Slashdot Mirror
Bombay High Court Rules Astrology To Be a Science
neosaurus writes "In India, the Bombay High Court recently ruled astrology to be 'a time tested science more than 4000 years old.' Not only does this stretch the definition of science, it also reaffirms people's faith in pseudosciences at a broader level." At least we can know for certain the people trying to get creationism taught as science in our schools have equally wacky friends around the globe.
That isn't very reassuring.
These one-liner summaries seem to be tickling CmdrTaco's fancy today ...
It's nice to know their are nutjobs in other places besides just the southern US
Sand and rocks are now drinks.
Since when did article postings come with gratuitous flamebait in addition to the link/info? Oh wait, this is slashdot..
"The Bombay High Court" ruling is about equivalent to the Georgia Supreme Court saying Creationism is a valid science discipline, or the France High Court declaring french to be the only language allowed to be spoken.
Yes it's a surprising decision, but likely to be overturned by India's "supreme court" later on. Saner heads usually prevail at the national/ union/ federal level.
Information wants to be expensive AND wants to be free. So you have Value vs. Cheap distribution fighting each other.
And why isn't this on Idle with the other dross, where it belongs?
Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
I have met numerous people, some of them quite clever and respected, who despite being well aware of various pseudo-science tricks (say homeopathy and the like) all fell for astrology. They will claim that people born at a certain time of year share some traits... (like it's some kind of scientific measurable proof. sigh)
I have no idea why it appeals to so many, especially women for some reason. Just look at most women's magazines!
Every newspaper has a column (all of them sufficiently vague that you can't use this to prove how ridiculous the whole thing is).
I wonder what it is that makes so many of us susceptible to such blatant scientific fraud.
As for India, I am not surprised... their belief system is already quite complicated and intersects with all aspects of life, science included.
TODO: 753) write sig.
RTA, Bombay High Court didn't "rule" this way. They noted that India's Supreme Court already ruled on whether Astrology is a science back in 2004 and parroted the result of it. Seems consistent to me.
There are more scientists in India than anywhere else in the world !!!
#include std_disclaimer.h
People who dance appear to be crazy by people who can't hear the music.
(FYI, that statement goes both ways)
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
This makes making fun of India so much easier now.
I thought it's called 'Mumbai' now?
from Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombay_High_Court#History_.26_Premises:
"Although the name of the city was changed from Bombay to Mumbai in 1995, the Court as an institution did not follow suit and remained as the Bombay High Court."
Wikipedia doesn't explain why that is so.
'When the Going gets Weird, the Weird turn Pro.' - Hunter S. Thompson
At least we can know for certain the people trying to get creationism taught as science in our schools have equally wacky friends around the globe.
What happened to the /. that was fairly neutral, objective and unbiased? Perhaps it only existed in my mind. Ad hominem such as this is unnecessary, it only cheapens /. as a whole. Creationism is not being pushed anywhere as a science, to be taught, sure, but not as science. Somehow it has become the boogeyman to those that don't actually know what science is. In the marketplace of ideas their will always be struggle, and the victor will not be the one making childish remarks towards the other.
Actually, that's exactly the concern; nobody (well, very few people) object to Creationism being taught in a religions course, forces such as the Texas school board are indeed trying to mandate its inclusion right next to the observed evolution studies present in many science textbooks, and used for materials in science classes.
You're special forces then? That's great! I just love your olympics!
I already predicted this. I scientifically yanked the guts out of my dinner last week, and there it was.
Who would win this election: Andrew Weiner vs Andrew Weiner's weiner.
How can any of these countries possibly be trusted with nuclear weapons? What if the stars happen to align themselves in just the right way? GOODBYE!
Every science is based on certain axioms so is this. We must not say that it is fake. Rather, we should say that "we dont know". Someone please read Vaastu Shastra and comment below here.
While I do agree with you regarding the article commentary, there are indeed people who are trying to get creationism(disguised as Intelligent Design) taught as science in schools. Eg. http://www.discovery.org/
A nicer list of the papers written etc. are here --> http://www.intelligentdesign.org/science.php
This space for rent.
According to TFA,
"So far as prayer related to astrology is concerned, the Supreme Court has already considered the issue and ruled that astrology is science. The court had in 2004 also directed the universities to consider if astrology science can be added to the syllabus. The decision of the apex court is binding on this court," observed the judges.
Apparently India's Supreme Court has already made a ruling about this and the lower court is just following orders.
It is in the south of India, so this makes perfect sense. Do they sleep with their relatives and hate the government there too?
Actually I would say reasonably intelligent people could be fooled by Confirmation Bias. http://www.skepdic.com/confirmbias.html
Almost everyone is susceptible to Confirmation Bias and intelligent people tend to rationalize even more.
This space for rent.
You will read an article that saddens you, or find true love, or get dumped, or get a new job, or have a good lunch, or........
You mean stuff like Global Warming? Opps sorry Global climate change. You know you can trust those scientists they just change the name when things are not going the way they predict..
MOD PARENT UP!!!
... so if Astrologers say the time is now to bomb Pakistan out of existence, I guess they should go for it.
I only believe in OCTOPUS for predictions....hahahaha
I'm taking bets on the next practice or belief system to be labeled and taught as a science. The reading of entrails, tea leaves, palms, or smoke columns? How about tech support by Tarot? (that one does have a certain ring to it, doesn't it?) Any others?
--Udo.
zoroastrians, the folks who actually started astrology, at one time had the largest empire in the world, the achaemenid empire:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Achaemenid_Empire
eventually, as their empire dwindled and islam rose, they fled persia for india, where zoroastrians became a wealthy, influential and rich minority, the parsis:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parsi
if you like the music of queen and freddie mercury: his background is parsi
another thing that always struck me about parsis, the towers of silence:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tower_of_Silence
earth, fire, air, water... no i'm not talking about the last airbender, but in zoroastrianism, so as not to pollute the other elements, the dead can only go to the air, so their bodies must be put on pillars to eaten by vultures
this ruling is more about the power of an influential group in india, as so much in the world is
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Science can certainly be regulated by law, but one cannot legislate what is or is not science. This is just sheer ignorance.
Douchebag commentary, douchebag.
Commentary seemed pretty spot-on. Don't know what your problem is.
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
"Like, wow, man!"
I'll admit, it's entertaining, and there might, maybe, be some basis to find correlative data for personality traits, but honestly, this is like taking a /. poll seriously. I can't recommend that too enthusiastically, either.
You mean people that believe in the beginning their was nothing then nothing exploded and became everything. Wow there is a fairly tale to tell kids. From the summary "At least we can know for certain the people trying to get creationism taught as science in our schools have equally wacky friends around the globe." WTF does Christianity have to do with this article? Christianity preaches against astrology. neosaurus is a troll trying to take a cheap shot at others beliefs why didn't he make a wisecrack about Islam or another religion? Oh that's right no one wants to make fun of someone who may blow you up so pick on someone who wont blow you up.
Of course, the notion that such a being would or even could actually care about the daily goings on of such short-lived organisms such as ourselves is another matter entirely. But the notion that God exists and made everything is really the best explanation I've ever seen for where it all comes from.
...Astrology can be a science. Although not every scientist will accept the findings.
As "cdesign proponentsist" Behe said during the Kitzmiller v. Dover trial, any definition of "scientific theory" that would include Intelligent Design would also include Astrology.
Science is by definition the utilization of the scientific method. If you're not using the scientific method, it's not science.
Belief has nothing to do with observation and testing. Or peer review for that matter.
There is no controversy or argument. It's not science. And anyone arguing that it is, doesn't know what science is and therefore isn't qualified to say what is or isn't science.
This is what the majority wants. I keep hearing about how in the business of politics, whenever the majority gets what they want, "society" wins, including the people who lost. Is this not true anymore? After all, if "society" decides that government should spend tax money on (for example) intelligent design, then everything is working as planned, right?
Exactly, Creationism has a very very very high chance of being wrong, and I usually say that only idiots view creationism as true -- come on, just because you have faith it doesn't mean that you have to believe in nonsense. Faith is one thing, crazy fundamentalist crap is another. Creationism will never be a science, and if I could, without incurring in a fallacy, I'd say "it is just plain stupid and definitely wrong". I am a non-believer, an atheist, but I respect other people's faith, as I know that it is a fallacy to either say that god exists or that god doesn't. This, however, doesn't mean that I have to turn into a baboon and agree with those who believe in creationism. It's just absurd!
With that said, I think that the commentary is, indeed, spot on.
Have you heard about SoylentNews?
It is that very macro Evolution that is responsible for the creation of your ancestors, the Trolls.
- For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat
A 2010 Harris Poll shows that only 31 percent of Americans believe in astrology. But it's not a science here, yet!
CBS News
Adidas To Bring Back Sneakernet
Pretty good for a "science" that states the sun is in capricorn when it actually is not.
Did they rule if this was valid for old astrology dates or the new aligned reality based astrology with Ophiuchus or both.
A very respected psychology researcher recently published a paper producing purported statistical evidence for "psi", i.e. phenomena that cannot be explained by known science. The author carried out a long and detailed study on his students: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/06/science/06esp.html and concluded that the effect of 'psi' was 'statistically significant'. The evidence was severely criticized by his peers - in particular is a dismissive rebuttal to the work cited in the same article. Links to the papers lie therein as well. The outlook I have had, reinforced by these studies is that it doesn't hurt to dab a toe on the other side (i.e., in favor of pseudo sciences) every now and then. It helps you think out of the box of known science and understanding. It's like exploring a landscape by following the stars rather than your GPS and compass. You may venture into uncharted territory more easily with the former.
As a Bible-thumping believer in Christ, I believe that Creationism should NOT be taught as science in our public schools, because it is not a science of mankind. It should be taught as FAITH... and taught in the Church, not our public schools. The sciences taught in schools should be limited to the basics such as math, physics, chemistry, biology, geology, etc., stuff that the Lord has allowed mankind to learn as provable facts.
If astrology is to be taught in our public schools, then let it be taught as a liberal arts/entertainment subject, because that's all that it is anyway (and IMHO, a fool's frivolous and superstitious waste of time and energy). I'd have no problem with that.
Please read the article.
A PIL (which is a Public Interest Litigation) is something any citizen can file.
An organization filed a litigation in court to ban all advertisements related to astrology, feng shui and Vastu Shastra(Ancient practice of arcitechture which supposedly brings positive energy and makes inhabitants millionares).
Court said it cannot ban them as they have been practiced in India for 4000 years.
A USA analogy?
Lets say you file an application in court saying ban all church advertisements promising happiness salvation etc.,
That said in India even educated people sometimes sacrifice children to make their fate good etc,. etc., and many news channels have regular "informercials" on special "talismans" which can make you invincible from the vagaries of life. So this news isn't really shocking. Its just that even if the high court or the supreme court(highest court of the country) had said nothing, or said the opposite, it would have had no effect.
My Aurora : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o91ZsGwJYyg
FB : https://www.facebook.com/TanveersPhotography
In other countries they have Sociology, Philosophy, Theology instead, which are equally useless nowadays. Useless in the sense that they don't produce useful results.
My favourite Astrology story comes from a local group of statisticians who set out to disprove it back in the 1980s. After surveying thousands of people and collecting as much information as they could over the course of several years, it didn't matter how they worked the data, it always led them to the same conclusion: the month of your birth has an impact on your outlook on life, thus proving some merit to astrology.
Seemingly disgusted by their findings, they ran it by a group of doctors who conducted a similar study. Without hesitation, one of the doctors said "Well duh, if you were born in a summer month, chances are you spent more time outside with your parents, ate healthier foods, and were exposed to more activities in a day."
The point is, there is science behind just about everything, even if it is pseudoscience. It's the people who try to sell you something that you need to watch out for.
There are some very educated people (BioChem & Pharma PhDs and MDs ) who are studying homeopathy. Homeopathy is a great example of not throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
Aspirin, pot, and other natural treatments and the placebo effect dude for the win!
Oh dear ... and which is the best explanation that you have seen which explains who made God? Ad nauseum. ... and if you are not of the notion that such a being would or even could actually care about the daily goings-on of such short-lived organisms such as ourselves, why are you capitalising god? Are you doing this in reverence? :S
You are right, the creationists lost. However they forked their project and are currently running it as Intelligent Design. Tomatoes, Tomatoes.
I am a v1ral sig. Plse c0py me and h3lp me spread. Thank y0u?
MOD CHILD DOWN!!!
Science is really only a best guess as to how and why things work. Form a hypothesis, do some experiments, collect results and see how they compare with the predictions. How is astrology any different?
The judges didn't have any chance to rule otherwise; their horoscope said so....
Maybe a sufficiently advanced magic will look like technology to a sufficiently primitive society.
What happened to the /. that was fairly neutral, objective and unbiased?
I'm not sure that Slashdot has ever been neutral about certain topics. But the inconsistency can be annoying. If the Bombay High Court had ruled that Climatology was "a time-tested science", I doubt we'd hear any sarcastic remarks at all. And there are certainly a few similarities between Astrology and Climatology, as in:
I'll just look into my computer simulation to see the future of the Earth for the next century! There's no way that the simulation could possibly be inaccurate, because I have asked another Climatologer to peer-review it.
Hmm... oh dear. It looks like civilisation will certainly be destroyed by a great flood from the polar ice caps within twenty years. I guess you need to renew my research grants so I can figure out how you should prevent it.
You did that? Thanks. Let's see now... I think you should raise taxes and hire more Climatologers. Then you'll be safe. Oh, by the way, turns out I was wrong. Actually, civilisation will be destroyed by a new ice age. I have to do some more research, so how about some more money?
The tao of democracy: the government you can vote for is not the real government.
... and who is the homo who is being hominem-ed? You are feeling personally insulted because Taco generalised people sharing your belief system? Furthermore, yes, creationism is being peddled as a science. Read about the different subsets of creationism and associated litigation, especially the Lemon test.
At least we can know for certain the people trying to get creationism taught as science in our schools have equally wacky friends around the globe.
What happened to the /. that was fairly neutral, objective and unbiased? Perhaps it only existed in my mind. Ad hominem such as this is unnecessary, it only cheapens /. as a whole. Creationism is not being pushed anywhere as a science, to be taught, sure, but not as science. Somehow it has become the boogeyman to those that don't actually know what science is. In the marketplace of ideas their will always be struggle, and the victor will not be the one making childish remarks towards the other.
Sorry buddy, but I happen to live in Texas, where the board of education is most definitely trying to have creationism taught as science. They don't believe in evolution, and want to teach I.D. as a scientific alternative to evolution. Read for yourself. Pay particular attention to Mercer, McElroy, Lowe, Leo, Dunbar, and Bradley, who are some of the worst offenders. They are completely unqualified to render any sort of judgement on these issues, as their own statements show that they have no understanding of the theory of evolution themselves. On top of that, there are enough morons down here that they keep getting voted back in. Morons get elected, make the curriculum worse, creating more morons who'll get elected. It's a vicious cycle.
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
MOD PARENTUP!!!
Virgos are sceptical about such things.
Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
Heard in a Texas School board committee: "They took our jerbs!"
Wrong. The major pushers of creationism (Answers in Genesis, The Discovery Institute, Harun Yahya, Institute for Creation Research, etc. etc ad nauseum...lots of nauseum) all disagree with you and all want to replace science with their sectarian perversion of it.
But string theory . . .that's still totally legit right? Right?!?
I have met numerous people, some of them quite clever and respected, who despite being well aware of various pseudo-science tricks (say homeopathy and the like) all fell for astrology. They will claim that people born at a certain time of year share some traits... (like it's some kind of scientific measurable proof. sigh)
Why do you think Copernicus was looking up at the sky? Besides being a cleric and an astronomer, he was also involved in medicine. And at the time, your astrological charts dictated (at least partially) what kind of treatments were necessary to restore your health.
'Telepathy' of child used as evidence in abuse case in Scotland: http://www.scotsman.com/news/39Telepathy39-of-child-used-as.6707586.jp?articlepage=1
Astrology isn't a science in the sense normally used here. It does not modify its rules in accordance with empirical observations, and there are no properly conducted experiments showing that predictions of astrology do better than chance in any field it's applied in. Further, there is no explanation in known physics for how birth time and place would correlate with such predictions.
However, the word "science" hasn't always been used in that sense. Aquinas, in (IIRC) Summa Theologica, argued that theology was a science. I couldn't follow his reasoning (there's a lot of proofs by blatant assertion in that book), but he obviously wasn't using it in the same sense. It's been used to mean fields of scholarly study.
Therefore, I'd like to know what this decision means. Does it mean that astrology is taught as a science in Indian schools? That astrological charts are admissible as evidence in Indian courts ("Your honor, the defendant has Mars in square to Jupiter and Mercury, and at the time of the crime was experiencing a Saturn transit!")? That it is permissible to make claims based on astrology in advertising? That astrologers are eligible for research grants (not that I'd expect any research to get useful results)?
Before scoffing too hard, we need to find what Indian jurisprudence means by "science".
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
that foolishness is a universal virtue, and not confined to Americans like the followers of Sarah Palin,
Like the inimitable Groucho Marx, I would never join a club that would have me as a member.
Bauer points out that astrology does in fact meet the definition of science here:
http://books.google.com/books?id=NN7E3r_w09IC&lpg=PA4&ots=bhyGOhux8l&dq=bauer%20astrology%20science&pg=PA4#v=onepage&q&f=false
This is a pretty damn good book, makes a good double feature with Kuhn's _Structure of Scientific Revolutions_, especially for ignorant nerds that like to spout off about 'science'.
So, what testable predictions has Astrology confirmed? I suspect none, so it's not a science.
ASTROLOGY, a conjectural science, which teaches to judge of the effects and influences of the stars, and to foretell future events by the situation and different aspects of the heavenly bodies. This science has long ago become a just subject of contempt and ridicule.
Seems consistent to me.
Not if you like to be consistent with reality.
Perhaps you missed my point about how if God were outside of time,the notion of God having a beginning or end is meaningless -- and it therefore becomes safe to say that God always was. You can't say the same about the universe because time is part of it. Simply put, God only needs a requires a creator if God is also bound by time just as the universe is. If one is to assume that God created the universe at all, then God clearly existed before the universe, and existing before the universe would mean that there is no reason to assume that the restrictions imposed by the universe, in particular, the effects of time, would have to apply. To assume otherwise would be to assume that time itself also exists outside of the universe, but that contradicts current accepted scientific theory which is that time began with the Big Bang.
Oh, and I capitalize God because that would be the beings name, least insomuch as we are capable of identifying any name for it.
It was a truly sad day (in 2004) when India's court ruled that astrology was a science, but it wasn't the first. The article states that the Bombay High Court merely reaffirmed this ruling. So it's *another* sad day for India. They just don't know the difference between an philosophy and a science.
And up is down!
Only after exchange of a W boson.
i am apparently falling into a western misperception going all the way back to the ancient greeks:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoroaster#Western_perceptions
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Merely a semantic detail. Until the 1800s the word "science" meant "system of knowledge" and applied to philosophy, region, best practices, etc. In the 19th century science acquired its modern mean of reproduceable observations.
...you are a mad scientist sick of the stupidity of humans and weren't sure which countries to include in your plot for global destruction. Rest assured India made it as easy as the US does.
"All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"
That's the kind of thing losers say.
I think there's confusion on both sides about what it means for something to be true.
Astrologists apparently think that they're dealing with fundamental principles, a kind of natural law. A skeptic looks at their theory, sees that it is contrived or constructed, lacking the deep logic of a real natural law, and rejects it as utter bullshit. But I think the reality is something different from either of those views.
The current scientific model of nature is underdetermined, with a lot left out that is "random". Is all of that truely random, or is there some kind of sloppy structure to the randomness? Are there ghosts of patterns in it that are more than just figments of the imagination? It would not take something very strong or obvious to cause such patterns. If something is "random" relative to the causes and effects that we understand, then there's no energy potential to be overcome, nothing that has to be overpowered in order to twist the randomness into something less than random. It can be influenced by something that is infinitesimally close to unreal. A scientific skeptic will dismiss any such patterns as unreal however, if they can't be probed and controlled in a ridged and universally repeatable manner.
I'll give an example....years ago I looked into astrology, and did statistics on the birthdays of friends and female acquaintances who had clicked well enough with me to share their birthdays. There were perhaps 15 individuals. The 3 who were my closest friends were born multiples of 28 days from me, which is the Japanese emotional biorythmic cycle. And emotional affinity was the basis of our relationship. The of the people were tightly clustered around that side of the cycle, within a day or two out of sync. There was only one exception, a person who was exactly on the opposite side of the cycle, and who had previously stood out to me as being an emotional blank, someone who I could not feel. In terms of statistical significance, the data said that there was a real pattern, with something on the order of a million to one odds (I've forgotten exactly). And yet, a 28 day cycle makes no sense. What possible basis could it have? Its a multiple of 7, the the four of us who were exactly in-sync born on Fridays, and there could be a pattern with that. Perhaps, for example, we're born on Fridays because that's the day the doctor chooses to induce labor, because he wants to golf on Saturday, and perhaps there's some kind of emotional affinity that results from having been born traumatically in that manner. But that seems far fetched, and it doesn't work anyway, since it doesn't explain why I had no friends on the other 3 Fridays of the cycle.
Given the above information, or even a lot less, an astrologer would likely believe in the 28 day cycle. I still think its contrived - I don't believe that there is a fundamental natural process that comes around every 28 days. But it is nevertheless somehow real, even if only as the shadow of a superstition. To a skeptic, everything I just said will be dismissed as delusional, or as a statistical fluke. In their worldview, a superstition can not somehow cause or be caused by actual patterns in the real world that affect people who do not share the superstition. And I would agree with them if I had just this one example. But I have many, many other examples also, unexpected observations that I inquired into further rather than just blowing off because they didn't fit my view of how the world should work.
So I don't believe in astrology, in the sense that I don't endorse or support that thought of how the world works. Its like a god that I don't consider worth worshiping. Yet neither do I don't dismiss the god as an utter hallucination, and I think the people who do so are ignorant. Looking strictly at the meaning of the words, I think its fair to call astrology a superstition, and a pseudo-science. It stands above, and its only partially scientific, meaning that its half bullshit. But its not all bullshit, even though our modern science does not have an explanation for how that could be so.
Here in Chile, a couple of years ago a judge declared that a convict was cured from AIDS during his time served
(actually he was wrongly diagnosed with AIDS and had to serve his time in a separate jail, around other prisoners carrying HIV, when they let him go, he was "cured")
one can expect everything from lawyers/justice.
But... but.... think about the children!!!
-Space for rent
I have an Indian background and have long given up trying to argue against astrology with Indian friends and family who are into it. This got me thinking about culture wars and whether or not the modernity versus tradition battle manifests itself as a different culture war in each culture. I wonder if a list could be worked out for different cultures. Came up with three examples so far.
US: science versus ID/creationism
Turkey: secular people versus Islamists locked in a battle for power
India: science versus astrology/homeopathy/
The rest?
Western Europe seems to be an exception.
Anand Rangarajan anand@cise.ufl.edu
Two problems:
1. God exists outside the universe, and is therefore free from restraints that we only know to apply in our universe. If those constraints do not exist for a god, then they do not exist for any other explanation. Therefore, a god explains nothing.
But the notion that God exists and made everything is really the best explanation I've ever seen
2. Doesn't matter. You have no evidence, so it is no "better" than any other explanation anyone could possibly make up.
Josef Fritzl, is that you?
Gold chains, greasy chest hair and bad pickup lines. And magic healing crystals. Oh and Disco. Sounds pretty terrifying, actually.
Someone had to do it.
No worry, it'll all be meaningless come 2012
I just find it funny that people bash Astrology without even having the slightest idea what Astrology is and how to practice it. If you practiced Astrology you would see without any doubt that there is some truth to it, but I guess laziness makes people agree with an "Authority" in regards to what is true and what is not. I'm an IT professional for more than 8 years, always have been a geek and a science lover. As someone with a scientific mindset I had decided to put to Astrology to the test. I was skeptic of it when I began studying it, and was skeptic for a good while even though I was seeing evidence of it working. By now I have removed my doubt that Astrology is a pseudo-science and recognize it as an actual science that is surprisingly not recognized by the scientific community but it is by many people who are putting a lot of time and effort into more Astrological research.
My point is this, if you have any doubts of whether it works or not, then study it and practice it, and if people still want to live in ignorance then they can do whatever they want. All I know is that I practice it and it works for me, I use it as a tool for improving my life and those around me. If you think that Sun Sign Astrology is real Astrology (the kind you see in the newspapers and magazines) then you are WAY off from knowing what Astrology is.
Your "best"!? Losers always whine about their best. Winners go home and fuck the prom queen.
er... and following up on this notion of yours, the universe is also outside of time. Time is something which is within it. Consequently, there is no need for a chap to be fiddling around with the dials. In any case, you are taking the proverbial ridiculous leap of faith in postulating this dude's existence. or wait, maybe this being is not a dude, but is actually one of many constipated yellow Hyenas (duly capitalised) with eyes made out of blue glitter, peppered with numerous black orifices which are each conduits into various multiverses and what we call matter is actually God-faeces. It brings a new meaning to the term "Big Bang" I guess I just ran this conversation right into the toilet there.
The court hasn't necessarily elevated Astrology to the status of other sciences. It has just recognized that a significant proportion of the population implicitly trusts Astrology as a science and has done so for ages, hence, barring the practice of Astrology by law (especially under the law that was sought to be applied) is impractical.
I gave up when we declared catsup to be a vegetable. Now we have commercials proudly saying that manwhiches (tm) contain two servings of veggies.
It's a vegetable in the same way a can of crushed tomatoes is a vegetable. They are just crushed more and have a bit of sugar and other things added for flavor.
Tomatoes, crushed or not, are not vegetables. Botanically tomatoes are fruits.
Falcon
Should there be a Law?
When the first global warming came God advised Noah to build his ark. See the polar caps already melted once and I can prove it.
Not exactly. You're talking about "soft creationism", basically trying to use religion to answer the question "what happened before the Big Bang"?
"Creationism", in the context of American Christianity, is much more specific than this. It's the belief that evolution is not true, and that God created all animals (and humans) as they are now. It also usually includes the belief that the Earth is about 6500 years old based on a literal interpretation of the Bible.
If you ask a sample of random Americans what "Creationism" means to them, you''ll find that most of them think it means the above, and of those who identify themselves as "Creationists", they will agree with the above.
You're right, it is possible to accept evolution, the big bang, etc., and still believe in a divine creation before these events, essentially "god in the gaps", since science can't answer the question of what came before the Universe came into existence. However, when you use the term "Creationism", that generally implies a very specific set of fundamentalist Christian-based beliefs which do in fact contradict evolution and a lot of science.
Perhaps you missed my point about how if God were outside of time,the notion of God having a beginning or end is meaningless -- and it therefore becomes safe to say that God always was. You can't say the same about the universe because time is part of it. Simply put, God only needs a requires a creator if God is also bound by time just as the universe is. If one is to assume that God created the universe at all, then God clearly existed before the universe, and existing before the universe would mean that there is no reason to assume that the restrictions imposed by the universe, in particular, the effects of time, would have to apply. To assume otherwise would be to assume that time itself also exists outside of the universe, but that contradicts current accepted scientific theory which is that time began with the Big Bang.
Oh, and I capitalize God because that would be the beings name, least insomuch as we are capable of identifying any name for it.
Time as we know it began with the big bang. We know nothing of what conditions existed before. Positing a creator god requires more assumptions than simply positing that the conditions for the creation of the universe existed, and thus it exists. Why go to such lengths to insert some sort of anthropomorphic god into the picture?
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
MOD parent funny - hilariously creative
The of the people
The other people
So please change the name if its not to be called science! To the extent that statistical studies can be performed to find correlations between seemingly unrelated things like time and place of birth of CmdrTaco and the time stamp on this comment.. it is a science, its just statistics applied to a different domain.
I like Chinese food!
The waiters never are rude.
They only come up to your knees -
But they're warm ad they're willing and they're ready to please!
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
The astrologists just didn't account for that missing zodiac sign (Ophiuchus) for oh, a few hundred centuries. Now that they've got things all sorted out again with the alignment of the stars with the right zodiac sign, and the lunar eclipses with the precession of the equinoxes when the age of Aquarius starts, it should all make sense real soon. I'm sure that in no time we'll see some legitimate scientific explanations for astrology and personal behavior, like uh... the earth's position to the nearest supernova when you were born and the relative amount of positronic gravitrinos from dark matter emanating from Pisces during the last meteor shower means that tomorrow a Sagittarius will be kind and prosperous, but should be cautious of a close friend and their motives. But only if they live north of the tropic of cancer, since the gravitational pull of the moon for those in the southern hemisphere won't be enough to counter balance the red energy shift from Mars.
Global warming and other natural disasters are a direct effect of the shrinking number of pirates - Gospel of the FSM
What's seen in such experiment is the FORER EFFECT.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forer_effect
Har har, so now I can finally fulfill my childhood dream of becoming a scientist. I'm off to buy a couple of parrots.
Figured this posting deserved a little Sagan... from Cosmos episode 3: The Harmony of the Worlds
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iunr4B4wfDA
Astrology does have a few testable hypotheses (i.e., that an individual's personality traits are correlated to the season they were born in, and that an individual's behaviour in any given season is related to the season in which they were born). However, it's clearly not a science in that it doesn't really test those hypotheses in controlled experiment to establish the predictive power of the theory of astrology. If astrology was rigorously scientific in its approach, then there would be research in areas like southern hemisphere vs. northern hemisphere star signs, not to mention psychological research into refining what effect birth season has on personality traits.
Just about every astrologist is completely out to lunch, as well. Even the most striking imaginable correlation between birth season and personality would not permit quotidian predictions of how your day is going to go.
This is a science article and according to science the universe is more than 14 billion years old while earth is 4.54 billion years old. But Christians exclaim earth is only 4000 years old.
Christianity preaches against astrology.
Christianity may preach against astrology today but that hasn't always been true. Wiki has the article Christianity and astrology about it. At various periods in history Christian churches did believe in and support astrology.
Falcon
Should there be a Law?
In the west we believe economy to be a science. Economy sucks to predicting things. I got a university-degree in economy and my most valuable lesson is that I should not attempt to use economical models to try predicting future economical events. In a contest between economists and astrologers about the economical future of things, I would actually bet on the astrologers to win. Economy is filled with "facts" taken out of thin air that have no relation whatsoever to reality. The entire epistemological basis for economy is wrong. The assumptions fail to describe reality. And most people are not educated enough to be able to know if a formula assumes a bell-curve for it to work, so they use it even though it's designed something entirely different. Some of the worst problems in the world is because of this blind faith on economical science.
Take for instance the assumption of competition. It says there are free markets and that huge corporations won't buy out controlling stakes in the markets making them into oligopolies. A simple game of Monopoly will teach you this in a better way then many of the best universities. There are some statistical criticisms on economy that are really worth reading. Literary.
They should have judged astrology as a legitimate part of the service industry and a lawful livelihood as a religious service. They absolutely shouldn't have to rule it as science in order to keep the cultural practise alive. Now it will be only a matter of time when the first astrological defence comes before the courts and the courts are forced to take it under consideration.
Holy Cow, Indians believe in pseudo science? Who woulda thunkit?
... aaaaaaannnnnnnnnd watch the swarms of people preaching science as through it were a religion get outraged about this.
I got news for y'all. Your science, as practiced here, is no better than anything else that's out there.
All you have to do is follow the money. When your science is influenced by an agenda, you can prove anything.
For those with a working knowledge of Hollywood, I cite the movie "Thank you for not smoking", wherein Nick Naylor introduces Dr. Ehrhardt Van Grupten Mundt, whom is charged with "testing the link between nicotine and lung cancer for 30 years" at the laboratory in the Academy of Tobacco Studies
Naylor says. "The man's a genius. He could disprove gravity."
At least the people staring at the sky didn't have investors fretting about quarterly reports, baby.
Any practice that's been around for 1,000s of years, I'm kinda' thinking eventually you find some truth, somewhere.
For the geeks, I recommend "Dancing Naked in the Mind Field". A book by a nobel laureate whom after inventing PCR, speaks out vehemently about the inconsistencies he finds in the scientific community.
This is not to say that we don't have some really nifty things come out of science, but I would argue that the credibility of science should be regarded with an attitude similar to how one might view a "crystal healer" or somesuch.
Know that... those who practice science generally need very expensive toys.
Know that those toys can't be bought by an individual.
Know that whomever buys them for the true geeks, has an agenda.
Know that the geek has their well-being threatened by whomever is funding their geekdom, and thus, is faced with the compromise of supporting themselves (and their family should they have one), or practicing science true to it's name.
Hopefully, in this arrangement there is an intersection between true science and funding. Sadly, this is not always the case.
I have yet to see an example of where blind faith hasn't resulted in some truly atrocious things happening. Think, people.
Even if the thousands of years spent on astrology were merely for entertainment, could it not be argued that entertaining people is of a higher purpose than trying to sell them something? Surly this crowd has been burned by the sleezy sales person peddling an IT solution that doesn't actually work.
Oh, hey, I'm sorry, it seems you have restless leg syndrome. That's a clinical term we just made up, and a real disease. But, you're in luck. We have a pill for that!
Btw little Johhy keeps looking outside instead of paying attention in class. We have a pill for that, too.
What a wonderful world! Problems, solved.
Religion and historical articles aside. Creationism is more scientifically justifiable than Evolution. Unfortunately CmdrTaco has just lost some credibility to his science related postings for that extra little jab at the end. I will agree that Astrology as a Science sounds laughable. Actually as an Astronomer, I cringe every-time someone mistakenly says: "He's into Astrology". I'm sorry to get off coarse on this article but the Mathematics alone require more "faith" to believe in Evolution than Creationism. In fact, in addition to the Scientific support for creationism. Einstein's Law of Relativity means that time slows as matter approaches the speed of light. Once you apply the mathematics on the age data of the Universe and carbon-data of the earth, it has a very interesting correlation to the 6 days of creation. (+1 day of rest of coarse)
science here is a field of study. If philosophy or library science or political science can be called science why not astrology?
Since when did article postings come with gratuitous flamebait in addition to the link/info? Oh wait, this is slashdot..
Since day one. Where have you been?
Also, one man's "flamebait" is another man's witty repartee. There are plenty of other news aggregator sites out there, and as you so keenly pointed out, this is Slashdot. If you don't like it, feel free to find another that you do like. Personally, I think that's a hell of a lot more practical suggestion than to try to change the nature of what Slashdot is and has been for years with what I consider a pretty gratuitous flamebaitional comment itself.
So believing in "God" is "wacky" now. Nice.
Point taken. But, they were able to predict positions of stars, times of solar and lunar eclipse with stunning accuracy. Much much before the first telescope. Clearly, they aren't a set of duds like say a tarot card reader ! A lot of ignorant fools on /. seem to comparing an astrologist to the dude who sits by a parrot.
And astrology and horoscopy are not the same thing!
Check this out http://www.icas.org.in/
Creationism is based in much stronger science than the theory of evolution.
Specifically, the 2nd LAW of thermodynamics rules out any possiblitly that the THEORY of evolution could be true.
In my (science and christian-influenced) view, its a biology versus physics debate, rather than science versus religion.
Shouldn't the LAWS OF PHYSICS take precidence over some crackpot theory from a biologist?
Christians and Catholics are not the same religion. Christians believe astrology is an abomination Catholics invented a religion that incorporated all of their pagan beliefs under the guise of Christianity because Christianity was becoming a popular religion and Emperor Constantine was try to stay ahead of the game. And the Romans never stopped persecuting the Christians they just became the Catholics and carried on their extermination of Christians till the end of the Dark ages. Also where do you get this 4000 years?
- Indian doctors to focus on the fluid balance theory
- Indian engineers to learn more about the wonderful properties of phlogiston
- Indian economists to study the highly profitable theories of Charles Ponzi
That would be nice.
Based on that summary, perhaps we can lobby to have the recent pseudoscience of humankind-caused global warming taught around the globe, also. Oh, wait...
Evolution is awesome and Darwin is god.
There that should get me some awesome karma.
Treat them like individuals. Do not let them enforce their form of Sharia.
After ID got crushed at Dover they forked it again. Now they're pushing "Teach the [manufactured] controversy."
Depending on how it evolves it might make for an interesting area of study. Let's be straight, as of right now Astrology is cultural superstition and its methods are entrenched in psuedoscientific claims. However, I'll argue that alot of different areas of science in their infancy were also.
Maybe hundreds of years from now we'll discover some link between the relationship of celestial bodies and their influences on different earthly factors - yes including human cognitive evolution.
I don't think the idea that celestial bodies have an impact on human development is that far fetched. I mean the position of the moon alone impacts tides, etc. which impact the types of activities that people perform, and has played a role in the evolution of our different cultures. With recent talk of the identification of the biological clock, that has been passed down since from our ancestors, its fair to assume that there are things we may know about ourselves but haven't accurately identified. How much of this might be impacted by elemental forces such as solar radiation at peak times, etc.? I mean we know that the earth is continuously hit by gamma rays, etc. from extraterrestial phenomenon - could it be too wild to suggest that maybe in certain orbital positions there are different things that impact the earth and that these may influence our development?
I'm not all into supporting Astrology as a science, but maybe there are some aspects to it that may be worth investigating. I mean, people thought that traditional healing methods practiced by indigenous peoples was laughable, and now we know that there are indeed psychological aspects to healing.
"At least we can know for certain the people trying to get creationism taught as science in our schools have equally wacky friends around the globe." [Citation needed]
Also, WTF does creationism have to do with astrology? Sounds like flame-bait to me.
Christians and Catholics are not the same religion. Christians believe astrology is an abomination Catholics invented a religion
You obviously didn't read the wiki article on Christianity and astrology. It was the Catholic church who persecuted those who believed in astrology, not the other way around. Not your version, are you letting your hatred of Catholics show? That would explain your not reading, or totally ignoring, the wiki article.
Catholics invented a religion that incorporated all of their pagan beliefs under the guise of Christianity because Christianity was becoming a popular religion and Emperor Constantine was try to stay ahead of the game.
You don 't know much about history either, or you're making things up. Constantine only changed his beliefs after he had a dream in which a Christian figure told him his troops would be victorious in a battle with the Eastern Orthodox Church. When they won he became a believer. Now whether it was a real change of heart or was politically motivated I don't know. And neither do you.
Also where do you get this 4000 years?
Do you really not know there are Young earthers? Okay some believe it's 6000 years old. We've even had threads here on slashdot about Christian museums saying dinosaurs and humans lived together. And those are not Catholics. At least before he died Pope John Paul II said "God" created the universe with the Big Bang and that life evolved. Those Creationist Young Earthers you don't know about, unless you're lying, criticized the Pope over that. Like you they showed their hatred.
Falcon
Should there be a Law?
or they must being paid by astrology union. Actually Bombay should be spelled Mumbai.
Scary that that the high court of Mumbai thinks astrology is a science because it shows that the high court's members lack of understanding facts and reality. I would not trust any decision made by this court since do not take facts and reality as evidence.
However, I could see all of the fraudsters, embezzlers, and other criminals will come to Mumbai to incorporate and use its weak legal justice system to do their crimes. Now I wouldn't do business with any company that would have my financial information since they have such a weak legal system. I hope that a higher court would overturn this nonsense decision.
This is one of the dumbest Slashdot posts. Isn't this supposed to be a tech related forum? Astrology or religion don't really fall under the category of technology... I'm not FOR astrology on any level but Please remove this utter nonsense.
India has retards in power. They obviously didn't consult an actual scientist on this.
BeauHD. Worst editor since kdawson.
Scary that that the high court of Mumbai thinks astrology is a science because it shows that the high court's members lack of understanding facts and reality
The same could be said for anyone who believes in God.
BeauHD. Worst editor since kdawson.
Is there ANYONE here that believes in creationism or is it just me?!
Can we just save everyone the trouble and auto-tag everything "idiocracy" until the end of the world in a few months?
You mean the Mayan thing for 2021, right?
Please stay on the line and we will tell you your problems.
The study of patterns of coincidence between astronomical bodies and other schemas.
What does the Indian Rationalists Society have to say about this?
Actually take heart, this kind of absurdity usually means the mumbo jumbo is already on the downward edge of credibility, otherwise it wouldnt even be in this fight.
Relying on wikipedia for info is a bad idea I one time for shits and giggles went to a wiki page that was about a certain ubuntu derivative and changed thing like ubuntu became poobuntu, free and open source software became free and open source cheese, unixlike became poonixlike. My point is it took 6 months before it was corrected with a comment "removed hilarious vandalism".
The 4000 year is bullshit anyone who actually reads their bible it has many genealogical records start adding dates it is closer to 6000.
As for the Catholic church they were the ones who persecuted everyone who wasn't a part of their organisation and/or didn't pay the priest enough.
Another thing is the term Christian. If someone from the church is asking for money it is a business not a church that is how you tell the difference (take the Vatican as example). Christian means you are a follower of Christ but too many scam artists use Christianity to make money (like a scientist has never falsified research or lied or ripped someone off for money) my point is perhaps I should stop getting offended when people ridicule Christians because the term really doesn't mean anything other than Nigerian scam artist in a robe. The people who call themselves Christians should be ridiculed, they are for the most part a bunch of losers they don't even worship who they say they do "Yahweh of the Torah or his son Yahshua". Where did this Jesus Christ thing come from? I wouldn't want someone mispronouncing my name. I will stop referring to myself as a Christian as I do not agree with most of them on religious matters.
Instead of living up to your name, why don't you do a bit of basic reading before posting comments here? The amount of crap in your comment is astounding.
I think Bombay High Court doesn't know the difference between science & statistics.
Universe == Science
Astrology = Statistics
Govt must constitute a panel to rewrite US Constitution and Quran
This, however, doesn't mean that I have to turn into a baboon and agree with those who believe in creationism. .
Huh? Isn't it the evolutionists who believe we're just baboons?
"City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
At engineering, we have always tried to simulate stuff, predict things like turbulence with probability, statistics, correlation, etc; At finance they are doing it with the economy and the markets. When you do some of these simulations and compare with what really happens, things are mostly way off! They aren't perfect either. Probably the astrologers need to do a brand revamp and call their trade with bigger names. BTW astrology is a lucrative profession (at least in India).
At least we can know for certain the people trying to get creationism taught as science in our schools have equally wacky friends around the globe.
Rob, you're trolling. I've seen the accusations made time and time again that there are people in America who want creationism taught in public schools as science, but I have never seen any of the alleged advocates. I think this is a boogeyman. I don't believe that such people exist and I ask you to document it.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
All well and good, as long as the sheep haven't elected politicians who've passed laws to stop you.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Just because you don't understand creationism, and believe in a world that "just is," don't knock it. There is merit in Creationism, stop your prejudice.
Or bombay rolls.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
In a recent BBC programme Dara O'Briain proclaimed that astrology was rubbish and Brian Cox followed up with "in the interests of balance on the BBC, yes astrology is nonsense." This got the Astrological Association of Great Britain so riled that they have put forward a petition for "fair representation" in the media. A couple of good blogs have been done on the subject in the Guardian - here and here
Astrology is a religion. Like all religions, it eugenically bred its adherents according to the verisimilitude they expressed toward their astrologically predicted character. So after all these years of breeding the descendants tend to treat others according to how true they are to their predicted character. So the courts are recognizing this cultural behavior.
This should not come as much of a surprise. The general view among the majority of the Indian population is that astrology is a proper scientific subject. Some universities even offer courses in it. Pseudoscience and religion is the greatest earners in India. The biggest Yoga Guru in the country has claimed that his breathing exercises can cure cancer and AIDS and still receives widespread support, and very little condemnation.
The Person can go to the Supreme Court to challenge the judgement of the Bombay High Court
This is offialdom at maybe its worst; maybe this public official (Kevin Lacy: jklacy@dot.state.nc.us) maybe has too much time on his hands. Perhaps he needs to have a little less time, or to take lots more time to think.
Looking at space, radio, science and computing from a 'down-under' amateur enthusiast perspective.
There's nothing wrong with Creationism, the belief that the world came about thanks to a deity.
The problem is teaching it as if it were *Science*. There is a lot of bunk out there created by
so-called creation scientists who twist facts to fit their biases.
At least we can know for certain the people trying to get creationism taught as science in our schools have equally wacky friends around the globe.
This is of a very cute soundbite, but let us not go entirely overboard here. But first of all, just to get it out of the way: I don't believe in astrology or any other religious stuff.
However, the fundamental difference between creationism and things like astrology, tarot and other similar superstitions, is that where creationism exists in plain and obvious contradiction to facts that are well-known to the believers, many other superstitions are based on "experience", all be it muddled and misinterpreted experience.
Take tarot: you spread a number of cards with symbols in a basically random sequence, interpret them and experience the feeling of insight in your situation and your future - and the prediction often turns out to be true. To the believer this is a proof that you have gained occult insight into the future, to the scientific non-believer, the explanation is that the attempt at interpreting a random set of symbols has forced you to think outside box, thereby allowing you to get a deeper understanding of the facts you already possess, and making you better able to make a reasonable estimate of what will happen.
icas.org.in
Because it can quickly lead to massive numbers of people acting like total buffoons, damaging themselves and their surroundings (going from driving animals to extinction during a winter flu epidemic because some guru said 500 years ago that it's balls are good against sneezing, all the way up to destroying an entire state's economy because clearly Krishna has ordained it so - just look at the stars !).
Idiocy in large groups isn't funny when it has real consequences for everyone else, and it quickly does : in Afghanistan a few dozen doctors were executed for refusing to treat infections with camel urine*. here's some western muslim defending this. This would be a good laugh, except they kill people for this. Stating that camel urine does not cure diseases apparently is intolerant in the extreme "to muslim feelings". After all - stating that is stating that allah lies.
* the advantage of using urine to clean wounds is that when you're totally cut off from civilization and fresh water, urine is about the only relatively sterile liquid you're going to find. It is probably better to wash open wounds with urine than with water from a pond in the jungle or oasis, or using seawater. Using water from a flowing river, however, is *much* better (since urine is poisonous in large quantities). And yes, in the middle east 1500 years ago you weren't very likely to find flowing water, and of course "somehow" allah was not actually able to see that outside of his little desert conditions were different. (I wonder how that is possible, unless of course, allah did not exist outside of the imagination of the paedophile prophet, and thus didn't know anything said paedophile never knew about ...)
Lots of things can be scientific, measurable and repeatable. For instance the science of gullibility and human manipulation.
Math and Physics are just theory after all. It's wise to remember what the tools are doing and that they are just tools, approximations, ways of achieving something etc... they are not reality beyond that.
The placebo effect is a well known for instance, modern physics won't disagree that where not only holistic in body but that we are connected to everything in the universe, and each other. For instance this post now contains part of me and is based on what I have observed and what other people, animals and the planets have passed on to me. I am stardust, and the radiation from galaxies so distant that the best telescopes only just get a glimpse.
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
Relying on wikipedia for info is a bad idea
Can you point out where I said wiki was a good source of info? Or did I use as one source among others?
The 4000 year is bullshit anyone who actually reads their bible it has many genealogical records start adding dates it is closer to 6000.
One of those other sources did say 6000 years.
As for the Catholic church they were the ones who persecuted everyone who wasn't a part of their organisation
Just as other churches did. Many of those Christians who burned people on stakes were not Catholics. The Anglican church of England most definitely isn't Catholic but it persecuted others. The Puritans or Pilgrims came to America to escape persecution. Here's a link to a Library of Congress page about America as a refuge for those Christians from one church who were persecuted by Christians from other denominations. King James I "persecuted both Catholics and the extreme Protestant Puritans and Separatists." Yet when the Puritans set up the Massachusetts Bay Colony they in turn persecuted those not of their own church.
So, are you going to admit the truth or are you going to continue to persecute Catholics?
Falcon
Oh, not one of those links above are wiki links.
Should there be a Law?
Independent tests have shown astrology to be 100% accurate for predicting certain specific events, namely Easter and Ramadan.
There's other ways "Christian" has been used. Thomas Jefferson was a Deist who took the Christian Bible and cut out the sections dealing with miracles and the supernatural to create the Jefferson Bible. Jefferson believed Jesus was a great teacher, just not the "Son of God". Those who believe that have been considered Christians by some, though not all. Still another way was with Christian agnosticism.
Falcon
Should there be a Law?
Sand and rocks are now drinks.
Billions^Billions microbial lithovores can't be wrong, can they?
Every help desk everywhere practices a form of this. Random problem is given randomly selected solution from prescribed deck of solutions till one "works", eg the recipient of the service stumbles upon the actual fix in the process of being peppered with a disjointed series of possible solutions. Terot card readers use the same approach but usually have the good sense to cut the chump loose after a few "solutions" have been drawn from the deck so they can "service" the next "customer".
Why the constant harping on evolution vs. creation? Isn't it a possible scenario and therefore scientifically valid that some super being designed and created the universe? Especially when numerous people experience communication with this super being on a daily basis? CmdrTaco and other slashdotters seem to have this wacky, religious and evangelistic idea that once we divest ourselves of a belief in God our lives will improve, our science will flourish, and we'll find the elusive cure for the common cold. Atheism and Theism are philosophically equal options. Evolutionism and Creationism, their origin science corollaries are scientifically equal options. We all actually know this. Evidence is and always has been in the eye of the beholder. The underlying belief system and deeper still, the worldview of devotees of both camps are the gatekeepers of how the evidence is interpreted. But no, the atheist agenda can't admit that! Never! We are pure scientists! You are religious pig dogs... Yes it's getting a little old...
Jedis are stupid. If they were so powerful, why couldn't they handle counseling for a kid who missed his mom?
We just had a great "testable moment" with this whole "New Zodiac" thing (http://newsfeed.time.com/2011/01/13/horoscope-hang-up-earth-rotation-changes-zodiac-signs/).
Ultimately, the Zodiac (any of them) works the same way a carnival fortune teller works on you... most people filter the negative and overemphasize the positive. Maybe this is a vestige of back when life was, for the most part, pretty grim -- when you spend all your day hunting, fishing, warring, whatever, those little positives deserve a special place.
Anyway, it's amusing to see those who actually, sorta-kinda at least, believe in this stuff, having to choose between that old sign -- having nothing to do with "the stars", that thing they've hung their hat on, perhaps for decades, and the (often) new sign, which is actually based on the stars. Mythology touted as science rarely has such a schism.
-Dave Haynie
No, these are not predictions, they are arbitrarily defined using astrological methods. For example, Easter Sunday is the first Sunday after the full moon following the northern hemisphere's vernal equinox. This is no more a prediction than a house's address predicts its existence.
Besides, this isn't even Astrology---it's Astronomy. Picking the date may be based on Astrology. Finding the date relies on Astronomy.
Isn't Astrology given as an example of a field that is more science like than ID simply because it can be falsified while ID cannot?
veliath