Astrology - Avoid this thread if you have high blood pressure

[Sticks]

For the record Phil and I are in 100% agreement that Astrology is bunk and does not work.

I found this article in our local rag and found some quite galling claims.

A lot of people have a poor perception of astrology," says grandmother-of-two Vicki Seaton.

"It's not hocus pocus, it has a scientific basis and it recognised as such.

What scientific basis, what did I miss?

"I have studied it for many years. A lot of people who go into astrology are clinical psychologists and they have written books on the subject. A person's chart is seen as a first-class diagnostic tool.

Yikes, I never realized that if I had to go to a clinical psychologist I would need to tell them my star sign and bring along some chicken entrails

Vicki is keen to separate astrology from the daily horoscopes you find in a newspaper or magazine.

I wonder why . . . .

A lot of Vicki's clients are women but she has done charts for quite a few men too.

So are women more gullible than men?

Though astrology is an ancient scientific art that goes back thousands of years, it can never be 100% accurate, says Vicki..

"In the majority of cases you can be 98% right," says Vicki. "Many people are amazed by the results.

I am amazed because all reputable studies show that astrology does not work

"You can really go into someone's life."

And their wallet!!

[Trebuchet]

Sticks, as a skeptic you should not let this go unanswered. I'd suggest a letter to the paper expressing your doubts, and proposing that she agree to be tested for the JREF Challenge.

Write to her as well. Explain this great opportunity to prove, once and for all, the scientific validity of astrology, put a stop to Randi's naysaying, and just incidentally put a million bucks in her pocket. If she can do half of what she says, it'll be a piece of cake. My psychic powers predict she'll respond with one or more of the following:
1. The million doesn't exist.
2. Randi uses his own psychic powers to send out "negative energy" and defeat the claimants.
3. She doesn't need the money, and besides it's contaminated with skeptical vibes.

[Tucson_Tim]

I'm a Scorpio and Scorpios don't believe in Astrology.

[Noclevername]

Western or Chinese Zodiac? Current, time-adjusted, or sidereal dating?

[Sticks]

I thought Randi had closed his challenge to those applying to it.

In the newspaper article it lists her email address if anyone wants contact her.

[sarongsong]

Originally Posted by Trebuchet

Sticks, as a skeptic you should not let this go unanswered...

Wouldn't that also require any challenging doubters to get their charts done in order to provide 'evidence'?

[Tobin Dax]

I got about halfway through the article before I couldn't take any more. I really did like this quote:

"Many people are interested in seeing their birth chart and it can forecast 10 to 15 years ahead."

Apparently, your birth chart is inconsistent in its forcasting ability (assuming a decent range in ages of clients). I don't see how that's possible for any sort of consistent science.

[Dr Nigel]

I tried following the "contact us" link and got a 404 error. Obviously, the rag doesn't really want people to send in comments on the news stories - er, I mean extended adverts - that they print / post.

It was some of the most feeble reporting I've ever read. Not once was there any challenge for this charlatan to back up her claims.

[Gillianren]

Originally Posted by sarongsong

Wouldn't that also require any challenging doubters to get their charts done in order to provide 'evidence'?

Hey, quite a few of us around here did just that; fewer than chance predicts picked their own out of a set of four. (Actually, I and several others wanted "none of the above" as an option.)

[sarongsong]

Unsure what you mean; by "around here" do you mean BAUT or your physical neighborhood? Is there a link to your reference?

[Gillianren]

BAUT. In ATM perhaps a year ago.

Scientific Test of Astrology

[RBG]

Originally Posted by Sticks

I thought Randi had closed his challenge to those applying to it.

Last I saw, a few weeks ago, TAR still had the challenge going but had restricted the challengers to those with some kind of recognized media presence. Maybe too many dilettantes wasting his time? I don't know.

RBG

[sarongsong]

Originally Posted by Gillianren

BAUT. In ATM perhaps a year ago...

Gee, only 8 pages to go thru...

[Tobin Dax]

Originally Posted by sarongsong

Gee, only 8 pages to go thru...

I don't know if you're complaining that it's too long or not long enough, but either way, the test was complete. You could read the entire thread in a few sittings, and you can see the whole test happen from conception to results.

Gillian doesn't deserve a snarky comment aimed at her. You're the one who asked for the thread.

[hhEb09'1]

Originally Posted by Gillianren

BAUT. In ATM perhaps a year ago.

Scientific Test of Astrology

Wow, it's been two years since we started that almost

[sarongsong]

Originally Posted by Tobin Dax

...You're the one who asked for the thread.

No, I asked for

...a link to your reference...

[hhEb09'1]

Originally Posted by sarongsong

No, I asked for

I went to the link, and the first two sentences read

Now that I've gotten your attention, no, this thread isn't about some recently published paper that supports astrology. It is, however, about a test that we're doing right here on the BABB.

Isn't that exactly what you wanted?

[Tobin Dax]

Originally Posted by sarongsong

No, I asked for

I'm confused, then. Do you mean you wanted the results? You were given them. They're toward the end of the thread. Is there something I'm still missing?

[sarongsong]

Originally Posted by hhEb09'1

...Isn't that exactly what you wanted?

Sure, and I must agree with montebianco in post #211 (of 215, when the thread was inexplicably Closed):

Ugh, I'm getting a headache trying to parse this one...

I don't think most people consult astrologists to recognize themselves, more how to deal with certain circumstances they find/may find themselves in.

[Tobin Dax]

Originally Posted by sarongsong

Sure, and I must agree with montebianco in post #211 (of 215, when the thread was inexplicably Closed):

I agree with montebianco, too. It is rather difficult to figure out what Eroica is saying in that sentence.

I don't think that the closing was malicious, though. As of a few months ago, *all* old ATM threads were closed. The closing of this thread could have happened at any time within about 16 months.

I don't think most people consult astrologists to recognize themselves, more how to deal with certain circumstances they find/may find themselves in.

Are you saying that Grey's application of astrology was non-standard? What, then, does an astrologer use your chart to tell you, and how? I'm sure we could repeat the test with a "dealing with circumstances" point in mind. However, what an astrologer will tell you either about yourself or about how you will/should deal with a situation comes from the same source information, right? So shouldn't it be related? IOW, shouldn't the results of testing one application, at the very least, positively correlate to the results of testing the second application?

[Noclevername]

IMHO most people who believe in astrology don't consult astrologers, they just read the astrology section of their local newspaper.

[Maksutov]

I have faith in astrology.

[sarongsong]

Originally Posted by Tobin Dax

...Are you saying that Grey's application of astrology was non-standard?

No, no; I think it was well-intentioned, just not deep enough.
Thanks for the "As of a few months ago, *all* old ATM threads were closed." observation---hadn't realized that one.
As for the "Is that me/my chart?" premise of that thread

Scientific Test of Astrology

, I think it invites self-image vs. how-others-see-us speculation. I view astrology as just another fun tool to help shed more light on a situation, like casting the Chinese I Ching [Book of Changes] and reading its charming interpretations (even Jung was intrigued), all in an effort to see 'The Big Picture' before making a decision in a matter of concern. There's extremists in any endeavor, it seems.

[Gillianren]

Originally Posted by sarongsong

. . . even Freud was intrigued . . . .

Well, and as may or may not be mentioned on that thread, what brought the test up in the first place was a person with strong faith in Jungian astrology, which is of course why the test is intended to tell you what your personality's like--that's what Jungian astrology does. However, mine for one was horribly, horribly wrong. And that's not just my opinion, either; I read all four options to several friends, and there was a consensus among them that the correct answer was clearly "none of the above."

[sarongsong]

Then it should have been titled:

Scientific Test of Jungian Astrology

[hhEb09'1]

Originally Posted by sarongsong

Sure, and I must agree with montebianco in post #211

At first I thought you were just making a self-deprecating wisecrack, but I got intrigued by the quote from Eroica there. I did a quick search of the thread, and that's the only post where the word "utterly" appears. Maybe Eroica can help us figure out how that string of apparent nonsense got there?

[Maksutov]

I have faith in astrology.

[Dr Nigel]

'S okay, Mak, we heard you the first time.

[Dr Nigel]

Originally Posted by sarongsong

... I view astrology as just another fun tool to help shed more light on a situation,

So how do the positions of the planets in their orbits and the position of Earth in its orbit at your time of birth shed light on any kind of situation in your life?

...all in an effort to see 'The Big Picture' before making a decision in a matter of concern.

Bur how is it that a process that is demonstrably false helps you to see the "big picture"?

Surely, a rational assessment of options and likely consequences / outcomes would better serve to place a decision into its appropriate context?

There's extremists in any endeavor, it seems.

Well, I daresay that's correct. I do not see how it has any bearing on your preceding statements.

[Jim]

Originally Posted by Sticks

What scientific basis, what did I miss?

Hey, it's all about planets and geometry and math. What could be more scientific?

Yikes, I never realized that if I had to go to a clinical psychologist I would need to tell them my star sign and bring along some chicken entrails

Entrails are optional. Besides, many clinical psychologists now consider them out-dated.

So are women more gullible than men?

I don't think I'll comment on this. My horoscope for today said, "If you want to avoid trouble, keep your fat mouth shut."

Or did my wife say that?