stars not in the equatorial plane are spread over a sphere and so there effect on universal force vector cancel.
The zodiac is part of that sphere.
Hence its effects should cancel as with all the other stars.


"And so on" includes people, cars, buildings, airplanes, red hot magma*, asteroids, comets, sunspots, and all the things that move around in the Solar System.
Stand near red hot magma and you will feel different. (is it a chocolate cookie?)
You did not get the reference. See my signature.



...we are mainly water and so the organs in our body will be pulled ‘this way and that’ and thus change our outlook on life.
Except that the tides are of the order meters or dozens of meters compared to about 12000 km (the Earth's diameter), which is 1:10^6.
So, over the height of a body, the displacement would be of the order of microns in the best case.
I think that microbes in the bodies have a larger effect than the Moon.
And they affect how you feel too.
Again, avoiding the point.



I think I will write this up for an astrology magazine.
Of course, it would be rejected by any self-respecting scientific magazine.
I am talking money here papageno, I have my Tired Light theory of redshifts and the CMb for my scientific acclaim.
Which are not scientific theories, and whose basis have benn abundantly disproven.

You avoided all my points and you provided no quantitative estimates to support.
The only thing you have proven is that you have not the slightest clue about gravity and that you are unable of examining an idea critically and scientifically.

[lyndonashmore]

To papageno and others who asked for quantitative calculations - here they are:
Jupiter has a mass of 1900x10^24kg. It is, on average 7.73x10^11m from the sun. The Earth is 1.5x10^11m from the sun. That means that the earth Jupiter distance varies between a max of 9.2x10^11m and a min of 6.2x10^11m. The max/ min forces on a water molecule in our body (mass about 2.9x10-26kg?) is (9.5 – 4.3) x10^-33N which produces accelerations of (3.3 – 1.5)x10^-7 ms^-2. Over the period of one day during your horoscope then Jupiter can cause this water molecule to move a distance of 560m to 1.2km due to Jupiter alone!
QED!
Cheers
Lyndon

[papageno]

To papageno and others who asked for quantitative calculations - here they are:
Jupiter has a mass of 1900x10^24kg. It is, on average 7.73x10^11m from the sun. The Earth is 1.5x10^11m from the sun. That means that the earth Jupiter distance varies between a max of 9.2x10^11m and a min of 6.2x10^11m. The max/ min forces on a water molecule in our body (mass about 2.9x10-26kg?) is (9.5 – 4.3) x10^-33N which produces accelerations of (3.3 – 1.5)x10^-7 ms^-2. Over the period of one day during your horoscope then Jupiter can cause this water molecule to move a distance of 560m to 1.2km due to Jupiter alone!
QED!
Cheers
Lyndon
The same water molecule travels about 70000 km in a day due to the Earth's rotation around its axis.
And you forgot to estimate the other forces acting on the molecule (for example, electric forces) and that the same force is exerted on any physical body with the same mass.

By the way, you still have not addressed the points I made in my first post.

[lyndonashmore]

To papageno and others who asked for quantitative calculations - here they are:
Jupiter has a mass of 1900x10^24kg. It is, on average 7.73x10^11m from the sun. The Earth is 1.5x10^11m from the sun. That means that the earth Jupiter distance varies between a max of 9.2x10^11m and a min of 6.2x10^11m. The max/ min forces on a water molecule in our body (mass about 2.9x10-26kg?) is (9.5 – 4.3) x10^-33N which produces accelerations of (3.3 – 1.5)x10^-7 ms^-2. Over the period of one day during your horoscope then Jupiter can cause this water molecule to move a distance of 560m to 1.2km due to Jupiter alone!
QED!
Cheers
Lyndon
The same water molecule travels about 70000 km in a day due to the Earth's rotation around its axis.
And you forgot to estimate the other forces acting on the molecule (for example, electric forces) and that the same force is exerted on any physical body with the same mass.

By the way, you still have not addressed the points I made in my first post.

The same water molecule travels about 70000 km in a day due to the Earth's rotation around its axis.
But this is as well as the body. the water molecule inside your body was in equilibrium before Jupiter came on the scene, floating. then it can move nearly 1km due to Jupiter alone during your daily horoscope. Its like water in a central heating system - it doesn't take much force to circulate it because its in equilibrium to start with.
I answered all your points in your first post - I just omitted the repetitions.
Cheers,
Lyndon

[lyndonashmore]

Yorkshireman wrote But it's not constant. I live 1100 feet above sea level - when I go the the beach, gravity will be different. If I climb to the top of Ingleborough at 2373 feet, it will be different again won't it?
Ah when I climbed Inglborough, the falls the caves I felt really different. It must have been the gravity>
Cheers,
Lyndon

[papageno]

The same water molecule travels about 70000 km in a day due to the Earth's rotation around its axis.
But this is as well as the body. the water molecule inside your body was in equilibrium before Jupiter came on the scene, floating. then it can move nearly 1km due to Jupiter alone during your daily horoscope. Its like water in a central heating system - it doesn't take much force to circulate it because its in equilibrium to start with.
You forgot about brownian motion.
And all the electric forces on a molecule.
And the fact that gravity acts on all types material.



I answered all your points in your first post - I just omitted the repetitions.
Hogwash

Where are your calculations that show that the variations in the gravity of the Earth and the effect of the Moon are negligible?
You have to provide quantitative estimates, otherwise you no justification to neglect these effects.

[...]

Exactly the same happens with the Sun, so you should "average out" the effect of the Sun as well.
You cannot be this incoherent and expect to be taken seriously.

[...]

You are supposed to provide quantitative estimates of these "tugs".

[...]

Except that gravity affects every material.
We see tides in water because water is fluid and covers most of the Earth's surface, not because gravity has a special effect on water.

[...]

The zodiac is part of that sphere.
Hence its effects should cancel as with all the other stars.


Are you going to drag this thread like the other one?

[Fram]

To papageno and others who asked for quantitative calculations - here they are:
Jupiter has a mass of 1900x10^24kg. It is, on average 7.73x10^11m from the sun. The Earth is 1.5x10^11m from the sun. That means that the earth Jupiter distance varies between a max of 9.2x10^11m and a min of 6.2x10^11m. The max/ min forces on a water molecule in our body (mass about 2.9x10-26kg?) is (9.5 – 4.3) x10^-33N which produces accelerations of (3.3 – 1.5)x10^-7 ms^-2. Over the period of one day during your horoscope then Jupiter can cause this water molecule to move a distance of 560m to 1.2km due to Jupiter alone!
QED!
Cheers
Lyndon
The same water molecule travels about 70000 km in a day due to the Earth's rotation around its axis.
And you forgot to estimate the other forces acting on the molecule (for example, electric forces) and that the same force is exerted on any physical body with the same mass.

By the way, you still have not addressed the points I made in my first post.

The same water molecule travels about 70000 km in a day due to the Earth's rotation around its axis.
But this is as well as the body. the water molecule inside your body was in equilibrium before Jupiter came on the scene, floating. then it can move nearly 1km due to Jupiter alone during your daily horoscope. Its like water in a central heating system - it doesn't take much force to circulate it because its in equilibrium to start with.
I answered all your points in your first post - I just omitted the repetitions.
Cheers,
Lyndon

Are you seriously thinking about what you are saying? First of all, Jupiter is / was always there, so there's no before/after and no equilibrium in that sense. And furthermore, do your molecules move a km a day without you doing anything? Do water molecules in open air (not restricted by a body) move that distance? Can you give an example of this? If not, why doesn't this happen?

[Frog march]

Ashmore’s Scientific Proof Of Astrology..


perhaps an astrologer fell out of an apple tree on lyndons head...!!?

[captain swoop]

Can you give one good reason why we would be so heavily influenced by the very very small changes, but not by the big changes?
I told you, Homeopathic Gravity

[Nicolas]

Can you give one good reason why we would be so heavily influenced by the very very small changes, but not by the big changes?
I told you, Homeopathic Gravity

I bet the BA goes #-o for not having that one in his article ;). (he doesn't, does he?)

[wedgebert]

Surpised noone mentioned this:

Lastly, we have the constellations of the zodiac. A constellation is a group of stars forming a pattern and so these ‘clumps of stars’ will have their own force of gravity which will be different for different constellations and thus the ‘little tugs’ will differ according to the mass and distances of the stars involved. Now in astrology instead of just looking at a particular constellation they divide the zodiac into twelve equal parts and the little tugs will depend upon the stars within that chunk of space. The constellations too will affect the magnitude and direction of the ‘little arrow’ on our head.


Just because the stars in a constellations make a vaguely disernable pattern in the sky, it doesn't mean they are anywhere near each other in space. Any two stars in a constellation might be seperated by hundreds of light years.

Also, if all the stars that aren't in the 12 zodiac constellations manage to cancel each other's effects on us out, how did the ancient people who first "discovered" the constellations manage to pick out only the stars that affect us?

As I said when you go on holiday you feel different because the pull is different
Hmm, I feel different on vacation whether I go anywhere or not. It's the thought that "Hey, I don't have to go to work for a few days" that causes that, not variations in gravity.

[Fram]

Can you give one good reason why we would be so heavily influenced by the very very small changes, but not by the big changes?
I told you, Homeopathic Gravity
Of course =D>

[Tensor]

I do have to give Lyndon credit, he is at least consistent. His Scientific Proof of Astrology is as useful and scienfically credible as Ashmore's Paradox and his ideas on binary black holes. i.e. not at all.

[Psi-less]

The page by John Mosley from Griffith Observatory here (http://www.griffithobs.org/SkyOphiuchus.html) has a nice discussion about how the astrological signs have "moved" over time. I'm just disappointed about not being born under the sign of "Ophiuchus"--it has kind of a nice ring to it. :wink: And to think, I've been basing my life on reading the wrong horoscope all this time. :^o

Psi-less

[JohnW]

To papageno and others who asked for quantitative calculations - here they are:
Jupiter has a mass of 1900x10^24kg. It is, on average 7.73x10^11m from the sun. The Earth is 1.5x10^11m from the sun. That means that the earth Jupiter distance varies between a max of 9.2x10^11m and a min of 6.2x10^11m. The max/ min forces on a water molecule in our body (mass about 2.9x10-26kg?) is (9.5 – 4.3) x10^-33N which produces accelerations of (3.3 – 1.5)x10^-7 ms^-2. Over the period of one day during your horoscope then Jupiter can cause this water molecule to move a distance of 560m to 1.2km due to Jupiter alone!
QED!
Cheers
Lyndon
Ladies and gentlemen, I think this confirms a suspicion I've had for the last couple of days. He's trying to wind us up.

Lyndon, you don't believe any of this nonsense yourself, do you?

[Frog march]

The rock that was flying through space 60million years ago only had such an effect on the dinosaurs because they were Capricorns..

[Tensor]

I'm just disappointed about not being born under the sign of "Ophiuchus"--it has kind of a nice ring to it. :wink:
Psi-less

With the movement through the zodiac and the actual dates when the sun is in Ophiuchus, I was born under that sign, and that's my answer when someone asks. 8)

Of course, I feel kinda cheated, cause I can never seem to find it listed in our newspaper. :wink:

[captain swoop]

What is the trigger at the moment of birth that 'sets' your Zodiac?

What about the preceding 9 months?

[Swift]

Of course gravity is the strongest force that affects human physiology, physical well-being, and emotional state. If I take a gun and shoot someone in the head, it is not the physical damage, neurological damage, and fluid loss that kills them, it is the heavy, lead bullet lodged in their skull and the gravitational attraction on all the water molecules in their head. :o 8-[ #-o

Ok, I was just kidding. But this is complete nonsense. Things like chemical bonding and plain old viscosity will have orders of magnitude stronger force on water molecules than gravity.
reference on relative strengths of forces (http://ithacasciencezone.com/chemzone/lessons/03bonding/bonds.htm)
Objects with an electrostatic charge attract or repel each other. This force is referred to as an electrostatic or electromagnetic force. Electrostatic forces are roughly 10^10 times stronger than the "weak" force. The matter we interact with every day is controlled and in fact defined by these forces. When these bonds hold the atoms within a single molecule together they are called intramolecular bonds. When these bonds hold molecules to each other they are called intermolecular bonds.

The "Weak" force is approximately 10^30 times stronger than the gravitational force. This force binds the proton to an electron in forming a neutron. This force in action can result in electron capture or in failure results in B-decay.

The attraction between any two objects with mass is called the gravitational force. This force is the weakest of all the forces and virtually unnoticeable between small masses. Only when dealing with planet like masses does the force become realistically noticeable. Given enough mass, like the Earth and Sun, it can act at great distances and is responsible for holding entire solar systems together as well as holding us to the earth.

[Psi-less]

With the movement through the zodiac and the actual dates when the sun is in Ophiuchus, I was born under that sign, and that's my answer when someone asks. 8)

Of course, I feel kinda cheated, cause I can never seem to find it listed in our newspaper. :wink:

Lucky!! When asked, I go for the Monty Python answer, "I was born under the sign of "Derry and Thoms". It confuses them just long enough to make an escape. Or, "I was born under the sign "Monad"." It's the symbol of the NP railroad and, being born at the "NPRR Benevolent Association Hospital", it probably had far more influence on my life than any distant star. :wink:

Psi-less

[lyndonashmore]

Swift wrote:
Ok, I was just kidding. But this is complete nonsense. Things like chemical bonding and plain old viscosity will have orders of magnitude stronger force on water molecules than gravity.
True but these are balanced in a normal body, so when Jupiter changes position the tug must affect the Universal force vector and cause it to change magnitude and position.
Cheers
Lyndon

[lyndonashmore]

To papageno and others who asked for quantitative calculations - here they are:
Jupiter has a mass of 1900x10^24kg. It is, on average 7.73x10^11m from the sun. The Earth is 1.5x10^11m from the sun. That means that the earth Jupiter distance varies between a max of 9.2x10^11m and a min of 6.2x10^11m. The max/ min forces on a water molecule in our body (mass about 2.9x10-26kg?) is (9.5 – 4.3) x10^-33N which produces accelerations of (3.3 – 1.5)x10^-7 ms^-2. Over the period of one day during your horoscope then Jupiter can cause this water molecule to move a distance of 560m to 1.2km due to Jupiter alone!
QED!
Cheers
Lyndon
Ladies and gentlemen, I think this confirms a suspicion I've had for the last couple of days. He's trying to wind us up.

Lyndon, you don't believe any of this nonsense yourself, do you?
No, I don't believe a word of it. If you remember the original posts by me, I said that one cannot discount "forces known or unknown" causing atrological effects. With my Universal force vector I have shown that there are known forces which have astrological origins before we even start on the unknown ones. This is the point that I am making.
Now the odd person here says that the effects are negligible whilst most say that they are not. This is a different argument to saying that there are no known forces - thats all.
Cheers
Lyndon

[Yorkshireman]

Swift wrote:
Ok, I was just kidding. But this is complete nonsense. Things like chemical bonding and plain old viscosity will have orders of magnitude stronger force on water molecules than gravity.
True but these are balanced in a normal body, so when Jupiter changes position the tug must affect the Universal force vector and cause it to change magnitude and position.
Cheers
Lyndon

What do you mean by 'balanced in a normal body'? The fluids within a human body are never in completely still, undisturbed equilibrium. That's just plain wrong! They are always moving!

I would write more, but I need to visit the gents.


Lyndon, you don't believe any of this nonsense yourself, do you?

[lyndonashmore]

papageno wrote;

Are you going to drag this thread like the other one?
I never dragged any thread out in my life. Which one? If you are referring to This (http://www.badastronomy.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=16369&start=0&) one then I assure you that the topic is very much alive and moving forwards at a great pace.

You didn't answer my questions either,
What zodiac sign are you, Leo?
Cheers,
Lyndon

[Yorkshireman]

No, I don't believe a word of it.

So you're deliberately wasting our time. Well I'm sorry, but I'm going to have to shoot you. (http://www.phespirit.info/montypython/cheese_shop.htm)


If you remember the original posts by me, I said that one cannot discount "forces known or unknown" causing atrological effects. With my Universal force vector I have shown that there are known forces which have astrological origins before we even start on the unknown ones. This is the point that I am making.
Now the odd person here says that the effects are negligible whilst most say that they are not. This is a different argument to saying that there are no known forces - thats all.
Cheers
Lyndon

If you remember the original replies by us, as well as Phil's article, we discounted unknown forces that could act with any degree of correlation with what is required for astrology to work as advertised.
We have also shown the "known" force of gravity as being a negligible effect, through mathematical calculations.
Who are these 'most' people who say that the effects are not negligible? So far on my list I have... you.

[papageno]

Are you going to drag this thread like the other one?
I never dragged any thread out in my life.
Your actions contradict you.


Which one? If you are referring to This (http://www.badastronomy.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=16369&start=0&) one then I assure you that the topic is very much alive and moving forwards at a great pace.
There is no evidence to support your tired light "theory"and your posts only proved your lack of understanding of basic physics.


You didn't answer my questions either,
What zodiac sign are you, Leo?

Now you know how we feel when you avoid addressing our points.

[Fram]

No, I don't believe a word of it. If you remember the original posts by me, I said that one cannot discount "forces known or unknown" causing atrological effects. With my Universal force vector I have shown that there are known forces which have astrological origins before we even start on the unknown ones. This is the point that I am making.
Now the odd person here says that the effects are negligible whilst most say that they are not. This is a different argument to saying that there are no known forces - thats all.
Cheers
Lyndon Emphasis mine... :roll:
If you don't believe a word of it, then why do you continue to write nonsense even in this post? Forces with astrological origins? What is that supposed to mean? There are loads of forces, and none of those have any astrological meaning, and there is no force possible that could have the impact, the result astrologers say it has (assuming for a moment that astrologers could agree with one another), because the results they claim are nonexistent.
Once and for all (I wish): there can be no force, either known or unknown, that produces the results the astrologers claim, as those results don't exist. No astrologer has been able to make any sizable prediction that turned out to be true, no astrologer has been able to show a more than superficial knowledge of other peoples lives and behaviour. There is nothing to explain.

[Celestial Mechanic]

At the risk of sounding like a stuttering CD:

Which astrologer predicted the terrorist attacks on 9/11? I don't mean something like "America could see a terrorist attack within the next five years", (this is the kind of forecast any knowledgeable person could have made, not something requiring new-age snake-oil), but a real prediction. Heck, I'd even settle for a prediction like "You may want to phone in sick today if you work in a Manhattan high-rise"! Where were the predictions?

[Swift]

No, I don't believe a word of it.

So you're deliberately wasting our time. Well I'm sorry, but I'm going to have to shoot you. (http://www.phespirit.info/montypython/cheese_shop.htm)

MOUSEBENDER:
(Shoots him) What a senseless waste of human life.
Though, in this case, maybe it isn't. :wink:

[JohnW]

There are loads of forces, and none of those have any astrological meaning, and there is no force possible that could have the impact, the result astrologers say it has (assuming for a moment that astrologers could agree with one another), because the results they claim are nonexistent.
(emphasis mine)
Exactly, Fram. You can concoct a bizarre microgravitational explanation if you like, but the bottom line is that you're explaining nothing, because there is nothing that needs to be explained.

[lyndonashmore]

Fram wrote
If you don't believe a word of it, then why do you continue to write nonsense even in this post? Forces with astrological origins? What is that supposed to mean? There are loads of forces, and none of those have any astrological meaning, and there is no force possible that could have the impact, the result astrologers say it has (assuming for a moment that astrologers could agree with one another), because the results they claim are nonexistent.
Once and for all (I wish): there can be no force, either known or unknown, that produces the results the astrologers claim, as those results don't exist. No astrologer has been able to make any sizable prediction that turned out to be true, no astrologer has been able to show a more than superficial knowledge of other peoples lives and behaviour. There is nothing to explain
I think the last part of your post is an over generalisation. Somebody always predicts the future correctly, its how many predicted something that didn't happen that shows astrology to be wrong. We only hear of the ones who got it right.
Secondly, there was nothing wrong with my posts. My universal force vector (I do like that phrase) is dependent upon the astronomical terms used by astrologers. therefore it is a force of astrological origins. one cannot discount these as not possible. How big must a force be to have an effect on the body?
Cheers
Lyndon

[lyndonashmore]

Are you going to drag this thread like the other one?
I never dragged any thread out in my life.
Your actions contradict you.


Which one? If you are referring to This (http://www.badastronomy.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=16369&start=0&) one then I assure you that the topic is very much alive and moving forwards at a great pace.
There is no evidence to support your tired light "theory"and your posts only proved your lack of understanding of basic physics.


You didn't answer my questions either,
What zodiac sign are you, Leo?

Now you know how we feel when you avoid addressing our points.
Leo

[lyndonashmore]

At the risk of sounding like a stuttering CD:

Which astrologer predicted the terrorist attacks on 9/11? I don't mean something like "America could see a terrorist attack within the next five years", (this is the kind of forecast any knowledgeable person could have made, not something requiring new-age snake-oil), but a real prediction. Heck, I'd even settle for a prediction like "You may want to phone in sick today if you work in a Manhattan high-rise"! Where were the predictions?
They did (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/551055/posts)
cheers
lyndon

[The Bad Astronomer]

Over the period of one day during your horoscope then Jupiter can cause this water molecule to move a distance of 560m to 1.2km due to Jupiter alone!


Are you seriously suggesting this is true? Really?

Every single day, my water molecules move 560 to 1200 meters? I assume this is toward Jupiter.

So why am I not stretched out to a km in length? You seem to be saying my water is affected, but my bones are not.

You might want to think carefully about how you answer this. You are saying a lot of things that are patently wrong, and many of these (including the idea that we are made of water which is affected by tides) have been shown to you to be wrong.

[John Dlugosz]

Something else I heard a while back...

Most other animals are fertile only during a specific time of the year. For example, being born in the spring when resources are abundant is a good idea. People can be born at any time. So, perhaps the baby is "prepped" differently to better cope with the time of year and the activities of its first year?

Nothing to do with gravity.

[Fram]

Fram wrote
If you don't believe a word of it, then why do you continue to write nonsense even in this post? Forces with astrological origins? What is that supposed to mean? There are loads of forces, and none of those have any astrological meaning, and there is no for