Slashdot Mirror


Majority of Young American Adults Think Astrology Is a Science

Hugh Pickens DOT Com writes "Americans have always had a strange fascination with astrology. First Lady Nancy Reagan famously employed the services of an astrologer after the assassination attempt on her husband. Now UPI reports that according to a new survey by the National Science Foundation, nearly half of all Americans say astrology is either 'very' or 'sort of' scientific. Younger respondents, in particular, were the least likely to regard astrology as unscientific, with 58% of 18 to 24 years olds saying that astrology is scientific (PDF). What's most alarming is that American attitudes about science are moving in the wrong direction. Skepticism of astrology hit an all-time high in 2004, when 66 percent of Americans said astrology was total nonsense. But each year, fewer and fewer respondents have dismissed the connections between star alignment and personality as bunk. Among respondents in the 25 — 44 age group 49% of respondents in the 2012 survey said astrology is either 'very scientific' or 'sort of scientific,' up from 36% in 2010. So what's behind this data? The lead author of the report chapter in question, public opinion specialist John Besley of Michigan State University, cautions that we should probably wait for further data 'to see if it's a real change' before speculating. But, he admits, the apparent increase in astrology belief 'popped out to me when I saw it.'"

625 comments

  1. And in other news... by Type44Q · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Majority of Young American Adults Think a Comma is Nike's "Swoosh" Symbol.

    1. Re:And in other news... by Big+Hairy+Ian · · Score: 1, Funny

      The majority of young Americans think a burger is one of your five a day!

      --

      Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.

    2. Re:And in other news... by nitehawk214 · · Score: 0

      Majority of Young American Adults Think a Comma is Nike's "Swoosh" Symbol.

      To keep it on topic... "Majority of Young American Adults Think a Comet is the thing you use instead of a period."

      --
      I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
    3. Re:And in other news... by ackthpt · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Majority of young Americans think health care is something only old people need.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    4. Re:And in other news... by Big+Hairy+Ian · · Score: 1

      Just try to get them to find Paris France on a map!

      --

      Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.

    5. Re:And in other news... by Big+Hairy+Ian · · Score: 2

      Depending on the time of the month some young Americans were just confused :D

      --

      Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.

    6. Re:And in other news... by mark_reh · · Score: 1

      But they'll tell you whose shoes Paris Hilton is wearing this week.

    7. Re:And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Majority of Young American Adults Think a Comma is Nike's "Swoosh" Symbol.

      To keep it on topic... "Majority of Young American Adults Think a Comet is the thing you use instead of a period."

      A majority of American young adults think "axe" means to request a question verbally of someone.

    8. Re:And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's easy. Tell them to locate the city of Quyquo and ask them to correctly pronounce the name of that town.

    9. Re:And in other news... by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

      Majority of Young American Adults think a period is something their girlfriend keeps missing.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    10. Re:And in other news... by bickerdyke · · Score: 1

      Try to get them to find ANY Paris on a map...

      Or France.

      --
      bickerdyke
    11. Re:And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      this same demographic votes predominantly democrat

    12. Re:And in other news... by Lumpy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      A majority of young adults are dumb as a box of rocks. and it's not their fault. It's that they had horrible parents that did not teach them anything and went to public school.

      Education in the United states is a complete and utter joke. As an adult that went through that system and had to have my father scream at teachers and administrators to do their frigging job, and myself had to do the same thing until I simply pulled my child from the worthless public school system and sent her to private school at great personal expense, I know how worthless it is. They teach to the common moron and we cant leave the dumb kids behind. Oh and we cant dare insult someone , little timmy loves the spegetti monster as his lord and savoir, we cant upset his family teaching that the world was not created in 3 days and is only 400 years old...

      Americans are poorly educated, and it has became so bad that todays young adults are less educated than the ones just one generation before because of being PC and how education is the bottom of the barrel budget wise.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    13. Re:And in other news... by hcs_$reboot · · Score: 1

      And a majority of Americans voted, twice, for W

      --
      Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
    14. Re:And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A majority of young adults are dumb as a box of rocks. and it's not their fault. It's that they had horrible parents that did not teach them anything and went to public school.

      Any time there's something wrong with people, you can find someone else to point your fingers at. "But it's not even the parents, it's their parents for not teaching them to value education!"

      Where does the buck stop? There are plenty of ways to seek education by yourself, why not blame the people who could be doing it?

    15. Re:And in other news... by The123king · · Score: 1

      The majority of young americans: hate Obama; think public healthcare is a waste of money, whilst not understanding the new laws; believe Snowdon was serving in the public's interest; blame colleges (and not the lack of a subsidised education system) on student debt; are pro-life and would like to see abortion made illegal; are against banning assault weapons; as well as, of course, believing astrology is a science.

      I think it's time to look at exactly who and where these people being surveyed are. The old adage of "There are lies, damned lies, and statistics" seems very relevant here.

      --
      If you gave me a choice between a printer and a giraffe with explosive diarrhoea, i'll get my ladder and my raincoat
    16. Re:And in other news... by sudden.zero · · Score: 1

      or they think "axe" is an awesome body spray.

    17. Re:And in other news... by Cigarra · · Score: 3, Informative

      Nope, just once, in 2004. In 2000 a majority voted for Al Gore.

      --
      I don't have a sig.
    18. Re:And in other news... by sudden.zero · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Ask them to find anything on a map for that matter. http://news.nationalgeographic...

    19. Re:And in other news... by nitehawk214 · · Score: 1

      Depending on the time of the month some young Americans were just confused :D

      i will assume you mean during a full moon...

      --
      I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
    20. Re:And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That is true, and the sad part is they are numbers are growing.

    21. Re:And in other news... by nitehawk214 · · Score: 2

      or they think "axe" is an awesome body spray.

      Either way, they are wrong

      --
      I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
    22. Re:And in other news... by sudden.zero · · Score: 1

      If I had any children, which I don't, I would never allow them to go to public school. Politically correctness has ruined our society, and will continue to ruin it until this country is no more. What kind of non-sense is this "No Losers" bologna that they are teaching children these days? If one loses a game, he or she loses, and if one wins then he or she wins. There is no grey area, and those are the facts! This bull shit that everyone gets a trophy whether they win or lose is just that bull shit! When I was a kid when we lost we tried harder so we could get a trophy next time, and then when we finally won the trophy we were proud. These days they are teaching kids that no matter what they win, and life is always fair in their little psychotic delusion of a world! $&%$ politically correctness and the democratic ass that it rode in on!

    23. Re:And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      majority of young american adults think capital letters are just for shouting

    24. Re:And in other news... by nospam007 · · Score: 1

      "A majority of young adults are dumb as a box of rocks. and it's not their fault. It's that they had horrible parents that did not teach them anything and went to public school."

      Even with the best of schools there will be 50% of them having an IQ under 100.

    25. Re:And in other news... by pr0fessor · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I went to a parent teacher conference when my son was in junior high and was excited to get to talk to his science teacher. I loved my junior high and high school science classes because we did experiments and it was fun.

      I was very disappointed to find out that my son would not have that experience, because their insurance wouldn't cover it.

      We have done more than a few of the experiments I could remember from school in the garage.

    26. Re:And in other news... by Ex-MislTech · · Score: 1

      There is a reason for that...

      http://www.deliberatedumbingdo...

      --
      google "32 trillion offshore needs IRS attention"
    27. Re:And in other news... by AJH16 · · Score: 2

      In fairness, I didn't want to vote for Bush, but Kerry wasn't a serious candidate. I would have taken just about anyone over Bush, but Kerry wasn't it.

      --
      AJ Henderson
    28. Re:And in other news... by AJH16 · · Score: 2

      Note that after Bush's second term I gave up completely and vote third party now.

      --
      AJ Henderson
    29. Re:And in other news... by Ex-MislTech · · Score: 1

      I've been to Paris in the 1980's and you didn't want to go there then, its worse now.

      --
      google "32 trillion offshore needs IRS attention"
    30. Re:And in other news... by Ex-MislTech · · Score: 1

      Some of the dumbing down of the youth is deliberate.

      http://www.deliberatedumbingdo...

      --
      google "32 trillion offshore needs IRS attention"
    31. Re:And in other news... by macson_g · · Score: 1

      Hard to say what's worse...

    32. Re:And in other news... by BForrester · · Score: 2

      No, they think "axe" is something you do with a question.

    33. Re:And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope, just once, in 2004. In 2000 a majority voted for Al Gore.

      And in 1992 and 1996 the majority voted against Bill Clinton.

    34. Re:And in other news... by Redmancometh · · Score: 1

      The majority of young americans: hate Obama;

      "You can keep your plan" "America is the greatest country in the world now join my in changing it" "I will work to close gitmo"...so that's not exactly irrational.

      Think public healthcare is a waste of money whilst not understanding the new laws

      Well if we are going to evaluate this objectively, and we have results...the best way to evaluate is using those results yes?

      Well the results for a huge swath of America have been massively increased premiums. Whether you understand the new laws or not...if something causes you to pay more for less..you're not going to like it. That's not even touching on the Obama-hate-motivated dislike many people share.

      believe Snowden was serving in the public's interest

      Publishing ALL of those documents was irresponsible. However, most people don't see that as the greatest issue at hand. To some people individual rights are still absolutely and utterly paramount.

      Since the NSA was fragrantly violating the rights of the public (and still is), so attempting to curb the action is acting in the public interest isn't it? Even if he had no intent to act in the public interest, and released information contrary to public interest, that singular fact means at least in some way he was acting in the interest of the public at least a bit. You know since there is no non-trivial-brightline to decide "yes" or "no."

      blame colleges (and not the lack of a subsidised education system) on student debt;

      First of all your argument is terrible because we already have a subsidized university and college system to a great extent. Not only that, but it is responsible for a large portion of the debt. The subsidized Stafford loan is responsible for some massive percentage of student debt.
      Second there is a lot of evidence that universities, and even colleges are incredibly wasteful. They are almost as bad as the federal government when it comes to trimming the fat. When a university spends $1,250 on a crappy dell opteron with 3gb of ram, no video chipset, a 160gb harddrive, and some crappy Core 2 Duo or at best an i3...that's a big problem. I've seen exactly that personally. Not only that, but it's under contract! The excuse was "the opterons are supposed to be "business class" and "really robust"" without even focusing on failure rates.

      are pro-life and would like to see abortion made illegal

      I believe the whole point is they see it as murder. If you see a fetus as already a human abortion could definitely be seen as a horrible abomination. Personally I think the uncared children are a lot worse tragedy, so I'm pro-choice. However, I can most certainly understand the logic behind both sides.

      are against banning assault weapons

      I own a few guns, and I shoot from time to time, and I consider myself pro gun. However I'm not gonna argue against an assault weapons on actual assault weapons. The problem is that the last 2 assault weapon bills have had parameters that include FAR more than just classical assault weapons.

      Just saying most of the things you posted have 2 valid sides to them...astrology does not. You seem to have kind of a polarized view of the world..

    35. Re:And in other news... by sudden.zero · · Score: 1

      Paris is a cesspool!

    36. Re:And in other news... by Dragonslicer · · Score: 1

      And a majority of Americans voted, twice, for W

      Not even close. Just over 50% of the people who voted did so for Bush. Voter turnout in the United States isn't even remotely close to 100%.

    37. Re:And in other news... by gordo3000 · · Score: 2

      funny comparative point, norway doesn't allow children activities where everyone doesn't win until you turn 11. And it's not that they are a country of losers either, they are the winningest country in the winter olympics. there is no particular reason you become weak or a loser because you don't have rankings for 8 year olds who all actually suck at their sport of choice.

    38. Re:And in other news... by RogueWarrior65 · · Score: 1

      And in even more other news, a majority of young American adults get their news from the Daily Show and the Colbert Report. Also blogs.

    39. Re:And in other news... by Kielistic · · Score: 0

      You probably shouldn't be so brazenly pompous about your ignorance of linguistics. If you knew anything about the etymology of the verb 'ask' you would know it was often spelt 'ax' or 'acs'. It is a perfectly valid dialectical pronunciation of the word even from a prescriptivist standpoint. The concept is described here.

    40. Re:And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      can't (twice).
      Timmy
      spaghetti

      Who's as dumb as a box of rocks?

    41. Re:And in other news... by bondsbw · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The majority of (all) Americans think health care is the same thing as health insurance.

      --
      All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
    42. Re:And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ax is incorrect. Knight used to be pronounced "kahnickt", but it's still wrong today as well.
      Your big words don't make it so.

    43. Re:And in other news... by ninjagin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What you have identified as "political correctness riding a democratic ass" is a lot older than you assume, but it is, in fact democratic... old school. It's old name, back in the times of the Greeks and the Romans, was "decorum". It means "fit" in latin, having the meaning of "suitable". It's part of good rhetoric, as a device that brings an audience closer to you by not being rude or offensive. To flip that around the other way, you can include (or show that you welcome) a person or group of people in your reasoning or community by choosing your words carefully.

      I think you may be conflating decorum with inappropriate recognition for achievement, but the two are separate things. The former is meant to show or develop alignment with shared goals or interests, and the other is meant (with good intent, perhaps, though with questionable results) to boost self-esteem.

      I choose to observe rules of decorum (the people around you actually decide what they are) because I want to work more effectively with people around me and to perhaps have an easier time convincing those people to do things that I see as beneficial. By not declaring that the people around me are my hated opposition or labeling them in ways that might confine their ways of thinking to those that oppose my views, I keep them open to my persuasion.

      Since I share your goal of not perpetuating inappropriate recognition of achievement, I'm happy to let you know that I was utterly unconvinced by your point of view and there is little chance that you will ever persuade me. I encourage you to keep floundering away in your rhetoric until everyone around us is as convinced as I am.

      --
      .. pa-ra-bo-la, pa-ra-bo-la, 2 pi R, 2 pi R, where's your latus rectum, where's your latus rectum, 2 pi R
    44. Re:And in other news... by judoguy · · Score: 0

      A group that largely voted for Obama as Savior thinks astrology is good science and this surprises anyone?

      --
      Peace is easy to achieve, just surrender. Liberty is much harder get/keep.
    45. Re:And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In U.S., 46% Hold Creationist View of Human Origins

      Another 35% of Americans believe that humans evolved, but with God's guidance.

      Only 15% of Americans say humans evolved, but that God had no part in the process.

      Basically 81% of Americans are superstitious about God's role in man's creation.

    46. Re:And in other news... by Kielistic · · Score: 0

      It's no more incorrect than aluminum. Many dialects still use aks- it is obviously still in use and therefore not 'wrong' (a meaningless word in this context). Your ignorance is not a replacement for facts.

    47. Re:And in other news... by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, that's not true. "Correct" English is defined by its usage: if enough people use it a certain way, that way becomes correct. There is no central authority for the language, unlike French.

      For your "knight" example, it really depends on how many people mispronounced it. If enough people mispronounce a word a certain way, that becomes the correct form (this is usually called "corruption"). Lots of our modern English words are mutated forms of earlier words, frequently borrowed from other languages.

      Of course, if it's only a small group of morons who mispronounce a word, and it never takes root and becomes popular, then it's just wrong.

      It's kinda like revolutionaries: if you try to take over the government and you succeed, you're a "freedom fighter" or "revolutionary", and become revered as a "Founding Father". If you fail, you're a "terrorist" or a "traitor", and you're executed and become infamous and despised.

    48. Re:And in other news... by Pseudonym+Authority · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The boomers are a pretty good place. They are an incredibly selfish, entitled, and overall shitty generation that grew up with unprecedented prosperity provided by their parents and decided that that was somehow their own work. The US will not advance until these people have died off, or at least gotten so senile that they stop voting.

    49. Re:And in other news... by blackbeak · · Score: 1

      Wish I had some mod points for you....

      --
      Everything and its opposite is true. Get used to it.
    50. Re:And in other news... by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      There's no easy answer. People are responsible for themselves (once they're an adult; less so before that), but they're also a product of their environment and upbringing and circumstance. Hitler was horrible, but if his early life hadn't been so bad, it's quite likely he wouldn't have been such a monster, and might have even been a decent person. This doesn't mean we don't hold him responsible for his crimes and atrocities.

      If someone's a serial killer, but his parents pushed him to be a serial killer through a horribly abusive upbringing over his entire childhood, who do you blame? Both.

    51. Re: And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They think their girlfriends period is something she needs to go to the clinic to get "fixed" when it goes missing.

      She's very pneumatic. Orgy-porgy, etc.

    52. Re:And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If I had any children, which I don't, ...

      What is interesting is that it seems the strongest opinions on child rearing come from people who don't have children. When one does take responsibility for raising children, many seem to find that the answers they have and choices they must make are not as clear-cut or black-and-white as they seemed to be.

    53. Re:And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And lets not check the teachers or put them thru yearly evaluations to see if they are just as dumb, or if they actually know what there doing!!

      I understand there is no interaction with parents and there children, but that comes down to the "free market" are (US) Democracy, forcing people to eek out a living, and pretty much spending there time married or devoted to there jobs opposed to spending time with there families.

      I do live in reality, and know there are just as many parents that have the time but don't spend it wisely with there children.

      There's not one solution to fixing the problem, but with the way are government has forced the cost of living to spiral out of control is a huge reason, on top of many others. It has gotten to the point where the US can keep trying to hold off the inevitable collapse of society, but there time is running out, I think it is a good thing, we can down and rid ourselves of Federal control and other forms of government and political BS. The bad part is all the fall out from our own stupidity/chaos instead of trying to help each other.

    54. Re: And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I suspect sports isn't everything in Norway, and that children there are more or less rewarded for completing their lessons well, even before the age of 8.

    55. Re:And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And in 1992 and 1996 the majority voted against Bill Clinton.

      All one can say is that the majority didn't vote for Clinton, not that they voted against him. And the difference between 1992, 1996 and 2000 is that the winner (as it is supposed to be) was the one with the majority of electoral college votes in 1992 and 1996, but not 2000.

    56. Re: And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also twice for the current idiot.

    57. Re:And in other news... by operagost · · Score: 1

      Your math skills tell me that you probably went to public school.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    58. Re: And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or you could say that only 19% have a belief system based in hard-boiled Atheism.

    59. Re: And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Ooh snap! Lexicographers be scrappin' up in here.

    60. Re:And in other news... by blackbeak · · Score: 2

      Oh, for a mod point to give.... (sigh). Follow the link, read the free ebook (thanks Charlotte!), and then check out http://www.invisibleserfscolla... to understand Common Core Curriculum.

      --
      Everything and its opposite is true. Get used to it.
    61. Re:And in other news... by nospam007 · · Score: 1

      "Your math skills tell me that you probably went to public school."

      Indeed. Does your private school have different figures?

    62. Re:And in other news... by jellomizer · · Score: 2

      Just remember 50% (Or damn close) of the population has below average intelligence.
      So you take half of the population with below average intelligence, then you add in a few percentage of people who just don't know better. Then you have the majority who say something stupid.

      Also it depends on how you word things.
      The question of how scientific is astrology is, Very, Somewhat, very Little, not at all. Could lead people who actually do not believe in astrology to answer the question to imply that they do.

      How Scientific is Astrology?
      well Lets compare it to the scientific Method
      Formulation of a question: Can and external force predict my future? Check
      Hypothesis: The position of the stars and planets may give my my future? Check
      Prediction: If we have x combination then a person should be like that? Check
      Testing: We have millions of people doing this for thousands of years? Check
      Analysis: Well we got some people who says it works. But we don't have any fixed numbers? No Check
      4 out of 5, 80% That sound rather scientific to me. Lets mark me under somewhat.

      Lets not forget about the scientific advancements that astrology has created.
      1. Using constellation to help track and locate stars. Otherwise it would be like looking at a random sample.
      2. Seeing that Planets move differently then other stars, which allowed us to help comprehend the model of our solar system and the universe.
      3. Seeing the trends on how constellations change due to the seasons. allowing us to measure our path around the sun...

      Sure the idea of actually telling the future is bunk. However there is a bunch of advancements in science from it. Besides it is a good way to convince your local king, to pay to look at the stars.
       

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    63. Re:And in other news... by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 2

      Even with the best of schools there will be 50% of them having an IQ under 100.

      That rather depends on the school's admittance policies, doesn't it?

    64. Re:And in other news... by ultranova · · Score: 2

      Politically correctness has ruined our society,

      Yes, but thankfully there wasn't much left to ruin after Dungeons and Dragons finished what Rock'n Roll had left.

      Honestly, you'd think we wouldn't be here anymore, after all the times society has been ruined since antiquity.

      These days they are teaching kids that no matter what they win, and life is always fair in their little psychotic delusion of a world!

      If the world isn't fair, then why do you complain when winning or losing don't make a difference for the price one gets?

      $&%$ politically correctness and the democratic ass that it rode in on!

      Well, don't worry, democracy seems to be on its way out. Your tax dollars are busily building Fascism 2.0 even at the moment, so just lean back and relax.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    65. Re:And in other news... by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      The negative stereotypes of frogs are actually accurate representations of parisians.

      Outside Paris, many frogs are actually decent people.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    66. Re:And in other news... by operagost · · Score: 1

      It was a joke, based on the fact that having a large number of students with an IQ slightly above 100, but a tiny handful with extremely low scores, could skew the mean.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    67. Re:And in other news... by DrNoNo · · Score: 1
      Since the NSA was fragrantly violating the rights of the public

      'Fragrant Violation' is attractive young ladies violating speed limits and getting away with it when pulled up by the police. Thinking that when the NSA violate anything, they might do so fragrantly is somehow worse than believing astrology to be a science

    68. Re:And in other news... by HornWumpus · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I bet Norwegian children ignore their teachers and keep score, just like American kids when faced with the same instructions.

      If they don't I fear for the future of Norway. Bunch of stinking law abiders.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    69. Re:And in other news... by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 2

      http://www.amazon.com/Illustra...

      http://www.amazon.com/Illustra...

      Unfortunately, they don't seem to have done one for Physics.

    70. Re:And in other news... by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 2

      Of course in other English-speaking countries, the punctuation mark you're thinking of is called a "full stop".

    71. Re:And in other news... by blackbeak · · Score: 1

      Hey Anonymous, you forgot to correct the extra space after "someone"! (Ha, NOW, who's....?)

      --
      Everything and its opposite is true. Get used to it.
    72. Re:And in other news... by blackbeak · · Score: 1

      And a majority of Americans voted, twice, for W

      ... who is also as dumb as a box of rocks!

      Btw, the beta version is not an improvement.

      --
      Everything and its opposite is true. Get used to it.
    73. Re:And in other news... by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      WTF? You are simply wrong. That's not a matter of opinion.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    74. Re:And in other news... by SecurityGuy · · Score: 1

      Not even that. 50.5 million people voted for Dubya, or about 16% of Americans. If you want to cut to a more reasonable "Americans eligible to vote", then 26% of that 194 million voted for him (or Gore, for whom 51 million voted). There were 129.5 million registered voters, so 39.4% of them voted for Gore and 39% for Bush.

      Even if you go to people who actually voted in the election, Gore got about 48 1/2 %. Still not a majority.

    75. Re:And in other news... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      if enough people use it a certain way, that way becomes correct.

      In this case enough don't, even if you count them as one and not 3/5.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    76. Re:And in other news... by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 1

      axe and the 'misspelling' of ask (aks) are homophones?

      Not where I live (Trapâ"bath split)

    77. Re:And in other news... by cellocgw · · Score: 1

      a majority of young American adults get their news from the Daily Show and the Colbert Report

      If only. John S. is not only bitingly funny, he actually presents data to back up his position. Good luck getting that from Hannity&Company.

      --
      https://app.box.com/WitthoftResume Code: https://github.com/cellocgw
    78. Re:And in other news... by ultranova · · Score: 1

      Where does the buck stop?

      It doesn't. Why would it? People act out their genes and upbringing, genes originate from evolution, which in turn reflects the laws of physics. The ultimate cause - and thus ultimate responsibility - for any given breach of ethics goes way beyond any agent that could be considered even remotely capable of them, beyond humans, beyond life, beyond matter right to the nature of reality itself. So pass the buck away, stop worrying about assigning blame, and concentrate instead on what can be done to solve the resulting problems.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    79. Re:And in other news... by sudden.zero · · Score: 1

      Really the "winningest" huh? You mean they are the country that has won the most medals? I'm sorry that is Russia with the top medal tally. They had the most medals in 1956,1960,1964,1972,1976,1980,and 1994. Where as Norway is actually second but most were won a long time ago: 1924, 1928, 1936, 1952, 1968, and 2002 being the newest first place win. So no not the "winningest" in a long time, better than the US in the Winter Olympics yes, but of course Russia kicks every countries ass because they live in the cold all the time, and this year they have home advantage. Oh and my information comes from here: http://www.topendsports.com/ev...

    80. Re:And in other news... by Will.Woodhull · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Blowing off a mod point to post this. But I want to see any responses, so I don't want to AC this.

      Bringing this back on topic, an increasing number of young people use the word "science" in its older sense, back when it meant an internally self-consistent body of knowledge. Back before the experimental method was described. In the original sense of the word, astrology is a science, just as the medicine of ancient Greece was a science, or artists' study of color theory, perspective, and proportion is a science.

      The real question is why so many youngsters today are using the word "science" in this larger sense? I think the answer has to do with their early exposure to fractals, to strange attractors and butterfly effects, and to the mixing of eurocentric world views with the world views of India and east Asia.

      It might be that the apparent increase in belief in astrology has more to do with a shift in how the word "science" is now used among young people. Among those under 30 yo, talking about the science of acupuncture, or the science of yoga or of meditation is not uncommon. In this sense, the science of astrology fits right in.

      What would be interesting is if the poll had also asked the question, "Does astrology have less, as much, or more impact on your daily life as chemistry and physics?" I would guess the answer to that would show no significant change over the years.

      --
      Will
    81. Re:And in other news... by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 1

      Oh crap, Slashdot.

      You redesign the UI, yet a heading I paste from wikipedia gets mangled by the text encoding???

      "Trap-bath split"

    82. Re:And in other news... by Will.Woodhull · · Score: 1

      We got Google. We don't need no steenking maps.

      --
      Will
    83. Re:And in other news... by Hognoxious · · Score: 2

      He's right because the ballot paper doesn't look like this:

      I do NOT want (tick one)

      Ron Richguy (Rep). .[__]
      Len Lawyer (Dem) . .[__]
      Nate Nutcase (Eco). [__]
      Rob R Baron (Lib) . [__]

      to be President, over my dead body./TT

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    84. Re:And in other news... by pr0fessor · · Score: 1

      They also have some great electronics kits and books.

      Like pong.
      http://www.amazon.com/Velleman...

    85. Re:And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lame joke; IQ doesn't work that way, ever.

    86. Re:And in other news... by stenvar · · Score: 1

      Education in the United states is a complete and utter joke.

      Actually, it's fairly average among Western nations; but don't let facts get in the way of a good rant. Even US public schools are fairly average in comparison to other nations.

      As an adult that went through that system and had to have my father scream at teachers and administrators to do their frigging job, and myself had to do the same thing until I simply pulled my child from the worthless public school system and sent her to private school at great personal expense, I know how worthless it is.

      So, what you consider "worthless" isn't actually "education" in the US, it's public education. And the logical approach is therefore to let more people choose private education, say via voucher programs. That's particularly important for those who, unlike you, can't afford to send their kids to private schools.

    87. Re:And in other news... by See+Attached · · Score: 1

      Leaving no child behind was more important than elevating those with the drive to push schools limits. Has it become difficult to distinguish disinterested / underperforming brainiacs from disinterested / less-capable students? Society needs all types, each to excell in their field, or excel in mediocrity. Its all good, just give a chance to those that will.

      --
      Time for a new Political party in the US (or two!) One is off the rails Other cant pony up a leader.
    88. Re:And in other news... by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      It could. You would have to deliberately construct the population. A school seeing perverse economic incentives might construct that population.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    89. Re:And in other news... by Hognoxious · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Perhaps the problem is that a lot of young Americans don't know the difference between astronomy and astrology?

      Looking at your post it seems they're not alone.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    90. Re:And in other news... by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      I was addressing his repeating the long debunked electoral college claim.

      Bush won Florida. It is a simple fact.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    91. Re:And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope, just once, in 2004. In 2000 a majority voted for Al Gore.

      I believe you mean a PLURALITY!

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U...

      BOOOOOOM! How does that feel!

    92. Re:And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At least he had a plurality. Dubya didn't in 2000.

    93. Re:And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah! for Government Schools. Their product (that is, edumacated student) is outstanding--out standing in the rain.

    94. Re:And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So...it's God's fault?

    95. Re:And in other news... by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      yes. 49% have an IQ below 100.

      50% includes half of the 100 IQ people. 1% is an acceptable fudge factor, some claim 48% are below 100 IQ some claim even higher as the average covers a near 50% of the population.

      My personal observation of humanity suggests that its 60% that is below 100IQ but that is also skewed by what I see these morons doing on my morning commute.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    96. Re:And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then they'll be totally confused when we tell them that comets HAVE periods.

    97. Re:And in other news... by jellomizer · · Score: 2

      I never stated that astronomy and astrology were the same... However Astrology was an earlier "study" of the stars, that allowed the back bone for real science of astronomy. As most of us look into space and we see the stars, we go well isn't that nice, however really sit back and make much sense out of it. Astrology was the first attempt to really make sense out of it. Its conclusions were wrong, but at least it fond a pattern in the seemingly random sky.
      This allowed the backbone for Astronomy to really understand what is happening.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    98. Re:And in other news... by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      And honestly the economic cross section. it is a reality that lower economic neighborhoods are lower in IQ (united states and 1st world only) because there is a very large amount of developmentally challenged people that live in those neighborhoods because they cant afford $1500 a month rent on their government checks. These people are the 80IQ and lower that are functionally disabled but they honestly can not hold a job and rightfully the government and society needs to take care of them. Others are above that level 81 to 90 IQ that are simply the idiots of society that have a genetic propensity for lower IQ and thus they breed lower IQ children. these children are stuck in the poor neighborhoods and go to these poor schools. The smart kids that just happen to be poor are double doomed in these schools because they are not set up to handle a kid with 110-140 IQ so the kid will get paired with a druggie that is struggling or one of the higher functioning morons and dragged further down. Couple with that the teachers do not want to be there because it's an inner city poor school that has a dramatically higher rate of dipshits that think they are tough and you have a recipe for complete failure. Those teachers need DOUBLE the salary of a rich district to attract good teachers to the schools. But we cant have that.

      It is known that poor schools have a far higher number of special needs students as well, so they end up even more strapped for cash.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    99. Re:And in other news... by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      You.

      I suggest you learn the proper use of apostrophes.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    100. Re:And in other news... by avandesande · · Score: 1

      Although not absolutely true they are mostly right.

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
    101. Re:And in other news... by jc42 · · Score: 1

      ... a majority of young American adults get their news from the Daily Show and the Colbert Report. Also blogs.

      Even more fun is that, in both of the most-recent major election years, numerous surveys turned up the result that the people who watched the Daily Show and the Colbert Report were also best at accurately answering questions about the various candidates. This led to a lot of humor.

      Of course, it's not obvious in this case which is the cause and which is the effect. But it did lead to a lot of accusations about the mainstream media's news in general and their coverage of the election campaigns in particular. How is it that a bunch of professional comedians specializing in satirical coverage seem to be more informative than the "serious" news agencies?

      One bit of commentary I ran across argued that the general failure of the media to educate the public is primarily the result of their being mostly funded by advertising, and the marketers don't generally like a well-informed public. But, the explanation goes, it seems that the companies that advertise in the Daily Show and the Colbert Report do in fact support educational content. Why this might be isn't clear.

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    102. Re:And in other news... by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      IUT's called not being lazy and getting a second job. I worked two jobs to put my kid through private school. 100% of my income from my nights and weekends paid for her school. Plus I was very unamerican and drove a 15 year old car refusing to buy a new one, and lived in a 800 sq foot home instead of the required 5500 square feet that americans deem as required for.

      People can afford what is important to them. MOST do not put their child's education above impressing the neighbors with new cars and large houses.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    103. Re:And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Especially since Astrology IS a science, just not the kind of science we've grown up with. I'm not saying I believe it is accurate, but it is nevertheless originating from observations and theories about outcomes. Also, there is probably a core of truth in it that many people today turn a blind eye to, or at least a very interesting avenue to further modern science into.

      Let the slashcrows start crowing!

    104. Re: And in other news... by gordo3000 · · Score: 1

      Great using number of times first, total medal count Norway wins. And you did subtract out the medals from eastern block countries not russia right? Or you just left them in for ease? But yes they had a dull period where due to no or little state support they failed to take first. That changed around 1984 and about 20 years later they come first again.

      And they win the lifetime medal count even with the soviet bloc to stand against.

    105. Re:And in other news... by cusco · · Score: 1

      I used to do phone surveys (sorry, I was desperate for work). They "typical" respondent to a phone survey is far from a typical person. How many people do you know who are willing to spend 20 minutes of their time in an annoying activity that will not benefit them in any way? Not many.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    106. Re: And in other news... by jc42 · · Score: 1

      Or you could say that only 19% have a belief system based in hard-boiled Atheism.

      Or in hard facts. ;-)

      After all, there's no shortage of hard-science support for the evolutionary process. And you don't need to be an atheist to understand how a god (or team of gods) might build a universe that works that way. Scientists do it all the time: Set up a test environment and initialize it to some state, then sit back and watch what happens.

      More than one science-fiction writer has written stories based on such scenarios. Of course, to make the story interesting, it usually turns out that the "gods" (aka technologically advanced aliens) do interact with our world, and do so during the story.

      Earlier, /. had a story similar to this, about the situation with the wolves and moose in Isle Royale. That's a semi-isolated "system" that has been strongly affected by human activity, but for half a century or so has had only a tiny human population that cares for and studies the wolf-moose-forest ecosystem and how it develops.

      It's not difficult to imagine that our world might be a similar study that has been running for a few billion years. Maybe the researchers sometimes land and "interfere", or just visit to do a bit of personal data collection. Or maybe they just vacation here, perhaps disguised as humans (or mice or gnats).

      Or maybe not.

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    107. Re:And in other news... by Capt.DrumkenBum · · Score: 1

      A majority of young adults are dumb as a box of rocks.

      I will not have you insulting boxes of rocks like this!!!

      --
      If I were God, wouldn't I protect my churches from acts of me?
    108. Re:And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think now all you need to do to fully refute his point is demonstrate how scientific method -objectively- clustered certain stars and determined the appropriate scientifically-connected pagan god for each.

      Since astronomy will undoubtedly continue to use these concepts regardless, it seems fair to say astrology has contributed to the science irrespective of the viability of many of its conjectures.

    109. Re:And in other news... by Capt.DrumkenBum · · Score: 1

      And a majority of Americans voted, twice, for W

      ... who is also as dumb as a box of rocks!

      I will not have you insulting boxes of rocks like this!!!

      --
      If I were God, wouldn't I protect my churches from acts of me?
    110. Re:And in other news... by Master+Moose · · Score: 1

      Don't you just type that into google earths search bar?

      --
      . . .gone when the morning comes
    111. Re: And in other news... by gordo3000 · · Score: 1

      Btw I don't care for a he said she said on something meaningless like medal count. Suffice at giving out trophies to all kids or just the top scorers in peewee football is pretty damn meaningless to competitiveness and its way more complex.

      But yes the USSR has the wins count, and in lifetime medals its norway . the odd similarity is both countries have sports academies to nurture the best athletes and both traditionally put a lot of emphasis on playing outside even at the coldest in winter. I think that matters a lot more

    112. Re:And in other news... by RogueWarrior65 · · Score: 1

      Cherry-picked data.

    113. Re:And in other news... by Shortguy881 · · Score: 1

      My god, your application of the scientific method is down right idiotic. Lets take your application and use it to determine the validity of Scientology:

      Formulation of a question: Are we immortal beings who have forgotten our true nature? Check
      Hypothesis: Does auditing events in one's past frees them of their limiting effects, revealing one's true nature? Check
      Prediction: If we audit someone they should better remember their true nature. Check
      Testing: We have hundreds of thousands of people doing this for over a decade. Check
      Analysis: Well we got some people who says it works. But we don't have any fixed numbers? No Check
      4 out of 5, 80% Lets mark this under somewhat to.

      By this implementation of the scientific method, everything is scientific.

      --
      Brilliance without wisdom, power without conscience. Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants.
    114. Re:And in other news... by Cimexus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Haha, very true. I'm a recent migrant to the US, having previously lived in a country with a universal single-payer system. One of my first challenges when I started work here was understanding my insurance options ... open enrollment, deductibles, co-pays, in-network vs. out of network etc. All this new terminology was really quite overwhelming given that I'd never had to ~think~ about healthcare AT ALL before in my life. I was used to turning up to any old doctor/clinic I could find, getting treated, swiping my healthcare card on the way out and ... leaving. Money barely came into it. But here - so many choices, so many restrictions. It's a minefield.

      A lot of people I talk to here really can't wrap their mind around healthcare in a world where it isn't tied up intimately with the insurance industry. They also can't seem to understand that universal healthcare does not mean the government is somehow controlling your treatment. In my old country, doctors/clinics/some hospitals were regular, private businesses, just like in the US. If I didn't like one, I could go to another. The only difference is the government pays most or all of the bill at the end. Government-PAID healthcare does not always mean government-RUN healthcare...

    115. Re:And in other news... by Cimexus · · Score: 1

      Indeed. The #1 problem with the US education system IMO is that geography isn't a compulsory subject like it is in most other OECD countries (at least, a basic level). Geography encompasses a lot more than just rote learning where things are though. It takes about cultures and languages in various areas of the world. It teaches basic skills like how to represent a three dimensional view of something onto a 2D grid, how to orient yourself in space using a map, gives you some basic sense of distance and direction, explains basic principles of navigating on a sphere (the Earth) and why certain things aren't always intuitive (e.g. shortest distance between two points is usually not a constant compass bearing, i.e. great circle vs rhumb line distinction)...

      I only did basic (year 7 and 8) geography myself but the number of people that simply cannot navigate, or look out at the horizon and understand where they fit within the wider picture, is astonishing.

    116. Re:And in other news... by dcw3 · · Score: 1

      I was there several times in the 80s (it was a short drive from my place in Germany), and spent a couple days just last year. In what ways do you claim that it's worse?

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
    117. Re:And in other news... by plover · · Score: 2, Funny

      The radio announcer said last night that the Palestinians and the Israelis might come to a peace deal real soon now, because it appears to be the only way they can get Kerry to shut up.

      --
      John
    118. Re:And in other news... by stenvar · · Score: 1

      So you're saying that our government should continue to waste tax dollars on a public education system that is a "complete and utter joke" because, what, you lived frugally? What kind of moronic justification is that?

      (Besides, I don't believe you; you have already shown yourself in other postings to be a complete idiot when it comes to money management.)

    119. Re:And in other news... by iluvcapra · · Score: 1

      With the caveat that the deciding vote was cat not by a Floridian, but by Sandra Day O'Connor.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
    120. Re:And in other news... by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Self esteem and no losers and stuff like that is not political correctness. Maybe they go hand in hand with some people but it doesn't make them the same thing.

    121. Re:And in other news... by Platinumrat · · Score: 1

      You should prepare for a visit from Homeland Security anytime, in the not too distant future. You're obviously a terrorist, as only they want electronics and chemicals.

    122. Re:And in other news... by ultranova · · Score: 1

      So...it's God's fault?

      In any religious tradition that has an omnipotent God... yes. And us mere mortals can only decide how to deal with these challenges we're presented with. And blaming each other for acting like flawed mortal beings we all are is probably the least productive way imaginable of doing so.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    123. Re:And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      What are you, some kind of left-liberal, gun-banning, Obama-voting, pinko-commie? I bet you watch BBC news.

    124. Re:And in other news... by turgid · · Score: 1

      Bush won Florida. It is a simple fact.

      It was the zombie vote that did it.

    125. Re:And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Your math skills tell me that you probably went to public school."

      Indeed. Does your private school have different figures?

      I teach freshman physics (university) and I've never been able to tell a difference in math skills between private and public schools, particularly here where most of our kids come from comparatively affluent suburbs. A properly funded [i.e., not inner city] public school system is just as good (or bad) as any of the private schools in math and science education as far as I'm concerned.

    126. Re:And in other news... by hazah · · Score: 1

      And you do realize that the average of 100 isn't being set by that school, right? It's -- at least -- a national average. If your school is that close in it's stats to the expectation, I'm going to go ahead and suggest that your numbers are false.

    127. Re:And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Public education is not the problem nor is private education the solution. AMERICAN public education is quite different to public education anywhere else in the world. American culture does little to help young people develop the critical thinking skills that would enable them to swiftly dismiss rubbish like astrology, religion, alternative "medicine", anti- vaccination, and crackpot theory's in general. Swimming in a culture packed full of distractions and meaningless entertainment, combined with ample, and cheap resources has created a nation which is insular and fearful.

    128. Re:And in other news... by SebNukem · · Score: 1

      No, he's right. Your rant would have been perfect if it wasn't littered with typos. All the mistakes contradict your message.

    129. Re:And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The bad part is all the fall out from our own stupidity/chaos instead of trying to help each other.

      Well, then, let me be the first to help you out. Learn the difference between there/their/they're and are/our. You also made at least a couple of other spelling and punctuation errors as well. Consider this your (possibly) first lesson in proper English. Also, while I didn't notice you personally making this error, please also note the difference between 'then' and 'than'; I mention this because I see this particular error a lot and want other readers to take note.

    130. Re:And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps the problem is that a lot of young Americans don't know the difference between astronomy and astrology?

      Unfortunately, this rings all too true. I have a doctorate in astronomy. I have worked as a professional astronomer. I cannot even begin to tell you the number of times friends and relatives have asked me if I spend my days making up star charts and horoscopes. It is quite depressing, actually. I just wish there were a way to put the stupid back in the bottle but I fear that it is already too late for us.

    131. Re:And in other news... by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      We cant upset his family teaching that the world was not created in 3 days and is only 400 years old...

      Man, this world gets younger every day!

    132. Re:And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A group that largely voted for Obama as Savior thinks astrology is good science and this surprises anyone?

      I voted for Obama. Twice. I don't recall him ever campaigning as "Savior". I certainly never thought of him as "Savior" while I was in the voting booth. (Except, perhaps, as saving us from the idiots that the GOP had put forward on their ticket.) I think you may need to refill your lithium prescription.

    133. Re:And in other news... by Zordak · · Score: 1

      Majority of Young American Adults Think a Comma is Nike's "Swoosh" Symbol.

      To keep it on topic... "Majority of Young American Adults Think a Comet is the thing you use instead of a period."

      I'd say the problem is most likely that they don't know that "astrology" and "astronomy" are different things. "Astrology? Yeah, that's those dudes who study stars, right? Yeah, that's real science."

      --

      Today's Sesame Street was brought to you by the number e.
    134. Re:And in other news... by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Keep repeating that derp.

      You remain wrong.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    135. Re: And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's so... French.

    136. Re:And in other news... by mjwx · · Score: 1

      Education in the United states is a complete and utter joke. As an adult that went through that system and had to have my father scream at teachers and administrators to do their frigging job,

      This isn't the fault of the educators, their hands are tied.

      You see when a teacher tries to do something radical, like teach or engage the students in some critical thinking they get 30 parents (thanks to massive class sizes) barrelling down the halls yelling and screaming that they're introducing their children to all manner of horrible/ungodly/liberal ideas and unlike you or your dad, have an ambulance chaser on a leash.

      For everyone 1 person who wants the teachers to be allowed to teach, there's a few dozen that don't because they believe education is a bad thing(TM) for a variety of stupid reasons.

      Administrators are so scared of a lawsuit, teachers who try anything are punished.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    137. Re:And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even with the best of schools there will be 50% of them having an IQ under 100.

      Do you mean that even in the best of schools half the student body would deliver an IQ below 100!?

      If so, that's palpably untrue. I should be most surprised if the (not American) public school my son attends has even a single student who would test below 100 on any major IQ test (or below 115 for that matter). And that's not even the "best" public school in the state.

    138. Re:And in other news... by Chalnoth · · Score: 1

      But...but...socialism!

    139. Re:And in other news... by Redmancometh · · Score: 1

      You know I meant flagrant haha.
      I'm not gonna blame it on my phone's auto-correct, but I did type that entire thing (quite a goddamn challenge) on a phone. So you know...it's in the realm of possibility :).

    140. Re:And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really, from 2006???

      Captcha: adultery (now why is that?)

    141. Re:And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      young adults are dumb as a box of rocks.

      Nor can they employ proper grammar... this ought to be "... are as dumb as a box ..."
      What's wrong with you? Are you dumb as a box of rocks?

    142. Re: And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The are so many #1 problems that I won't know where to start...

    143. Re: And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about telling us the name of the country so we can investigate further?

    144. Re:And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It does in this country.

    145. Re: And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where does the government get the money to pay for that?

    146. Re:And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What defines an accredited university? How much of the university's revenue is used for "administrative" purposes? Maybe we should look at restricting which types of colleges loans can be used at, in order to push the universities into cutting the "fat".

    147. Re:And in other news... by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      Healthcare can be quite expensive, and in a place like the US with a lot of high tech medical doohickeys, it can be astonishingly expensive. The government does not have unlimited funds; in extremis it can't spend more on healthcare than the GDP. So sooner or later the government is going to determine and limit what it will pay for, and it would not be surprising to see everything else prohibited. So what will be the basis on which the government decides whose problems it will pay to fix? Obviously, those who can be expected not to contribute much to government get cut first: hence Obama's pronouncement five years ago that grandma should just take a pain pill (and prepare to die.) If you're an opponent of those currently in power (especially if you're prominent and have no way to blackmail the leaders) expect to have payment for your life-saving procedure denied or be subject to mysterious bureaucratic delays. If you've made a personal enemy of someone sitting on a death panel, kiss your ass goodbye.

      Remember also that ultimately the government pays for nothing; that generous benefit you're getting was stolen from your neighbor, your children or parents, your siblings or even yourself. That guy down the street who spends half his life in the hospital because every July he runs his motorcycle into a tree and every December gets a new form of VD from his favorite whore? You're paying for his medical expenses. He doesn't care, he's not paying, why should he be more cautious?

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    148. Re:And in other news... by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      Hello my baby, hello my honey, hello my ragtime gal.
      Send me a kiss by wire, baby my heart's on fire.
      If you refuse me, honey you'll lose me, then you'll be left alone.
      Oh baby, telephone, and tell me I'm your own.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    149. Re:And in other news... by JamieIanMacgregor · · Score: 1

      I would love to have something funny to say here but I think the sad truth is these "adults" don't know the difference between the words astrology and astronomy, let alone the difference in what they mean.

    150. Re:And in other news... by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      A 70 IQ is adequate to run a primitive shop like a farmstand, or operate a cash register. That's 2 standard deviations below the mean, leaving about 2.1% dependent upon family, charity, or the government, as an adult.
      IIRC among humans, the tendency is a 40% return to the mean, so two 70 IQ parents have a 50% chance of each child having an IQ of 82 or above.
      Tracking students (keeping bright and well-behaved students in classes with other bright and well-behaved students) is being deprecated by "politically correct" school boards; tracking would eliminate much of the "bad environment" problems they face in poor schools. Disruptive students need either whips or almost-magical teachers, and there aren't enough of the latter to go around at any price.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    151. Re:And in other news... by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      It's in Texas.

    152. Re:And in other news... by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      IQ distribution isn't perfectly Gaussian. On the low end there is a long tail, but it's clipped at zero On the high end there is also a long tail.
      I'd guess that the long tail on the low end is caused by brain damage of various sorts such as birth defects or accidents. On the high end there's a tendency to selective breeding and extraordinary care (which can act on whatever plasticity is available for IQ).

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    153. Re:And in other news... by AK+Marc · · Score: 1
      About 5% have between 99 and 101. Given that you are arbitrarily asserting that 1% have exactly 100, and refusing to round 49.5% to 50% just so you can whine about someone else being wrong, when they are not. Then you are as wrong as they are, and should have used 5% for your "fudge factor". But, as IQ is modeled as normal, rather than Poisson, you have 0 *at* 100, but 5% between 99 and 101 (or about 3% between 99.5 and 100.5). If you model it as a Poisson, then you'd be right (aside from your fabricated numbers being wrong), but that's not how it's modeled. Making your logic wrong, as well as your math.

      My personal observation of humanity suggests that its 60% that is below 100IQ but that is also skewed by what I see these morons doing on my morning commute.

      Those in the lower ranks do worse at assessing others. So I think we've found the problem.

    154. Re:And in other news... by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      A society being ruined does not mean that all civilization collapses; a more vibrant society often takes over the one that collapses from corruption.

      My 9th grade algebra teacher loved to quote Aristotle complaining about the degeneracy of the younger generation; implying that the good conditions then (1965) contradicted Aristotle. She failed to realize that Greek civilization fell apart after Aristotle's student Alexander 'The Great' died.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    155. Re:And in other news... by ChrisMaple · · Score: 0

      The boomers were set up by the so-called "Greatest Generation", which failed to give the boomers a moral foundation. They in turn were damaged by the Progressives of the 1900-mid-1930s era, who started the trend to personal irresponsibility and big government with Social Security and the Income Tax. Before then, the looters really didn't have a foothold.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    156. Re:And in other news... by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      In the US, the sign of a full stop is octagonal.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    157. Re: And in other news... by Great+Big+Bird · · Score: 1

      Oh how cute, you said death panel. Also government benefits are stealing from your neighbours. TIL!

    158. Re: And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Majority of young Americans think sneering is a valid form of argument.

    159. Re:And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bush lost Florida, but it voted for him anyway.

    160. Re:And in other news... by bluegutang · · Score: 1

      Same here.

    161. Re: And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's the old unicode bug though. The title on wiki contains an en-dash, your retyped place name contains a hyphen.

    162. Re: And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      nice paranoid theory - but doesn't hold up in practice. i live in a country with high tech medicine and universal healthcare (e.g.: http://www.medaustron.at/en/ ) everyone gets access to some pretty good medicinal services without paying extra - and if there's still something else you need, you can always pay for it privately, go to private clinics or get additional private insurance that pays for that. there's no "death panels" and usually it's the people who can afford private health care, who get to pay a little more - as the whole system is designed to support people who could not afford health care, it's obviously not them who get cut first. and yes, it doesn't pay for everything (like non-health-related dental procedures), but it doesn't have to - it just has to be more than nothing to be better than nothing.

      and it's not stealing, c'mon.... that guy from your example, running his motorcycle into a tree is probably not going to live long anyway - in that case he's probably much cheaper for the health-system by going to the hospital twice a year than needing daycare when he's ninety. also, it's not stealing, when you need it someday - besides one could argue that you are stealing health and oppurtunities from someone you're denying basic health care

    163. Re:And in other news... by Galilee · · Score: 1

      I think and hope that you are right. Shortly after I bought a telescope a friend made a comment about how I had gotten into astrology.

    164. Re:And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right, and you are the type of person that gives the politically correct, liberal, democrat, morons enough wiggle room to gain ground! No losers is politically correct BS because it would be "wrong" to call someone that didn't win a loser even though that is exactly what they are. If you have the least score you are the loser it is just how score based games are played. Only adults who were losers when they were kids would tell you different. So, change your liberal diaper, and grow a set!

    165. Re:And in other news... by sudden.zero · · Score: 1

      I can tell you this much for certain: I have a little cousin who is not very good at soccer, but he still gets a trophy for every tournament that his team plays in: win or lose. It gives him a false sense of pride and self esteem. If you were to ask him on any day of the week what he wants to be when he grows up he would tell you that he wants to be a pro soccer player. In reality since his team has never won a game, largely due to the fact that his skills as a goal keeper are not good, his possibilities of being a pro soccer player are almost zero, but due to the "No Losers" policy of kids teams these days he still feels like he has a shot. That is where I draw my conclusions from. It may be good for a child's self esteem while they are a child, but unfortunately in the real world those kids are going to end up frying chicken at KFC because their plans as a pro sports player never panned out due to the fact that they have been taught that everyone wins even if they lose!

    166. Re:And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds great. You should move back there.

      I lived in two countries, one with socialized, one with single payer, and have no interest in subjecting myself to those complete failures again.

      Also, those exist here, too. They're called "The VA" and "Medicaid." Ask people using each how they compare to real care.

    167. Re:And in other news... by mcgrew · · Score: 2

      What's the matter, kid, did your grandpa molest you or something?

      Entitlement? I'm certainly entitled to what I pay for. As to selfish, I see that more in the kids. We did NOT grow up in unprecedented prosperity you ignorant twat, the fifties when we were kids and seventies when we were young adults were both recession periods, and the seventies were inflationary DURING a recession.

      Selfish? Sorry, kid, that's YOUR cocaine-addled generation, not mine. Also, methinks you're confusing social classes with ages.

      Our generation was thrown into a useless war in southeast Asia by the "Greatest Generation" who ran things back then. If not for my generation, Bush would have drafted you kids to die in Afghanistan and Iraq.

      My generation fought against the Vietnam war and won, fought against pollution and got the Clean Air and water acts passed... my generation's protests were all effective. How's your "occupy" movement coming?

      My generation brought you PCs and cell phones and file sharing. Meanwhile, yours killed the unions.

      Fuck off, you nasty little twit.

    168. Re:And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The one who pays the bills is, in the end, the one who runs the show. All the government has to do is say "if you don't implement these changes and new standards, you won't get the money". These new standards and new regulations build upon each other, and eventually health care is run exactly as the government wants.

    169. Re:And in other news... by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Being of the same generation as yourself (IIRC I'm 3 years your junior) ... I totally agree, til you got to the part about the unions. Unions killed themselves with their own greed, and killed a whole economic sector by demanding money that just wasn't there, taking the last profit out of heavy industry and sending more and more of it overseas. Detroit is example #1, but I'd also point at the Butte copper pit, which I was there to see die at the hands of the union. Didn't seem to bother the union that the smelting industry was being squeezed between higher electric rates and higher union demands to the point that there was no money in it (and if a company can't make money, why stay in business?) And it didn't seem to bother the union when the mine shut down and threw 90% of the town into long-term unemployment. The miners weren't happy, but it wasn't up to them. Everyone I knew said they'd have rather kept working for less pay than lose everything.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    170. Re: And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck you.

    171. Re:And in other news... by lsatenstein · · Score: 1

      What are you, some kind of left-liberal, gun-banning, Obama-voting, pinko-commie? I bet you watch BBC news.

      How did you know? Did Edward Snowdon tell you?

      --
      Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
    172. Re:And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nicely put. I'd like to know what drew you here. A particular job? General business opportunity? Family?

    173. Re:And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      THAT is the best analysis of PC that I have ever read. I hope it's okay if I steal it? I am used to telling people that what they call PC can also be called 'politeness", and that there ought to be a greater emphasis on politeness for the more vulnerable than the less vulnerable. In other words, speaking truth to power, even if it verges on the offensive, can be a great thing. But speaking truth to the weak, and being offensive, is merely rude with no useful payoff. [note: i don't count a feeling of self-righteousness as a 'useful payoff', though I understand how pleasant it is]

      That (by the way) is why there is so little right-wing comedy.

    174. Re:And in other news... by lsatenstein · · Score: 1

      Healthcare can be quite expensive, and in a place like the US with a lot of high tech medical doohickeys, it can be astonishingly expensive. The government does not have unlimited funds; in extremis it can't spend more on healthcare than the GDP. So sooner or later the government is going to determine and limit what it will pay for, and it would not be surprising to see everything else prohibited. So what will be the basis on which the government decides whose problems it will pay to fix? Obviously, those who can be expected not to contribute much to government get cut first: hence Obama's pronouncement five years ago that grandma should just take a pain pill (and prepare to die.) If you're an opponent of those currently in power (especially if you're prominent and have no way to blackmail the leaders) expect to have payment for your life-saving procedure denied or be subject to mysterious bureaucratic delays. If you've made a personal enemy of someone sitting on a death panel, kiss your ass goodbye.

      Remember also that ultimately the government pays for nothing; that generous benefit you're getting was stolen from your neighbor, your children or parents, your siblings or even yourself. That guy down the street who spends half his life in the hospital because every July he runs his motorcycle into a tree and every December gets a new form of VD from his favorite whore? You're paying for his medical expenses. He doesn't care, he's not paying, why should he be more cautious?

      Actually, I live with a one-payer system. The hospitals have budgets and endowments. They are not free wheeling with useless technology. We have the tools (mris, microsurgery tools, robotics), where it is patient justified, not vendor justified). There is a concentration to improving operating theatre rooms utilisation, which means more surgeries permitted.

      As an example, X rays are digitalized. During the day our radiologists do their analysis for my local hospital, and for a hospital in Australia (12 hrs difference in time). In our night, while our radiologoists are asleep, Australia radiologists look at our xrays. Ergo, we get good turnaround and can treat emergencies 24/7 with little lost time. This swap or exchanges started with abandonment of film xrays as being primary tool.

      --
      Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
    175. Re:And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And let's not forget the Science of Heraldry!

    176. Re:And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and if that didn't work out you can rely on the USA for schools, research and in many cases better treatment.

      maybe not any more.

    177. Re:And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If not for my generation, Bush would have drafted you kids to die in Afghanistan and Iraq.

      You say that as if it's a good thing. To many of those cocaine-addled kids, being drafted would have been better than being feckless unemployed welfare leeches, or in prison for drug possession.

      What? You're the one who said they were crack addicts. If you're gonna start trashing the kids, don't hold back the punches, gramps. ::Seymour Skinner:: Come on Edna you know these kids have no future!

      My generation fought against the Vietnam war and won, fought against pollution and got the Clean Air and water acts passed... my generation's protests were all effective. How's your "occupy" movement coming?

      First, the withdrawal of the US has just as much to do with the incompetence of management (Nixon and co, the "Greatest Generation"), and the resilience of the Viet Cong, as your domestic protest. Likewise, the occupy movement isn't the single thing that changes everything. And it'll certainly not change things overnight. Wiki pegs anti-war protest to have started as early as 1964, and the US didn't withdrawal until 73.

      Second, it's not entirely correct to categorize occupy as a simply a movement of the young. About 64% are young, but there are older Xers and Boomers too. Many also had jobs. Not the sort I'd consider to be "cocaine-addled"

      My generation brought you PCs and cell phones and file sharing. Meanwhile, yours killed the unions.

      Except the Taft Hartley Act which curbed union power started back in 47. Unions peaked around the 70s, before many kids were even born.

      Also worth noting is that many union unfriendly private companies are owned/run by Boomers. The board and shareholders they answer to are also full of Boomers and their pensions, not the young.

      As to what the young generation brought... I don't know if you consider Larry Page or Linus Torvalds to be "kids", but they're not old enough to be boomers. You may hate Facebook, FourSquare, Spotify, or Tumblrr, but they're all started by the younger generation.

      Oh sure, they are all operating on top of that PC your generation made, but your PCs, sir, is using the transistors and other technologies developed by your forefathers. What was that about shoulders and giants? I'm sorry, I guess literacy is one thing the young lack... ill giv u dat ;)

      I would also like to end with this: the young also brought us Mr Edward Snowden.

    178. Re: And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most Americans think easy access to guns is a good idea.... screw the 2nd ammendment our founding fathers were stupid ..In that regard

    179. Re:And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It begs the question: why did you come here?

      Let me answer. Because the free market attracted you. It is better for becoming prosperous and it is better for health care.

      You get the one with the other. The alternative is the mediocre European model or the dysfunctional emerging market (a.k.a 3rd world) model.

    180. Re:And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > I was used to turning up to any old doctor/clinic I could find, getting treated, swiping my healthcare card on the way out and ... leaving

      See Timmy, this is how the communists live. Fear them, as they don't even understand how wrong this is.

      Note for all those who missed the swooshing sound - I don't understand either.

    181. Re:And in other news... by Bratch · · Score: 1

      Maybe they should be asked what the difference is between cosmology and cosmotology, just to see if they think they are the same thing too.

      --
      Beware of the Redittor who loans you a Sharpie.
    182. Re:And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's merely bringing up the point that astrology and astronomy were once the same science. Back when they were, the things GP meant were achieved.

    183. Re: And in other news... by Macgrrl · · Score: 1

      Obviously they are white mice

      --
      Sara
      Designer, Gamer, Macgrrl in an XP World
    184. Re:And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Americans are not just poorly educated - they are purposely mis-educated by the state, church and corporate cabals.

      With propaganda from the cradle to the grave it's a wonder that anyone can rise above it at all.

      Of course, the same is true for people in other countries to various degrees.

      People in the US and EU point at North Korea as 1984 without realizing they're living in a Brave New World.

    185. Re: And in other news... by madprof · · Score: 1

      Taxes. The best bit about this is the tax the public pay for that health care ends up less than the money the public pay for the insurance.

    186. Re: And in other news... by madprof · · Score: 1

      You think young Americans have early exposure to chaos theory and non-linear systems which makes them more likely to believe in astrology?

    187. Re:And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This blurb does not belong here.
      There are no supporting references, it is filled instead with emotional vitriol and personal regret. This is not the place for personal opinions like this. It diminishes the value of the good stuff.

      An objective view of the American education would likely grade the system as fair to good, C-.

      The American school system has not responded to upgrade the teaching methods for a variety of reasons,
      bureaucracy = excess money spent on administration
      entrenched programs and policies- we've always done it this way
      unions,= job protection uber allis
      poverty = welfare system that promoted single mothers who were uneducated and uninterested in educating their children, turning schools into mere babysitters
      drugs,= parents who were distracted from parenting by drugs
      antiquated methods = speed reading not taught, memorization skills not taught, speed math not taught, self management not taught,
      general approach of teaching to the lowest common denominator.= teaching so as not to leave the lowest achiever behind, at the expense of the others
      testing focus = the goals have shifted from education to scoring well on standardized tests
      As mentioned, parents play a huge role in education, especially in support and enforcement. It is as if schools need to teach parents how to be parents while they are teaching the kids.
      Still many kids do well due to either their own skill sets and self management and/or parental support and encouragement.

      JAF

    188. Re:And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have what you describe in Canada, but I have to wait a long time for any serious treatment for serious illness. The medicare system workers are paid with TAX DOLLARS. They are government workers, they are unionized, they don't care ... did I mention that after awhile any government worker realizes that you are not a customer that needs to be pleased or at least given quick and good service ... they just don't have to care because you they cannot be fired and you have to sue the government if you don't like it.

      The best solution to all this is to try to stop eating the total junk that most people eat and drink, stop smoking of you do, don't do limb risking sport, balance your weight .... then .... live long and prosper.

    189. Re:And in other news... by MutualFun · · Score: 1

      I've been to Paris in the 1980's and you didn't want to go there then, its worse now.

      Not true, not to change the subject. I lived in Paris, or just outside it, for a year and a half in 1990-91. And have visited 5-6 times over the past decade. Loved it. Not so much the Parisians. Many Americans think the French don't like Americans. BS. It is the Parisians and they don't like anyone, sort of like say New Yorkers. The people outside the city were fantastic. Friendly, helpful and they thought Americans were great. Never had any trouble in the countryside. But then again, they have a saying. "There are two kinds of people in France: Parisians and peasants." The Parisians displayed an equal opportunity rudeness quotient that was surprisingly balanced. They were rude to any and all, especially Frenchmen visiting Paris from "the countryside", not just Americans.

      So if you visit France, be sure to see the Eiffel Tower, take a cruise on the Seine, eat at a cafe, visit a museum and then go somewhere else in the country. Head down to the Loire valley to see some castles or the Normandy coast, go see some wineries in Bordeaux. The people will be friendly and you will have a much better time than hanging out in the capital.

    190. Re:And in other news... by mcgrew · · Score: 2

      Unions didn't kill themselves by asking for too much money, corporations killed the unions by buying "right to work" legislation in many states, then moving there. And there's no way any American can compete with someone who can get by on two dollars a day, so the "American" companies shipped jobs where pay was nothing and regulations were nonexistent (leading to poisoned baby formula, China's horrendous pollution, etc). Union labor? Minimum wage can't compete with China when it comes to cheap labor.

    191. Re:And in other news... by q4Fry · · Score: 1

      SatireWire.com: HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS DEMAND WARS IN EASIER-TO-FIND COUNTRIES

      Yes, it's parody. Yes, it's the internet of 2000. Yes, it's worth reading.

    192. Re: And in other news... by Will.Woodhull · · Score: 1

      You think young Americans have early exposure to chaos theory and non-linear systems...

      YES, I am sure of that. Some of the concepts of chaos theory and fractals, especially those concepts that can be vividly presented in graphics, are as well understood by today's grade schoolers as atomic theory and rocket engineering were understood by grade schoolers in the 1960s.

      Which is not to say that today's average youngster (a kid less than 40 years old) have any real grasp of these subjects. It is just that some of these concepts have influenced their world views as those views were being formed (and not as bolt-on additions, which is all that us older guys have to work with). E.g., for those under 30, that some things are fractal (self-similar at every level of scaling) has as much impact on their world view as Newton's third law. So the ancient astrology expression "as above, so below" carries more truthiness for them than it does for us older ones who grew up in a cause and effect (and nothing else) universe.

      which makes them more likely to believe in astrology?

      NO! I would not go that far. HOWEVER, youngsters are much less likely to dismiss astrology out of hand, since they are aware that there are other things affecting their world than just cause and effect chains. I think they are much more likely to accept that there are other forms of science (of self-consistent bodies of knowledge) than the cause and effect sciences that are all that classical western thought allows.

      --
      Will
    193. Re:And in other news... by Reziac · · Score: 1

      But the major union damage to their own industries happened long before China entered the picture. The major losses of heavy industry were 30 and 40 and 50 years ago. China has only been a real player here for about 20 years.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    194. Re:And in other news... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Thing is, constellations have zero meaning from a scientific point of view. They're just a convenient way of finding things, another way of saying "that bunch, over there" to someone who can't see where you're pointing.

      Just because a modern science grew out of an old pseudo-science doesn't mean the old pseudo-science isn't bullshit. See also: alchemy, chemistry.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    195. Re: And in other news... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      That should be "Fuck you, Honky".

      Actually, "Fuck you, Mr Honky".

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    196. Re:And in other news... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Just outside Paris there aren't any frogs. The banlieue are totally full of camel-jockeys.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    197. Re:And in other news... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      I know it's difficult for people who watch Fox to grasp, but there are different aspects to countries, and many are good on some and bad on others.

      Take Italy: Good food, good climate, but shit drivers and mostly thieves. Or France: Good food, good wine, but shit drivers and mostly smelly. Or Germany, where the food is so bad you wish they weren't such good drivers so someone would run you over, if it wasn't for the fact that their beer is rather good.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    198. Re: And in other news... by madprof · · Score: 1

      You think young Americans have early exposure to chaos theory and non-linear systems...

      YES, I am sure of that. Some of the concepts of chaos theory and fractals, especially those concepts that can be vividly presented in graphics, are as well understood by today's grade schoolers as atomic theory and rocket engineering were understood by grade schoolers in the 1960s.

      Can you name any grade school syllabuses which have chaos theory on them? Fractals?

      Which is not to say that today's average youngster (a kid less than 40 years old) have any real grasp of these subjects. It is just that some of these concepts have influenced their world views as those views were being formed (and not as bolt-on additions, which is all that us older guys have to work with). E.g., for those under 30, that some things are fractal (self-similar at every level of scaling) has as much impact on their world view as Newton's third law. So the ancient astrology expression "as above, so below" carries more truthiness for them than it does for us older ones who grew up in a cause and effect (and nothing else) universe.

      That "ancient astrology expression" is hardly well-known and obviously has zero to do with fractals. Or sanity. You are joining very far-away dots to draw this picture and it seems rather contrived. One might almost say it's totally made up.
      Also please explain the phrase "cause and effect (and nothing else) universe". Quantum theory allows for a non-deterministic universe but somehow I don't think you're thinking of this.

      which makes them more likely to believe in astrology?

      NO! I would not go that far. HOWEVER, youngsters are much less likely to dismiss astrology out of hand, since they are aware that there are other things affecting their world than just cause and effect chains. I think they are much more likely to accept that there are other forms of science (of self-consistent bodies of knowledge) than the cause and effect sciences that are all that classical western thought allows.

      Astrology is not self-consistent. It's self-contradictory, provably imprecise and has no evidence to back it up. The "science"-iness of it comes from marketing by astrologers, who are either frauds or braindead morons.

      So to correct you, the reason youngsters are less likely to dismiss astrology out of hand is because they're been conned by the name (it ends with "-ology") and by an industry based on people's gullibility.

    199. Re:And in other news... by nobodie · · Score: 1

      It is messedup, I agree.
      For most of my life I had my own companies and my own policies that I used for all my employees and my family. It was easy, I chose a medium good policy that fit what I needed and ran with it. It was a cost of doing business.
      Then I retired, went back to school and got a BA, and left to teach in Asia. I had a credit card with a $5000 limit that was our insurance policy. All our insurance. Never needed it or used it, even paid for the birth of my youngest out of pocket.
      Then, two years ago, we came back to the US. Jesus what an effin' mess! It took me a year to get everything the way I wanted it, coverage for the people who needed it, the right coverage for our needs and within my income and, and , and.
      Interestingly, the first thing I saw was that the best deal by far was using an HSA (Health savings Account) as the primary component of my family's policy. I pay in a small paycheck deduction (pretax) and the university pays in twice that (also untaxed) which goes into a personal savings account that accrues over time and can be used to pay off the deductible or whatever is needed. For this I get a 67% reduction in the cost of the policy and a higher deductible. After one year now I have almost the entire deductible in savings.

      I tell colleagues about this program and they are not interested. They don't even bother to read their paycheck to see how much is coming out for the various deductions or consider how to improve that cost to them. But they will keep a crap car for another year because they can't yet afford to buy a new one. They will move into a cheaper apartment because not only can't they afford to buy a house, they can't pay their rent in their apartment.

      Maybe its because I was in business before, but I don't see any reason not to understand my money.

      --
      Subversion of spatial scale luxury decoration ideas.
    200. Re:And in other news... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      You need a rebranding. Galactophysics? Stellistry? Himmelometry?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    201. Re:And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is in the year 3000.

    202. Re: And in other news... by Cimexus · · Score: 1

      Er, taxes?

      The point of single-payer is that a LARGE customer (like a government) can negotiate better prices from medical providers, because of their sheer size. There's also savings due to the gains in efficiency (paperwork, IT systems etc.) when there's only single entity responsible for payment.

    203. Re: And in other news... by Cimexus · · Score: 1

      Variously, I've lived in Australia, NZ, Singapore and Japan. Australia is a hybrid public-private system that works much as I described in the OP, though Singapore and Japan also have similarities.

      My post was highlighting that not all 'universal' systems are necessarily government-run (ala the UK NHS or Canada's system). There is a spectrum between completely private and completely public.

    204. Re:And in other news... by Cimexus · · Score: 1

      In most single payer systems, yes, there are limits on what the payer (i.e. the government or other universal insurer) will pay, for precisely the reasons you state. However, the prices that are considered 'normal' for particular procedures and treatments are agreed upon and updated regularly by a board of generally independent medical professionals. These are people concerned mostly with the efficacy of the treatments and what the rules are for deciding whether they are medically necessary, rather than the financial aspects of the system per se. The government then uses these guidelines to make budgetary forecasts. So unless doctors are charging way-beyond-typical prices for things, it's fine. (And if they do, they'll be investigated and may be forced to eat the cost themselves, it can't legally be passed on to the patients).

      However it's crucial to point out that if a procedure is medically necessary, it will be covered, regardless of how expensive it is. The government does not have unlimited funds, but the law of large numbers means that the costs over a whole population are quite predictable. Costs will increase over time as the population ages of course, which may require some tax increases or higher co-payments in future, sure, but this is still much more efficient than a non-single-payer system. The point of single payer is that a large customer (like a government) has bargaining power with providers and drug companies. They can negotiate cheaper prices for things than you or I could.

      Everyone needs medical care at some point in their life. So it's not like insurance for things that may or may not occur (like car insurance or home insurance). Amortizing the costs across a huge population that uses their collective power as consumers to negotiate better prices with medical providers makes sense.

      Yes technically this means you may be paying a few dollars more in tax to cover the tree-hitting motorcyclist or the drug addict or the VD dude. But that's a small price to pay for knowing that you will not have to worry at all about money if you yourself run into a tree the following day, or when you're old and are afflicted with cancer etc. Besides, the costs saved purely by the increased EFFICIENCY of having a single payer (i.e. much simpler, less paperwork, less billing, simpler IT systems etc.) I'd say more than makes up for that extra few bucks in tax.

    205. Re:And in other news... by Cimexus · · Score: 1

      Also - my time is worth money. Moving to the US and having to go through 100+ page documents comparing available health plans, filling all the damn paperwork out etc. took hours and hours of my time. I'll gladly paid a bit more tax (even if it's going to treat people other than myself) if it means I don't have to worry about all that. In universal health care countries, you never have to THINK about this kind of thing at all. You are covered. Automatically. From the moment you are born to the moment you die. Much less stressful and confusing ... that's gotta be worth something.

    206. Re:And in other news... by Cimexus · · Score: 1

      Wrong. Moved to the US purely for family reasons. My wife's American and her parents are getting old ... we hadn't seen much of them for a while. So fair is fair - we lived near my parents for many years, now it's time to return the favor.

      I was able to transfer with my current employer to a US - kept the same job, level, title and everything. My salary went down slightly due to cost of living adjustment (US cost of living is cheaper than where I came from), and I lost 4 days/year of vacation, but that's about it. The health insurance stuff was the only really confusing/difficult thing to adjust to.

      The US is no more 'free market' than where I came from! And it's certainly less prosperous, after the 2008 financial crisis here. I moved from Australia, but have lived in Singapore, Japan and NZ in the past too. Never stepped foot in Europe. So yeah, it's not like I moved here from a third world (or even second world) location. In fact the nation I came from consistently ranks higher than the US in economic freedom, quality of life and human development metrics.

      So please don't make assumptions. Neither of us wanted to move here - almost every aspect of life was better in Australia (even my American wife admits this). But family ties are important and outweigh economics. There are some positive aspects to living here too - real winters (yay snow!) and the cost of living is a lot cheaper (yay cheap clothes/shoes/cars/etc).

    207. Re:And in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude, Canada has that system in place (Saskatchewan, for example, follows your words closely in operation).

      Yankees still don't fucking get it, after it being on their doorstep for 60+ years.

      You can lead a horse to water, but whether it drinks or wastes to death of thirst is still its own decision.

    208. Re:And in other news... by mikael · · Score: 1

      I think this "No Losers" bologna came from those schools which just had a single annual school sports day. Everyone attended (ninety plus students in each year), and each year in each race, the same half dozen students kept winning. So six students go home with a handful of medals, and everyone else go back home empty handed. And that was the one and only competition there was. No spelling bees, science fairs, art exhibitions, book reading competitions.

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
  2. More likely by OblongPlatypus · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The decrease in astrology's visibility (people no longer read magazines, and "horoscope blogs" don't seem to have become a thing) may just have led to most young people not having a clue and assuming astrology = astronomy.

    --
    -- If no truths are spoken then no lies can hide --
    1. Re:More likely by Big+Hairy+Ian · · Score: 0

      Next they'll start believing nutritionists are scientists!

      --

      Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.

    2. Re: More likely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Facebook apps. This shit shows up everywhere on social media because 'fortune' is an easy port.

    3. Re:More likely by LoRdTAW · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I'll second that. They are most likely mixing up the two words.

    4. Re: More likely by Dayze!Confused · · Score: 5, Interesting

      This is why Neil deGrasse Tyson prefers the term astro physics.

      --
      "All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent." [Thomas Jefferson]
    5. Re:More likely by Mashiki · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Considering that people believe that BMI is an actual method to measure body fat? I wouldn't doubt it.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    6. Re:More likely by fiziko · · Score: 2

      Entirely possible. I used to mark assignments for a first-year University astronomy class, and about 6-7% of the students were upset that astrology wasn't included.

      --
      - W. Blaine Dowler
      http://www.bureau42.com
    7. Re:More likely by thaylin · · Score: 1

      Well my Cardiologist loves to go on about BMI...

      --
      When you cant win, ad hominem.
    8. Re:More likely by Trevin · · Score: 1

      I was going to say young people confuse the two as well, not because they don’t know about astrology but because spelling skills are dwindling.

    9. Re:More likely by sandytaru · · Score: 4, Funny

      Just make sure not to adopt one born in the Year of the Goat. I hear they tend to be flakey. Try for a Horse or a Dragon.

      --
      Occasionally living proof of the Ballmer peak.
    10. Re:More likely by microbox · · Score: 2

      The anti-science movement seems to be very active as well: vaccines, intelligent design, life-at-conception, aliens, GMOs, homeopathy et al., agw denial...

      Everyone seems to pick and choose when they are pro-science depending on how pleasant the topic is to the ear.

      --

      Like all pain, suffering is a signal that something isn't right
    11. Re:More likely by 1s44c · · Score: 1

      That's what I was thinking. If you ask a random person 'is astrology a science?' they will hear 'is astronomy a science?'

      I don't hear people talking about the future predicting nonsense in any context.

    12. Re:More likely by MiniMike · · Score: 4, Insightful

      most young people not having a clue and assuming astrology = astronomy.

      I find this only slightly less depressing.

    13. Re:More likely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's what gets me every time. I keep confusing the two names; but can you blame me? Biology, zoology, paleontology, astrology?

    14. Re:More likely by benjfowler · · Score: 2

      Until a few years ago, I didn't actually know the difference between dieticians and nutritionists. I also thought that chiro-quackery was legit too.

      Probably because of the atrocious state of Australian free-to-air TV, which is as dumb as dogshit, and always has been.

    15. Re:More likely by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Informative

      When I was growing up in the 1970s, it was common for people at parties to ask "What's your sign?" and "Age of Aquairus" was playing on the radio. Today, I almost never hear about astrology. I find it hard to believe that is anywhere near as popular as it used to be. Hold on, let me go get some real world empirical data ... okay, I just asked my 15 year old daughter how many of her friends believe in astrology. Her response: "What's astrology?"

       

    16. Re:More likely by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      Yeah, so did mine until I pointed out that hydrostatic measuring, or ADP are really the only good ways to measure it. It's such a poor method of measurement that if you asked someone to piss in a glass and used that to measure their body fat, it would probably be more accurate. If you go look up the history of BMI(including the peered research on it), you'll quickly find out exactly how flawed it is. It's right up there with astrology in terms of a "science."

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    17. Re: More likely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's not science, my aunt calls the 1-900 physics-hotline and all they pretend to tell her the future for $3.99 a minute!

    18. Re:More likely by Andrewkov · · Score: 1

      You must really be confused about Scientology..

    19. Re:More likely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's cardionomer, you moron! Or cardiophysicist if you will! Cardionomy is the real science, cardiology is an old, debunked pseudo-science.

    20. Re:More likely by bhagwad · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Unlikely. Most probably people are more and more depressed over the random nature the world and all the crap that can happen to them. Since astrology provides a nice safe structure to explain shit, it must be very comforting to believe in something...anything! Probably explains why people are still religious.

    21. Re: More likely by blueg3 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Do you have a reference for that explanation?

      I have a hard time believing that deGrasse Tyson doesn't recognize astronomy and astrophysics as distinct disciplines. I certainly would believe that he prefers astrophysics to be called astrophysics, but there's plenty of astronomy outside of that. (Notably, amateur astronomy is not at all astrophysics.)

    22. Re:More likely by blueg3 · · Score: 1

      The anti-science movement seems to be very active as well: vaccines, intelligent design, life-at-conception, aliens, GMOs, homeopathy et al., agw denial...

      Hopefully you mean antivax as anti-science, rather than vaccines.

      Is there some point, scientifically speaking, other than conception, when life "begins"? (Cells are alive in an unbroken chain from pre-conception to post-birth, so there's no transition from "not alive" to "alive". As far as I know, it becomes a distinct individual at conception.)

    23. Re:More likely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's the sort of thing fat people complain about. Most people use it as a general reference, not exact science.

    24. Re:More likely by Mashdar · · Score: 1

      Agreed. I would question whether 58% of Americans from ages 18 to 24 could define astrology, let alone comment on it.

    25. Re:More likely by sed+quid+in+infernos · · Score: 2

      I tried to find the actual question wording, but didn't have time to do a thorough search. If the question was "Do you think astrology is scientific, sort of scientific, or not scientific?", then this could, as you say, simply be a problem of ignorance about the difference between astrology and astronomy. But if the question included a definition of astrology such as "that the position of the stars and planets have an effect on personality," then the issues raised in the summary come into play.

    26. Re:More likely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The anti-science movement seems to be very active as well: vaccines, intelligent design, life-at-conception, aliens, GMOs, homeopathy et al., agw denial...

      All of those things are proven to be pseudo-science except agw denial. You can't lump agw denial in with those other things just because agw is the popular view. There are valid scientific challenges to agw (but not gw).

    27. Re:More likely by Sockatume · · Score: 1

      It's a tradeoff, given the expense and hassle involved in hydro or ADP. (Both techniques involve calculating a person's density directly by how much of a fluid they displace.) Calipers and/or one of those conductivity doofers seem to be a much better compromise than BMI though, at least as far as our high school efforts to evaluate them went.

      --
      No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
    28. Re:More likely by Chelloveck · · Score: 1

      It's not perfect, but it's a good first approximation. It has the benefit of being a quick test that anyone with a measuring tape and scale can perform. There are certainly exceptions, and you may argue that the accepted ranges are wrong, but overall the ratio of weight:height^2 is a reasonably accurate indicator of health for the vast majority of people.

      (This coming from a man who's been on the wrong side of the "obese" line for at least a decade, so I'm not just saying that because I'm pleased that it validates my lifestyle.)

      --
      Chelloveck
      I give up on debugging. From now on, SIGSEGV is a feature.
    29. Re:More likely by rjstanford · · Score: 5, Funny

      Totally true. I don't believe a thing about astrology, but then again I'm a pisces. We're naturally skeptical.

      --
      You're special forces then? That's great! I just love your olympics!
    30. Re:More likely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought they made computers?

    31. Re:More likely by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      That's BMW.

      His BMW to be precise.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    32. Re:More likely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      BMI was never intended to measure -- or even proxy for -- body mass composition.

      There's a strong positive correlation between high BMI and a variety of cardiopulmonary diseases that are *fully independent* of body mass composition.

      It also happens that there are a number of cardiopulmonary diseases and metabolic syndromes that are body mass composition dependent that are inevitably swept up in BMI, mostly because in numerous OECD populations high BMI and high body fat are so strongly positively correlated that bodybuilders et al. can safely be ignored because they present so strongly and obviously in clinical settings.

      That is, NO DOCTOR NO MATTER HOW DIM could possibly mistake the difference between an obese person and a bodybuilder given each of them share a BMI of 35. Both share precisely the same statistical risks associated with extra body mass, but each has additional extra risks beyond those that are composition- (and, more practically, activity-) dependent.

      An "athlete" with a BMI in the high 20s or 30s can easily fall into either camp, but a cursory inspection involving a pinch test (calipers are overkill) or electrical impedance scales resolves that without any difficulty. Of course, someone who falls into the overweight camp in spite of hobbies like jogging or weightlifting are often among the least likely patients to want to hear that they are carrying enough fat to pose current (and future) health risks to themselves.

      However, as a trivial example, consider a person with a BMI of 30 who starts to take up aggressive jogging or cross-country running. That person risks knee and foot damage fully independent of body fat. BMI captures that risk very well.

      That extensions to BMI may be more clinically relevant is an unshocking suggestion, but that is far far from what you are asserting. BMI is not fundamentally flawed. The flaw is that woolly thinking conflates BMI and body mass composition in people who aspire to be in the TINY SUBPOPULATIONS in which the positive correlation between high BMI and high body fat is sufficiently broken so as to be clinically relevant. (The clinical relevance is typically not worrying less about cv disorders but rather overuse injuries and kidney and liver disorders due to high protein turnover, high "vitamin i" intake, and the like).

      Sorry that you believe that you have a body for which you believe that the positive correlation between high BMI and healthrisks is equivocal, but a lot less sorry that you decide to compare statistical and evidence-based medicine with astrology, even if that's just hyperbolic rhetoric.

    33. Re:More likely by mark-t · · Score: 1

      Being religious isn't necessarily comforting... in fact, I'd suggest that in many ways it is far more comforting to believe that death is really the end of the line, rather than face the prospect of living with the consequences of the choices that one makes for all of eternity. In what way is that particulalry comforting unless you really believe yourself to be absolutely perfect (and most religious people I know do not).

    34. Re:More likely by houghi · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If people ask what my sign is, I always tell them : Elephant. For those who ask further and/or realize there is no such a sign (not even with a Chinese one) I say "Why not? I have a trunk!"

      One time people said they were really serious about Astrology. The type of person who was constantly telling "Typical [insert sign]". So I challenged them to tell me my sign. They needed 12 guesses. Let that sink in. 12!

      Palm-reading is on the same level. I witnessed a palm-reading once in Turkey. I was baffled as to why people would believe the person reading the palm. I did not understand, not because of the image you have in your head. This was not some Turkish Gypsy old woman. This was one of our own group of 18-22 year olds Western Europeans with good education. Not only that. He upfront told everybody he did NOT believe in hand-reading. He told he NEVER read a palm. He knew nothing about it. He upfront told that he would make stuff up and be very generic. He even gave examples UPFRONT.
      He took the hand, looked at it, put on a serious face and started making things up about past, present and future. Various people believed him, including the person whose hand was read. They still believed what he told was true after he told them several times that he made it up.

      A last one: when you have the opportunity to read other people their horoscope, ask them their sign and read out a different one (yours). Next ask them how precise it is. Say you do not believe and say you will read another one (theirs) and say it is yours. Ask them if they think that is also correct. Now you can tell that it was not true.
      One flaw with this is that you could have a 1/12 chance that you have the same sign. Cheaters would pick some random sign, but what it means is that you found your true soul partner.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    35. Re:More likely by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I read the .pdf, and I have this to say about it:

      I simply don't trust surveys that don't publish the exact questions they used.

      The wording, and how the questions are presented, are extremely important to the results. Most surveys are woefully unreliable anyway. But when you throw in the fact that you don't even know the actual questions asked, you might as well throw it away.

      I don't give a damn if it was the National Science Foundation that conducted the survey, or the National Creationism Organization. List your questions when reporting your results, or don't bother me at all.

    36. Re:More likely by novium · · Score: 1

      Forget young people. The people in our communications department (ages between 30-60) managed to design and mail out a postcard advertising an event for kids that included an astronomy segment as one in which we were going to teach kids "astrology".

      Of course they mailed it out to all of the parents, community partners, schools, and donors before showing it to anyone in my department (which was responsible for the event).. The word was in really large type and bold as well.

    37. Re:More likely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I asked mine and she said, "Is that the one with telescopes?"

    38. Re:More likely by wiredlogic · · Score: 1

      Well my Cardiologist loves to go on about BMI...

      Doctors aren't always the brightest bulbs. They're heavily educated in biology and not so much in statistics. BMI is designed to be an expedient way to assess populations or people. Its inaccuracies in assessing corpulence are smoothed out when applied to a large enough sample of people. Applying BMI to a single person and making any decision based on that result is dumb.

      --
      I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
    39. Re:More likely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is not a trade off. It is using the wrong thing. BMI was developed for obtaining a statistical ensemble for a large population. As a way to approximate the average population obesity it is a great tool. It was not developed to determine an individual's level of obesity. It simply does not work and was not meant to be used for individuals. It is something that is ripe for abuse by actuaries.

    40. Re:More likely by Alien1024 · · Score: 1

      That was my first thought as well. But we should know exactly how the question was phrased. TFA mentions "astrology, the study of celestial bodies' purported influence on human behavior and worldly events", but the linked PDF merely states "surveys have asked Americans whether they view astrology as being scientific".

      The PDF provides other interesting figures, such as the percentage of people correctly answering the question "Does the Earth go around the Sun, or does the Sun go around the Earth?... which I found shockingly low for the surveyed regions - 74 in the US, even a bit lower in the EU... only higher for South Korea.

    41. Re: More likely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is why Neil deGrasse Tyson prefers the term astro physics.

      Or in his case...Afro Physics.

    42. Re:More likely by bhagwad · · Score: 2

      It's comforting because it means you're important. If there is a god who cares enough (either way) to send you to hell if you're bad and reward you if you're good, then you're not someone insignificant...you're a person worthy of god's attention. Otherwise god would just say "yeah, whatever...hell, heaven...I don't give a shit!" Feeds beautifully into our innate narcissism. If you go to hell, you're a badass gangsta worthy of the company of Lucifer himself.

      It bring out the inner masochist in us. We gain pleasure from being crapped on and punished. Because even that way we're not being ignored.

    43. Re:More likely by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 4, Funny

      Hold on, let me go get some real world empirical data ... okay, I just asked my 15 year old daughter how many of her friends believe in astrology. Her response: "What's astrology?"

      I see the problem with your data. The poll was for 18-25 year olds. Your daughter still has three more years of stupid to absorb from school before she can have an opinion.

    44. Re:More likely by microbox · · Score: 1

      If you look at it, there is no hard line for life beginning. (And indeed, life ending. Check out all the legal definitions of death around the world, and the bizarre ethical implications.) The bible says that god "breathed life" in Genesis 2:7, which suggests that life begins at breath. That is obviously unsatisfying, but we are talking about the bible here. Strictly speaking, a sperm and egg is alive too... but obviously not a human being. But these are just concepts... not the reality of the thing. (Think Kant: Das Ding an Sich.) After-all, there is no hard line between "alive" and "not-alive" when you look for it. Prions? Viruses? Debatable they are living organisms. There's not dividing line between animal and plant (or sentient/non-sentient) either. If you're intellectually honest and after simple answers, then you'll just be disappointed.

      If you are really interested in figuring out when life "begins", then you should study Embryology and bioethics, and accept that there is not going to be a simple answer, or even a consensus opinion. But you will develop your own informed opinion by studying nature and ethical arguments. The "answer" does indeed depend on how you conceive of the question. For example, twinning is no longer possible after two weeks. (Are twins one "life" or two?) 20 weeks for a plausible neurological system. (Does a human need to have a "proto-brain"). Close to birth if you're talking the viability of the baby. Conception if you want to ban hormonal contraceptives. (This last argument is actually incoherent, since hormonal contraceptives on average prevent a lot of fertilized embryos from being destroyed -- but we are talking about the land of motivated reasoning here.)

      If you work from conclusion back to arguments, then you have no place at my table, intellectually speaking, but I'll have a beer with you and talk about the weather.

      --

      Like all pain, suffering is a signal that something isn't right
    45. Re:More likely by ninjagin · · Score: 1

      Another point might be mutation.

      --
      .. pa-ra-bo-la, pa-ra-bo-la, 2 pi R, 2 pi R, where's your latus rectum, where's your latus rectum, 2 pi R
    46. Re:More likely by gordo3000 · · Score: 1

      that's why all modern, popular religions allow for some sort of get out of jail free card (usually by saying something equivalent to "I'm Sorry").

      That is what makes it comforting. If I just say sorry, everything is forgiven and even if I have murdered, raped, maimed, abused, etc it doesn't matter because the guy in the sky will forgive me.

      If you look carefully at older religions you can see historically that it wasn't the case in olden times for there to be any form of forgiveness. The best case study is Hinduism, where most of the old tales tell about even heroes going to hell to atone for sins such as telling a lie or some such (though in that religion hell was not permanent, just a stop over to pay off your bad deeds). Modern Hindus believe you can go take a bath in a river and all that is forgiven.

      Many religious people are also shown to handle death of friends and family members easier, possibly because they believe they will "live on" in heaven.

    47. Re:More likely by catmistake · · Score: 2

      may just have led to most young people not having a clue and assuming astrology = astronomy

      It is likely both studies were born at the same time. Maybe 10K years before the invention of agriculture and the domestication of maize in southern Mexico, 18K-20K years ago the first scientists looked up at the stars and drew what they saw on a cave wall in Lascaux, France... and at the same time the first astrologer connected the stars like dots, and drew animals, which tell a story to them, which are no doubt related to far older oral traditions about which we'll likely never know anything.

      I find it perplexing why, these days, some are so hostile towards studies such as astrology or religion. While science is slicing up brains looking for the mind (and never finding it), other disciplines can tell us more about ourselves without all the ick. Even if astrology is mumbo jumbo, it reveals just enough about humans to be interesting.

    48. Re:More likely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Win.

    49. Re:More likely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think of this as a response to the economy and loss of jobs. When people dont have something solid in their lives they are more likely to grasp onto anything that they can. The last time the survey was completed in 2004 was when most people had work and that is now being stripped away. Desperation.

    50. Re:More likely by Chelloveck · · Score: 1
      I also looked (but could not find) information on the population being surveyed. Is this an actual random sampling, or self-selected respondents to an ad in Astrology Today magazine?

      Janine Melnitz: Do you believe in UFOs, astral projections, mental telepathy, ESP, clairvoyance, spirit photography, telekinetic movement, full trance mediums, the Loch Ness monster and the theory of Atlantis?

      Winston Zeddemore: Ah, if there's a steady paycheck in it, I'll believe anything you say.

      --
      Chelloveck
      I give up on debugging. From now on, SIGSEGV is a feature.
    51. Re: More likely by Vegan+Cyclist · · Score: 1

      ^ mod up! Kinda funny tho: let's confuse them with these terms instead.

    52. Re:More likely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have heard women talking about what sign they are compatible with and what signs they try to avoid.

    53. Re:More likely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ha I am a pisces and I have been using a similar line forever: "I am a pisces and pisces don't believe in astrology"

    54. Re:More likely by operagost · · Score: 1

      The Christian god doesn't send you to hell because you're bad. If he did, everyone would go to hell.

      Once you understand this, you are on your way to understanding the nature of God.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    55. Re:More likely by operagost · · Score: 2

      Internet atheists go out of their way to show that God is evil and vengeful. Then, when the truth that he is forgiving arises, they criticize that as a "get out of jail free card".

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    56. Re:More likely by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      yeah then he shut up about it since you obviously know better... ...look for the really old ex weightlifters. seen many?

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    57. Re:More likely by Noxal · · Score: 1

      Yet you pray and swear to a god. Fascinating.

    58. Re:More likely by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Darian Toms.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    59. Re:More likely by bhagwad · · Score: 1

      The nature of god? I thought you were only talking about the Christian god...

      Zeus has very different rules I can tell you!

    60. Re:More likely by blueg3 · · Score: 1

      If you look at it, there is no hard line for life beginning.

      Yes, I should have specified, "if you insist on choosing the a particular point". I did point out that at no point are the cells "not alive". So it's rather inaccurate to talk about the "beginning of life" rather than the "beginning of an individual" (as opposed to its parents).

      The bible says that god "breathed life" in Genesis 2:7, which suggests that life begins at breath. That is obviously unsatisfying, but we are talking about the bible here.

      I'll have to take your word for that. I don't really know any Bible, just biology, which is all I'm interested in here.

      After-all, there is no hard line between "alive" and "not-alive" when you look for it. Prions? Viruses? Debatable they are living organisms. There's not dividing line between animal and plant (or sentient/non-sentient) either.

      Likewise, asexually-reproducing species frequently form colonies where defining "an individual" is challenging.

      If you are really interested in figuring out when life "begins", then you should study Embryology and bioethics ... The "answer" does indeed depend on how you conceive of the question. For example, twinning is no longer possible after two weeks. (Are twins one "life" or two?)

      Yes, I'm pretty familiar with the biology. There are actually a number of interesting transitions in the first week or two, as cells aren't really committed yet to forming a single viable embryo (as opposed to, say, zero or two individuals). After that, though, the embryo is certainly alive (it never wasn't) and a distinct individual. It takes a much longer time to accrue any real chance at long-term survival, yes, but that seems like a very different question. I also don't really think that bioethics has much to do with the scientific, factual matter (despite its being interesting).

      Conception if you want to ban hormonal contraceptives. (This last argument is actually incoherent, since hormonal contraceptives on average prevent a lot of fertilized embryos from being destroyed -- but we are talking about the land of motivated reasoning here.)

      See, I was trying to limit this to the context of science. It seems that the real problem is that people want to use an answer to "when does life begin" as a motivation for moral and ethical opinions and, worse, for laws. However, it turns out to not necessarily be a very useful question (by itself) for this application. I would rather see, instead of people dither about what the "real" answer is to fix their own ethical opinions, accept that they can't hang their whole justification for their opinion on one piece of factual information.

      If you work from conclusion back to arguments...

      You seem to be under the impression that just because I think life does (more or less) begin at conception that I have some particular collection of moral opinions that I may want to impose on others. That's not the case.

    61. Re:More likely by ultranova · · Score: 1

      Well my Cardiologist loves to go on about BMI...

      Well, does it matter to the heart whether it's pumping blood through fat or muscle? If anything, muscle has a higher metabolic rate and thus puts more stress on the cardiovascular system.

      AFAIK one of the main problem of steroids is that they grow muscles but not heart, so you end up with a serious risk of heart attack the same way as a fatso.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    62. Re:More likely by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      I think the biggest issue with BMI as a measure is that they don't break down the healthy range for gender.

      Most of the other complaints I've seen are about it not working on people that are obviously healthy, which I don't think it was really designed for, as you said, it's a quick measure for the general population.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    63. Re:More likely by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      What does "sort of" mean?

      They study it, they hone it, they make observations, testable predictions, revise theories.

      Perhaps the meaning of the words sort of have come to be used more ironically (verbal irony) lately, like, yeah, that car's sort of safe I guess.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    64. Re:More likely by mark-t · · Score: 1

      Although the "guy in the sky" is frequently painted as being compassionate and forgiving, being forgiven by someone who allegedly knows exactly what's in everyone's heart would require considerably more than simply saying sorry, it would require actually *being* sorry. And not just circumstantially, either; since it's easy to express what feels like being sincerely sorry for something when you are facing imminent punishment for it. What sorriness in such circumstances often amounts to in actuality is usually just resentment for being caught, and not actually a genuine change of heart. There is a difference, you see, between just "being sorry", and "repentance". The latter is not just being sorry, it's being sorry enough to want to quit. For good.

    65. Re: More likely by gordo3000 · · Score: 1

      Its funny when people think because you can think critically about the evolution of religious thought and can argue comparative religious principals you are an atheist. Its sad being learned about the world is no longer acceptable in your belief system. That your belief system and the myths you were taught show a forgiving god is fine, but just so you know that wasn't there in the beginning.

      I used Hinduism as its the myth system I was raised in and whether there is a skyfairy or not, I feel there are lots of great things to learn from its older stories. But I'm not blind to the evolution of the religion through the ages.

    66. Re:More likely by cyberchondriac · · Score: 1

      But.. but.. you don't get to bust on " 'Murica" that way. What fun is that? Everyone knows that's the trendy thing to do.

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
    67. Re:More likely by DarwinSurvivor · · Score: 1

      I know a lot of people that get grumpy when the earth and sun are positioned such that the majority of the earth is between them and the sun.

    68. Re:More likely by microbox · · Score: 1

      I also don't really think that bioethics has much to do with the scientific, factual matter (despite its being interesting).

      On the contrary, bioethics has a lot to do with it, because a human is asking the question... thus the conclusions are always going to be informed by human nature (in the veridical sense), and also the culturally rooted frames that we use. There really is no way to separate them out. That doesn't mean things cannot be right or wrong and everything in-between. But it does mean that any absolute truth would need to be grounded in an absolute notion of who we are and what we're part of -- some sort of moral realism, or alternatively, mathematical realism if that is what you go for. And realising the incomplete nature of one's own understanding, I believe the best we can do is state our interpretations of natural phenomena explicitly in the context of the frames we use, which is just being intellectually honest, and "awake".

      You seem to be under the impression that just because I think life does (more or less) begin at conception that I have some particular collection of moral opinions that I may want to impose on others. That's not the case.

      Great =0.

      I'm pro-life in that I wand less abortion. Empirical evidence clearly shows that there are three policies that work:

      (1) Scientifically grounded sex education reduces unplanned pregnancy.
      (2) Access to contraception reduces unplanned pregnancy. (As such, the ACA will do more to reduce abortion in the USA than any single policy to date.)
      (3) Social safety net for single mothers also removes a key motive for abortion, and provably reduces abortion.

      I find (3) despicable, because I believe in personal responsibility -- however -- if you place life _above_ paying (a small amount) for other people's mistakes, then you will reveal yourself as being truly pro-life. As such, I believe that there should be a frugal safety net for women in trouble.

      Finally, note that banning abortion doesn't really affect the abortion rate that much (if at all), and countries with safe access to abortion also have the lower abortion rates, both universally, and when controlling for education and socio-economic factors.

      So I may be pro-life, but I disagree with pretty much everything the main-stream pro-life movement carries on about. Furthermore, though I'd only support restricting a women's access to abortion if, and only if, (1), (2), and (3) were implemented, (3) was considered absolutely shameful, and all of this was drilled into teenagers so that they know the consequences of their actions.

      --

      Like all pain, suffering is a signal that something isn't right
    69. Re:More likely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The two most common questions I get about my daughter (born 9 days ago) is: "When was she born?" Or "So is she an Aquarius?" I always reply with: "Not sure, I don't really pay attention to that." Maybe I am living in the 70's.

    70. Re:More likely by Drethon · · Score: 1

      Depends, do they think astrology is astronomy or astronomy is astrology. One is not that bad, the other is not that good...

    71. Re:More likely by houseparty2 · · Score: 1

      Most likely these people did not know what astrology is or just got it mixed up with astronomy. If someone is quickly doing a survey they probably saw "astro" assuming astronomy and went on their way. However, if people actually don't know the different between the two, that is incredible sad. Especially since astronomy is a important field that needs new people entering it.

    72. Re:More likely by narcc · · Score: 1

      If people ask what my sign is, I always tell them : Elephant.

      So I challenged them to tell me my sign. They needed 12 guesses. Let that sink in. 12!

      I don't know, that sounds pretty good to me. I'm astonished that it only took 12 guesses to get to "elephant".

    73. Re:More likely by airdweller · · Score: 1

      "there is no hard line for life beginning. (And indeed, life ending..."
      Yes, there is: when the brain dies, you become dead. That's it. No brain activity - no life.
      http://www.wired.com/wiredscie...

    74. Re:More likely by Solandri · · Score: 1

      When I was growing up in the 1970s, it was common for people at parties to ask "What's your sign?" and "Age of Aquairus" was playing on the radio.

      Actually, the age of Aquarius is one of the few things astrologers got sort of right. The Earth's tilt precesses over time (just like a gyroscope), resulting in the solstices and equinoxes shifting relative to the position of the stars. Currently, the moment the Spring Equinox occurs, the constellation Pisces is directly overhead opposite the sun (i.e. looking at the center of the ecliptic at midnight). Over time, this will shift until Aquarius is overhead. An entire precession cycle takes just shy of 26,000 years, sending the Spring equinox through all twelve zodiac constellations during that span.

      What they got wrong was: (1) The constellations are not all the same size, so you can't divide a full precession into 12 equal ages based on the constellations. (2) The song in particular was based on a common misinterpretation of each age being 2000 years. Hence the misnomer that the the year 2000 was the dawning of the Age of Aquarius. Simple math should tell you that this doesn't work, as it results in only 24,000 years for a precession cycle. Dividing the precession into 12 equal ages actually results in each age being about 2150 years. (3) There are higher order effects also at play, so even a calculation based solely on precession is not exact.

      But it is in fact a real astronomical phenomenon behind the term "Age of Aquarius."

    75. Re:More likely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...So I challenged them to tell me my sign. They needed 12 guesses. Let that sink in. 12!

      Actually, that's pretty good. I don't think I would have guessed Elephant in the first 12 guesses.

    76. Re:More likely by microbox · · Score: 1

      You do know that not every country in the world is a signatory to the UDDA. (You know what I'm talking about, right?). There are whole *countries* in the world besides the USA! Furthermore, the UDDA does not equate brain-death with death-death. Do you know what the Dunning-Kruger effect is?

      --

      Like all pain, suffering is a signal that something isn't right
    77. Re:More likely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Isn't that the point of it?

    78. Re:More likely by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Celestial bodies do have influence on human behavior and worldly events. When the Sun is in Leo and the fourth house (IIRC), I tend to feel hot when I go outside. This would be roughly noon or a bit later in late July or early August, and has nothing to do with where any celestial object was in relation to Earth when I was born.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    79. Re:More likely by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      For a population, average BMI is a reasonable measure. For individuals, BMI isn't too bad as long as you take the exceptions into account. My BMI is higher than it should be, and the reason for that is that I have too much fat and should lose some. If I were to exercise a lot, I could get to be the same mass with relatively little fat, and therefore have the same BMI with completely different implications.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    80. Re:More likely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      HAHAHAHAHAHA. Best fucking post in weeks!

    81. Re:More likely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Case in point:
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0ZZJXw4MTA

    82. Re:More likely by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      That's the sort of thing fat people complain about. Most people use it as a general reference, not exact science.

      Better let all those insurance companies in the US know then. Because many if not most, require BMI as the "determining factor in coverage."

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    83. Re:More likely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Life at conception is 'anti-science?' Explain scientifically how a single-celled amoeba on a rock incapable of further complexity is 'life' but an embryo which develops into a sentient creature inside a place whose only purpose is to gestate life isn't. Please. It would revolutionize biology.

      AGW denial is 'anti-science?' Pray tell, which side of that particular debate was caught manipulating data and conspiring to hide it because it contradicted their chosen preference? See: Climategate. Also, the side which keeps making false predictions (I remember being told as a child that the ice caps would be gone by 2000; in college, we were told there would be no snow by 2010; and how about all that acid rain that was supposed to melt our cities in the 1980s?). And, bizarrely, these same people once predicted an imminent ice age and mass famine by starvation because Earth could not sustain a population more than 5 billion. Modern Neo-Ludditism masquerading as 'environmentalism' is not science, nor 'pro-science.' It is the latest incarnation of a long, long history of doomsday cults, only a step removed from Bob Jones's Koolaid-drinkers.

      - Anonymous Coward

    84. Re:More likely by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1
      An atheist rejects the claim that any god exists, so he cannot "show that God is evil and vengeful". He can demonstrate that stories of God show him behaving badly.

      when the truth that he is forgiving arises,

      sez you

      they criticize that as a "get out of jail free card"

      Well, it is. There are so many flaws in religions, and they're layered so deep, that pointing out the flaws requires a scattershot approach. The more deeply layered flaws require temporarily accepting the supporting structure to identify the contradictions and moral depravity.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    85. Re:More likely by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      The position of that rogue planet about to impact on the earth has me scared silly. It's definitely affecting my personality.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    86. Re:More likely by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      Astrologers live by fleecing the gullible. They are a burden on society and retard civilization. They bring nothing positive to humanity. They deserve our scorn.

      For religion, the damage is far greater, but at least some of the promoters attempt to do good.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    87. Re:More likely by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      Dan Lurie lived to be 90. Joe Weider 93. Vic Tanney 73. Charles Atlas 80. Frank Zane is still alive at 71. Jack LaLanne lived to be 96.

      Your point was?...

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    88. Re:More likely by gordo3000 · · Score: 1

      can we mod best comment in the discussion? would be a nice addition.....

    89. Re: More likely by quantumRage · · Score: 1

      You might be onto something here. When I read the summary I mixed those two up. (I'm not a native English speaker, but still it's not an excuse). When I got to the end of summary, thought to myself... Astronomy... And realised the text was about horoscopes.

    90. Re:More likely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      most young people not having a clue and assuming astrology = astronomy.

      I find this only slightly less depressing.

      I have heartening news then. What this means is most people don't even know what astrology is called. It practically doesn't exist to many people. Do you feel any better?

    91. Re:More likely by Reziac · · Score: 1

      As a Gemini, I'm of two minds about it.

       

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    92. Re:More likely by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      I used to say that for every study posted here, but I'd get modded down more than up. Ask a question early that says "Astrology is the scientific study of the effects of the seasons on biometrics" hidden in the question, then later ask "Do you think Astrology is scientific?" and you'll get a much different answer than wording things in different ways. It's not just the one question asked, but the ones before it too that matter.

      To prove that, one of the "soft science" classes I took had the assignment to rig a survey. Predict a result, then guarantee it. Everyone had the same "question" but were to build a survey around it that got a different answer. Half the class was for "yes" and half for "no". It was for something mildly controversial (not abortion, but I think it was about bringing back the draft). Most of the class was successful in getting polled people to answer in the desired manner.

      Opinions of those being asked doesn't matter when you already know the answer you are looking for.

    93. Re:More likely by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Is there some point, scientifically speaking, other than conception, when life "begins"? (Cells are alive in an unbroken chain from pre-conception to post-birth, so there's no transition from "not alive" to "alive". As far as I know, it becomes a distinct individual at conception.)

      It's a distinct DNA code at conception. But then a cancerous growth is a distinct DNA code, and people don't argue that melanoma is life. That's why most "scientific" measures go to viability or consciousness. Some are avoided for other reasons. Viability doesn't work because that means that improvements in medicine can re-define life. Though that's a more practical one, it has more issues with the philosophical. The Constitution talks about a person being "born" but the conservatives (often strict constitutionalists) abandon that as any indication of when rights or life is begun.

      Even before I knew what abortion was, life seemed to begin at birth. Since learning about abortion, I've seen nothing that changed that. And yes, I have children, and watched them grow through sonograms and felt them kick. There's a reason why late term abortions are rare. Though the anti-abortionists seem to indicate that all done are 8th month abortions. The only ones done in that time frame are when there are issues that put both lives at risk.

      From a cellular perspective, the unbroken chain is from Eve (literal or figurative) to you, maternally passed, with an occasional infection from a near-virus called "sperm" that doesn't "break" the chain of life. So killing a person is killing billions of unborn people. Or killing men is legal, and killing women is one murder charge per egg inside her at the time. No, the more biological definitions give too much power to the matriarchy, so none of those would be accepted.

    94. Re:More likely by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      See, I was trying to limit this to the context of science. It seems that the real problem is that people want to use an answer to "when does life begin" as a motivation for moral and ethical opinions and, worse, for laws.

      Is there a solid scientific definition of "life"? Does the definition allow for symbiotic organizams to be alive? What about parasitic ones? Viruses? "When does life begin (as a distinguishing point for unique human offspring)" is partially dependent on the definition of "life".

      You seem to be under the impression that just because I think life does (more or less) begin at conception that I have some particular collection of moral opinions that I may want to impose on others. That's not the case.

      Then where's the scientific definition that distinguishes between a fertilized egg and cancer? Both are unique genetic code living withing an "older" organism, dependent on it for nutrients, and would die if it did. If the answer is "potential" then that seems to deviate from science. What if the technology were created to clone a "person" from a single skin cell? Wouldn't that make every mutated cell a "new life" just waiting for gestation to finish?

    95. Re:More likely by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      I'm pro-life in that I wand less abortion.

      I'm pro-choice in that I want less abortion. Pro-life is wanting *none* (yes, there is a sizable group that's anti abortion for any reason, including rape and medical problems).

      (3) was considered absolutely shameful,

      Places where (3) is shameful have a greater instance of (3). Having a temporary helping hand be a "good thing" encourages people to use it when they are headed down, not already rock-bottom (where it's harder to crawl out of). And having it considered a non-stigma helping hand doesn't hurt their chances of pulling themselves up. When it's a bad thing, when others find out you are using assistance, then hold you back. Or you are already "broken" so you might as well take advantage of it. But making it easy to get on, and get off, helps prevent the kind of failures that people assume when they hear about (3).

    96. Re:More likely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're the strangest religious person I've ever met.

    97. Re:More likely by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      And if the definition of "astrology" was "the scientific study of the effects of the seasons and tides on biometrics", what would you expect the answer to be?

    98. Re:More likely by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Someone like Michael Clark Duncan had a hight BMI and low bodyfat. Still died of heart disease. The thing bodybuilders don't get is that weight, not fat, it hard on the heart. A body of lots of muscle is no easier on the heart than a body full of fat. So lose weight. The less you weigh, the better off you are, presuming you aren't dangerously underweight (when your systems start starvation mode).

    99. Re:More likely by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Why are you so interested in body fat? It's weight that kills. What was Michael Clark Duncan's body fat percentage when he died of heart disease? Looked low to me. BMI correlates with heart disease better than body fat percentage because its the pumping through mass that matters, not strictly fat %. Though two people of equal BMI, the one with greater fat would probably be at higher risk, but an unfit person of 25 BMI will likely be at lower risk than a body builder of 30+ BMI.

    100. Re:More likely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Astrologers live by fleecing the gullible.

      How does that make them different from any other revenue generating commerce? Most consumers choose name brand products at name brand premiums even when generic products of competitive quality are available. Don't name brands also fleece the gullible? Is it really the gullible that should automatically get so much sympathy? To get my sympathy, you have to be gullible... and undeserving of whatever you allowed to happen to you.

    101. Re:More likely by mikael · · Score: 1

      It's known that the date of birth and geographic latitude does affect personality, but that's down to how sunlight affects the mothers' hormones, and consequently brain development while in the womb.

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
  3. And they vote! by fastgriz · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Explains the government we have.

    1. Re:And they vote! by interkin3tic · · Score: 0

      No it doesn't. First off, they don't vote as often as they should. Second, the tea party isn't a particularly young group, so at least half of the dynamic in Washington cannot be laid at the feet of young astrologists. Third, just my opinion, but while astrology isn't science, the republican party is even further from science. The philosophy there seems to be change the world to fit political ideology, not vice versa. Taxes must be cut because we took a pledge saying taxes must be cut. We're going to crucify scientists saying climate change is happening because we know it isn't because our donors told us it isn't.

      In conclusion, jokes need to have at least a kernel of truth to them in order to be funny.

    2. Re:And they vote! by fastgriz · · Score: 0

      They sure voted in 2008.... Hope and Change... Astrology... what's the difference?

    3. Re:And they vote! by gIobaljustin · · Score: 0

      Republicans? We should be keeping the One Party out of the power structure. The republican party is part of the One Party, but they're only one part of it. They all want to take away our rights, as is proven by all the egregious violations of people's rights and the constitution that have been happening for quite some time now.

      --
      Thank you Dave Raggett
    4. Re:And they vote! by gordo3000 · · Score: 1

      which core republican beliefs (not christian) are anti-science? I think they hold to science quite well. They crucify global warming because you cannot have a nuanced debate. i.e. yes, let's all accept AGW, now what the hell does carbon limitations do to help our countrymen? We can shift all these well paying jobs to other countries (ME, East Asia) where the same or more pollution will occur, and on top of that we will have an unemployment problem, or we can let climate change happen because by and large it looks like it will more seriously effect other countries, most of which aren't our trading partners. That sounds like cold science to me and it is what a lot of republicans used to argue before they realized they were losing the popular debate by making rational arguments as to why it isn't in our best interests at all to do X. So they went with the far more popular and effective (with the general voting public) "I can't hear you! I can't hear you! I'm rubber you're glue, we will lose jobs, etc"

      Taxes are not a science question either. It's a question of what things the government should do. There is no scientifically correct tax rate or a correct way to tax. I think the problem way be that voters like you don't really understand what is a scientific question and what is one of values and beliefs.

    5. Re:And they vote! by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      The actual shape of the Laffer curve is a scientific question.

      There are only two points not in dispute. 0 revenue at 0% taxation and 0 revenue at 100% taxation.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    6. Re: And they vote! by gordo3000 · · Score: 1

      I agree, but the maximization of tax revenue is what you are referring to, not optimal tax or fairness policies or optimal role of government in the long term or any of the actual debates we have when we argue about optimal taxation levels.

    7. Re: And they vote! by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      If high tax states are taxing at above the maximum tax revenue level rate then it certainly will inform the larger debate.

      At that point you can only be for higher taxes to punish the successful.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    8. Re:And they vote! by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

      which core republican beliefs (not christian) are anti-science?

      That's a straw man argument. I said the republican party was anti-science, no the core republican beliefs.

      They crucify global warming because you cannot have a nuanced debate. i.e. yes, let's all accept AGW, now what the hell does carbon limitations do to help our countrymen? We can shift all these well paying jobs to other countries (ME, East Asia) where the same or more pollution will occur, and on top of that we will have an unemployment problem, or we can let climate change happen because by and large it looks like it will more seriously effect other countries, most of which aren't our trading partners.

      That's a false dichotomy. Plus, that's no reason to deny climate change is occurring: you want to argue for letting climate change happen because it's going to affect other people, then make that argument, don't claim it's not going to happen. Conservatives who argue along those lines know that "Fuck those other people" is not a compelling argument. Lying, basically.

    9. Re: And they vote! by gordo3000 · · Score: 1

      Its as poor an argument as the claim that we should put people out of work consuming similar amounts of pollution causing goods from outside the country (the democrat argument in truth). They don't say the hard truth, that people have to consume less of a lot of stuff we are used to consuming, and so are equally dishonest. They make the specious claim by reducing our carbon emissions there will be a significant change in global carbon output to change the climate course. But none of that is honest either. Be pissed at stupid people being allowed to vote who can't listen to and then judge a nuanced argument.

      And yes, while there are the 6000 year old republicans, there are also the democrats who subscribe to foolish anti-gmo hogwash without cause or information. Both parties are filled with idiots, but as those idiots don't set the party platform that could be described as the central party goals, they are non-core.

    10. Re:And they vote! by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Science can be used to gauge whether Head Start is a net cost, or a cost saving measure. Does it save more in other programs, such as welfare and prisons, than it costs? Measuring it is a science (or can be measured by a proper study).

      But apart from that which is or isn't objective policy, the Republicans are anti-intellectual. And that is anti-science.

  4. Typo/misread? by Sockatume · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If I was skimming a survey that asked about scientific topics I'd probably read "astrology" as "astronomy" by accident. I'd possibly even chalk it up to a typo and deliberately substitute the two. I'm reading the paper right now to see if they accounted for this.

    --
    No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
    1. Re:Typo/misread? by Sockatume · · Score: 1

      It looks like the report aggregates about 30 surveys and unfortunately doesn't reference individual data sources for the astrology discussion. I'd be interested to hear from anyone who's done or worked on one of these surveys to see if they investigated this.

      --
      No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
    2. Re:Typo/misread? by EmperorArthur · · Score: 2

      Just don't wait too long if you're going to look into this. http://science.slashdot.org/st...

      --
      So lets pretend that we've just completed writing this code, as opposed to having just completed sabotaging it -Altera
    3. Re:Typo/misread? by Tom · · Score: 1, Informative

      I think you are trying to rationalize the results away because you don't want to admit that officially now 40% of americans are blabbering imbeciles.

      There's no other way to put it. And that's the brilliance of the paper. They don't ask if anyone "believes" in astrology or any such thing. They ask a question that has an objective true or false value.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    4. Re:Typo/misread? by Sockatume · · Score: 1

      I've not got a horse in this race, being a non-American. (If we were going to talk troubling survey results, the nontrivial minority in the US who think the moon landings were faked is equally alarming.) I just have an intellectual itch to scratch, and I'd like to see (for example) what happens when you issue the same test in English versus a different language where astronomy and astrology aren't cognates.

      --
      No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
    5. Re:Typo/misread? by Tom · · Score: 1

      Good luck finding such a language. Both words are from ancient greek. I did a quick bit of research and it turns out that for a long time they were much closer in meaning than today, and it's only been since Kepler that they have their modern meanings.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    6. Re:Typo/misread? by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Interesting also in the paper is that the amount of "scientific" publications or mentionings in the last decades has drasticaly shrunken.

      As if "a conspiracy" does not like "the people" to bother to much about sciense ;D

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    7. Re:Typo/misread? by Sockatume · · Score: 1

      I'd settle for cognates that have drifted far enough in spelling that they're unlikely to be confused. You see what my point is.

      --
      No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
    8. Re:Typo/misread? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have a depressing anecdote to offer. One of my friends is a physics professor at a state university. One class he teaches is freshman level astronomy. He says that every semester someone will raise their hand during the first week and ask when they're getting to horoscopes. He tells the room that anyone that thought the class would include anything about horoscopes should probably run to the registrar and drop the class. He always has 2 or 3 drop the class right after that.

    9. Re:Typo/misread? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nonsense. If people don't exactly know what astrology or astronomy is, that will skew the results. This is worth investigating.

    10. Re:Typo/misread? by CurryCamel · · Score: 1

      Finnish? "TÃhtitiede" and "astrologia" are sufficiently far apart.
      Unfortunately, "astronomia" is readily understood by (I'd guess) any finn, but you could in a questionnaire sufficiently remove any confusion by first asking about "tÃhtitiede", and later about "astrologia". Mixing "tÃhtitiede" and "astronomia" into the same text sounds too moronic.

      (pardon my ÃSCII)

    11. Re:Typo/misread? by fast+turtle · · Score: 1

      considering the fact that Astrology is the basis for much of Astronomy, I'd have to agree with the statement that "Astrology is sciencetific" . Sure we don't agree with many of the conclusions but after some in depth reading over the years, it's as reasonable of a science as most of Astronomy in general as most of that involves simply sky watching/searching (makes it open to hobbyists). Astrology though reguires a pretty high degree of compentcy in Math through Algebra. Sure there is software to ease the burden along with calculators designed/programmend with common algorythms but you still have to have a decent math background to even use the tools as most Astrologers don't believe in simply plugging shit into a computer and getting an answer w/o effort.

      --
      Mod me up/Mod me down: I wont frown as I've no crown
    12. Re:Typo/misread? by hyperquantization · · Score: 1

      ... [A]mericans are blabbering imbeciles. There's no other way to put it.

      But the question remains: are they imbeciles in Science education (the subject of the survey itself), or reading comprehension? I'm willing to bet there's a healthy mix of both, skewing towards the latter if you sample the Slashdot crowd ;)

    13. Re:Typo/misread? by Quirkz · · Score: 2

      They ask a question that has an objective true or false value.

      Well let's see. Astrology wouldn't exist without knowledge of planets and constellations and their location in the sky. That is objectively scientific, right?

    14. Re: Typo/misread? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You, sir, are an idiot. Using maths doesn't make something scientific. I suggest you repeat 6th grade.

    15. Re:Typo/misread? by Tom · · Score: 1

      No, that's bullshit.

      Creationism also wouldn't exist without animals and plants, but it still isn't a "kind-of-biology".

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    16. Re:Typo/misread? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They don't ask if anyone "believes" in astrology or any such thing.

      Until I get to see what question they do ask, instead of just the multiple choice answers they offer, I'm not going to be too convinced of any conclusion they offer.

    17. Re:Typo/misread? by Tom · · Score: 1

      Again, good luck.

      German: Astrologie / Astronomie
      French: astrologie / astronomie
      Spanish: astrologie / astronomÃa

      not feeling in the mood to test more. The spanish one is the only with more than a one-letter difference.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    18. Re:Typo/misread? by Sockatume · · Score: 1

      I would probably start looking further afield than the languages from which English got its grammar and vocabulary.

      --
      No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
    19. Re:Typo/misread? by Tom · · Score: 1

      If you go to non-western cultures, they probably won't have astrology, at least as we know it. They probably have their own systems, but you would have to go beyond words and also check how closely their equivalent of astrology is related to astronomy.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    20. Re:Typo/misread? by Sockatume · · Score: 1

      Hey, I never said it'd be easy.

      --
      No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
  5. Astrology by rmdingler · · Score: 4, Funny

    You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

    --
    Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

    Ernest Hemingway

  6. Just not young people... by QuantumLeaper · · Score: 1

    Michael Behe thought astrology was science too, I guess that didn't help the case in Dover. The problem is just not young people think astrology is science, scientists think the same way.

    1. Re:Just not young people... by IRWolfie- · · Score: 1

      " The problem is just not young people think astrology is science, scientists think the same way." That is the most ridiculous statement I have heard. One contrarian scientist doesn't equate to "scientists" without further qualification.

    2. Re:Just not young people... by Sique · · Score: 1

      Michael Behe also thinks Intelligent Design is somehow a scientific theory. I wouldn't give to much on his assesment.

      --
      .sig: Sique *sigh*
    3. Re:Just not young people... by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      Yes it does! Chef Anthony Morley eats people there fore all Chefs are Cannibals.

      You did not know that it is a known fact that if one person in a profession does something that they all must now do that?

      I'll send you the hive mind requirement memo again.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  7. IT IS SCIENCE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    It's a science of extracting money from gullible people.

    1. Re:IT IS SCIENCE by c0lo · · Score: 1

      It's a science of extracting money from gullible people.

      Nope, it's an art.

      --
      Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
    2. Re:IT IS SCIENCE by plover · · Score: 1

      It's a science of extracting money from gullible people.

      Nope, it's an art.

      I think it's engineering. It's repeatable and testable.

      --
      John
  8. More also want a job as a vegetarion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Rather than vetrinarion. Didn't RTFA. But did they control for those that heard/read astronomy wheb they said astrology.

    1. Re:More also want a job as a vegetarion by Diss+Champ · · Score: 2

      Personally, I'd much prefer a job as a veterinarian to one as a vegetarian.

      I can imagine the signs held by those who want a job as a vegetarian though:

      "Will work for no food!"

    2. Re:More also want a job as a vegetarion by MiniMike · · Score: 2

      A non-vegetarian veterinarian is a job where you can still eat when your customers don't pay you.

    3. Re:More also want a job as a vegetarion by blackbeak · · Score: 1

      A non-vegetarian veterinarian is a job where you can still eat when your customers don't pay you.

      A non-vegetarian veterinarian is a job where you can eat your customers when they don't pay you. (FTFY!)

      --
      Everything and its opposite is true. Get used to it.
  9. Astronomy Mix up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'd love to know how many of the respondents mis-read the question as Astronomy instead.

  10. And how much Astrology/Astronomy confusion is that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Interestingly the etymology explains such confusion:
        http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=astrology

  11. Racism is better! by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Interesting
    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    1. Re:Racism is better! by Mashdar · · Score: 1

      You're not going to buy me dinner before I click on your meatspin? Descriptions, please.

    2. Re:Racism is better! by SleazyRidr · · Score: 1

      He already said it starts about 4 minutes in, what more do you want? I assume he means that it's 4 minutes of meatspin before it goes into the how-to guide for making your own goatse.

    3. Re:Racism is better! by antdude · · Score: 1

      Or directly on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v... :P

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    4. Re:Racism is better! by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      Huh? That video starts at exactly the same point the one I posted does.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    5. Re:Racism is better! by antdude · · Score: 1

      Some people don't like watching embedded videos. Since it was a YouTube video, I posted its direct link.

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
  12. Prior data may suggest what is going on by JoshuaZ · · Score: 4, Interesting

    There's prior evidence that higher education and intelligence levels lead to rejection of astrology. See http://www.unz.com/gnxp/the-less-intelligent-more-likely-to-accept-astrology-as-scientific/. However, astrology is more commonly believed on the left than on the right end of the political spectrum as measured by self-identified conservatives or liberals. See the prior link where about only 65% of liberals declare astrology to be not at all scientific as opposed to about 75% of conservatives.. (In general a lot of different pseudoscientific beliefs end up being more or less common on one end of the political spectrum, although these can change over time, such as anti-vaccination attitudes becoming more common on the right after the HPV vaccine came out.) The correlation is not that strong, but there has been a left-ward trend in the US in the last few years. It is possible that memetic drag has thus increased the belief in astrology.

    1. Re:Prior data may suggest what is going on by TheNastyInThePasty · · Score: 2

      The country has moved further left? Hardly. Instead, the center point has leaped further to the right. Many of this president's poilicies are no more liberal than Ronald Reagan yet the far right calls him a socialist. Check this out. Look at the graph labeled "Party Means on Liberal-Conservative Dimension" and notice the jump on the conservative side. In particular, the Republican House of Representatives.

      --
      The best thing about UDP jokes is I don't care if you get them or not
    2. Re:Prior data may suggest what is going on by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wouldn't at all be surprised to find that things like Astrology and Homeopathy are considered "real" by those who identify themselves as left-wing, as those kinds of people tend to be hippies and hippies will believe "natural" bollocks all day long.

      On the flip side I wouldn't be surprised to find that things like Creationism and anti-AGW are considered "real" by people who identify themselves are right-wing, as those people tend to be religious and the religious will believe "God did it" bollocks all day long.

      Same shit different smell.

    3. Re:Prior data may suggest what is going on by JoshuaZ · · Score: 2

      There has been an increase in election of right-wing officials in the House certainly, but my many other metrics people have moved to the left. One prominent example is gay rights where 20 years ago gay marriage was almost unheard of as an idea and now has large scale support.

    4. Re:Prior data may suggest what is going on by ranton · · Score: 2

      However, astrology is more commonly believed on the left than on the right end of the political spectrum as measured by self-identified conservatives or liberals.

      Irrational people are not monopolized by either political party. Irrational liberals are more likely to believe in astrology, and irrational conservatives are more likely to believe in the flying spaghetti monster (or whatever they call their favorite deity).

      --
      -- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
    5. Re:Prior data may suggest what is going on by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The country has moved further left? Hardly. Instead, the center point has leaped further to the right. Many of this president's poilicies are no more liberal than Ronald Reagan yet the far right calls him a socialist. Check this out. Look at the graph labeled "Party Means on Liberal-Conservative Dimension" and notice the jump on the conservative side. In particular, the Republican House of Representatives.

      You are either stupid or blind... perhaps both.

    6. Re:Prior data may suggest what is going on by doconnor · · Score: 1

      You raise a good point. Maybe people are moving left socially, but right economically.

    7. Re:Prior data may suggest what is going on by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about this. If "smart" people tend to start having children later in life and also tend to have less children then the percentage of "smart" people will decline over time.

    8. Re:Prior data may suggest what is going on by dontbgay · · Score: 1

      Gay rights are rights to gay people. I thought "conservatives" were all about rights and limited government?

      --
      Sig not found.
    9. Re:Prior data may suggest what is going on by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Someone should make a film based on that premise.

    10. Re:Prior data may suggest what is going on by JoshuaZ · · Score: 1

      Political affiliations in general have more to do with historic alliances than overarching philosophical beliefs. There's no philosophical reason for example to expect attitudes towards abortion, environmental issues, and military spending to all line up as they do.

    11. Re:Prior data may suggest what is going on by JoshuaZ · · Score: 1

      Possibly but unlikely to be what is happening. Data suggests that over time intelligence has been going up by many metrics. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flynn_effect. It is likely that this is not due to genetics but to other causes (better childhood nutrition and reduced parasite load are both potential causes) but any hypothesis that relies on there being fewer smart people around now is going to fail that empirical test.

    12. Re:Prior data may suggest what is going on by cyberchondriac · · Score: 1

      The country has moved further left? Hardly. Instead, the center point has leaped further to the right. Many of this president's poilicies are no more liberal than Ronald Reagan yet the far right calls him a socialist. Check this out. Look at the graph labeled "Party Means on Liberal-Conservative Dimension" and notice the jump on the conservative side. In particular, the Republican House of Representatives.

      Really? You think Washington of the '70s or '80s would have even dreamed of talking of supporting gay marriage, amnesty for illegal aliens, or expansion or creation of half the entitlement programs we have today that the conservatives are generally against? Would anyone have dare complained about using "God" or prayer in government, as people do today? Have you ever watched a television program from 20 years ago, compared to the things they can say and do in television currently? Good luck finding the level of sexual innuendo, or people generously saying, "bitch" (just an example) on any '80s show.. you won't.
      No sir, the country has move farther left as a whole. In general, society grows more liberal over time. You just hear more about the Right because it finally resulted in a backlash, which is stirring things up.

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
    13. Re:Prior data may suggest what is going on by JoshuaZ · · Score: 1

      Many of your points are accurate but entitlements is off. In general, many forms of the social safety net have been shrinking (especially when inflation is taken into account). Also, serious lawsuits over the use of prayer in government started in the 1960s. And the first amnest for immigrants occurred under Ronald Reagan http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_Reform_and_Control_Act_of_1986

    14. Re:Prior data may suggest what is going on by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And how many people on that survey responded that they believe the Bible to be true?

      I don't doubt for one second that there are a lot of religious liberals. But there are far more religious conservatives.

      And for the record, Astrology == Christianity == Islam == Hinduism == any other bullshit magical system you choose to believe in. Measuring one aspect of religious belief in liberals and conservatives and comparing only that is incredibly dishonest.

    15. Re:Prior data may suggest what is going on by JoshuaZ · · Score: 1

      It is honest when you are you know, attempting to explain a rise in apparent belief in that specific system. The topic of conversation is the rise in astrology. Yes, other beliefs are associated with other political or religious identities. That's hardly relevant here.

  13. One day of working for a paper would convince them by WillAdams · · Score: 5, Interesting

    that astrology is intended as nothing more than entertainment --- the ``forecasts'' in a given newspaper each day are chosen from a set of a number of different forecasts, each of which is intended to fill up a different amount of space, e.g., if newspaper A has 1/2 a page to allot to them, they use the 1/2pg. filler version, if newspaper B only sold a 1-col ad for the astrology page, then they use the 5/6pg. filler version.

    --
    Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
  14. Re:Typo/misread? - Unlikely by JoshuaZ · · Score: 1

    This would be a reason to worry less if it were a single data point. But this sort of explanation doesn't help explain the apparent increase over time unless you think people are getting less careful about reading questions or using context recognition.

  15. Mixup by bickerdyke · · Score: 4, Informative

    or it might be a simple mixup between astrology and astronomy.

    --
    bickerdyke
    1. Re:Mixup by IRWolfie- · · Score: 4, Informative

      It is. This was tested in a eurobarometer by replacing "astrology" with "horoscopes" http://ec.europa.eu/public_opi... . The percentage of support dropped from 41% to 13%, indicating that most people do indeed mix them up.

    2. Re:Mixup by genik76 · · Score: 1

      But likewise, if you would ask random people

      1. Is astronomy scientific?
      OR
      2. Are celestial maps scientific?

      I bet the latter questions would get significantly less positive answers.

    3. Re:Mixup by Millennium · · Score: 1

      This. I'm forced to wonder: did astronomy also appear on this survey, and if it did, how many people answered that both were "sort of" scientific? I suspect that a lot of answers of this kind were a misguided attempt at compromise by people who didn't know which was which.

    4. Re:Mixup by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Misunderstanding the question still indicates stupidity.

    5. Re:Mixup by lars_stefan_axelsson · · Score: 1

      But likewise, if you would ask random people 1. Is astronomy scientific? OR 2. Are celestial maps scientific? I bet the latter questions would get significantly less positive answers.

      Yes, but that's predicated on the idea that people wouldn't know what "celestial maps" meant and that they likewise wouldn't know what "horoscopes" meant. I don't think you'll be able to find support for that. Many more people (the overwhelming majority) would probably be familiar with the term horoscope and know what it entailed, than would know about "celestial maps".

      So no cigar.

      --
      Stefan Axelsson
    6. Re:Mixup by genik76 · · Score: 1

      My point was rather that you cannot substitute astrology with horoscopes - they are a different thing. Many of those people that think that astrology is a science (I have not that opinion) would probably think that newspaper horoscopes and most horoscopes out there are pure entertainment (vs. real scientific horoscopes done by professional astrologists). Therefore the two questions produce such different answers - not because a third of the participants are dyslexic or have auditory processing disorders.

    7. Re:Mixup by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So people are a different kind of stupid. Wooooo!

    8. Re:Mixup by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      28%

      What share of the 28% do you think demand 'scientific' astrology and what % do you think didn't know the difference between Astronomy and Astrology?

      I'm going with 1%, at most, demanding 'better quality' mumbo jumbo. The rest confused about the words.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    9. Re:Mixup by lars_stefan_axelsson · · Score: 1

      I see. You mean that there are people who would make that fine a distinction. While I don't think there are enough of those people to make a difference in a poll like this, your point is well taken.

      --
      Stefan Axelsson
  16. & Unemployed young people wonder ... by BoRegardless · · Score: 1

    Why they can't get a job?

  17. I don't believe in astrology by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 4, Funny

    We Virgos are sceptical about such things.

    --
    Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    1. Re:I don't believe in astrology by bickerdyke · · Score: 1

      Believe me, this can get really hilarious when the other side (who just tried to explain your horoscope) doesn't get it....

      "Yes, you're right, that's indeed one of the typical character traits for people of your sign" *FACEPALM*

      --
      bickerdyke
    2. Re:I don't believe in astrology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just tell them that it's not skepticism, wherein there is some measure of uncertainty. Tell them you are absolutely certain that they are full of shit.

  18. Lame by Triv · · Score: 2

    For fuck's sake guys, there was so much more interesting information in that report and you went for the linkbait-iest piece of crap on the list. Have some fucking self respect. Check your sources. Be a goddamned editor. The rest of you: follow the link to the .pdf and read at least the Highlights of the report. It's fascinating.

    1. Re:Lame by lexa1979 · · Score: 1

      This is still Slashdot, even if there's a beta. We don't read TFA !!

    2. Re:Lame by Lumpy · · Score: 0

      You must be new here...

      Editor? this place has never EVER had an editor.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    3. Re:Lame by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The post was written by "Hugh Pickens DOT Com." The man's name IS linkbait.

  19. Also by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Majority of Young Americans are in a state school.

    Hello 1984.

    1. Re:Also by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How has being in state school have anything to do with 1984?

    2. Re:Also by Ex-MislTech · · Score: 1

      Check off #10 on the 10 planks of the communist manifesto.

      http://www.libertyzone.com/Com...

      --
      google "32 trillion offshore needs IRS attention"
    3. Re:Also by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not me. I graduated from state school in 1984.

    4. Re:Also by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      So because a communist likes an idea, it must automatically be bad and we should oppose it on principle, because communists are bad and evil in every way?

  20. Not Surprising by windwalker13th · · Score: 1

    When students are called upon to learn creationism in science class, we teach them that science does not need to be based on fact just belief. Why should students not make the logical analogy "evolution is to creationism as behavior psychology is to astrology" and that all are science. With politicians insisting that non-testable theories be taught as fact in science classes why should our students not assume that astrology is also a science?

    1. Re:Not Surprising by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      you didn't read the article did you. you're wrong and jumping to conclusions. Furthermore most students in the USA are not taught creationism in school

    2. Re:Not Surprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      HAHAHAHAHAHA

      Oh, wait. You were serious?

    3. Re:Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Islam is a religion of peace you insensitive clod (here, hold this stick of dynamite). The world would be at piece if everybody believed in exactly the same form of Islam. We have war (us being at the forefront of it) because that's not the case. If you guys would just either kills yourselves or start believing, peace would come!

      The only reason why we kill people is because we want peace! /sarcasm

  21. They're probably mixing up Astronomy and Astrology by adric22 · · Score: 1

    I hear people constantly get those two words mixed up. Obviously they sound similar, but have quite different meanings. I'd be surprised if that many people really believed astrology was a science.

  22. Its a science by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Science has to be falsifiable. Scientol^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HAstrology perfectly fits the bill.

  23. But more believe in evolution by jbmartin6 · · Score: 1

    So we win some, we lose some

    --
    This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
    1. Re:But more believe in evolution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hate "belief" in evolution. There's not win for science if those who "believe" in evolution can't tell you what the fuck it is, and what the guiding principles behind it are. Most likely they'll just regurgitate that humans come from monkeys, and stop there.

  24. Majority of Young American Adults.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can't tell the difference between astronomy and astrology and...
    they can't spell neither of those two words.

  25. Majority of Young American Adults Are Morons... by nam37 · · Score: 1

    Yup...

    --
    The two rules for success are:
    1) Never tell them everything you know.
  26. Re:Let's face it ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In a lot of ways, you're no different than places which had the Taliban -- a vocal minority opposed to knowledge and progress, and trying to impose religious beliefs on the real world.

    But?! Wat aboot my freedumbs?!

  27. This is what happens.. by CannedTurkey · · Score: 1

    ...when you allow people to believe in magic.

    --
    Ingredients: Turkey, Mechanically Separated Turkey, Water, Salt, Flavour.
  28. Founding fathers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Considering the founding fathers believed in Astrology greatly and paid astrologists to guide their decisions, yet we had a fantastic low federal power, state focused government, I dont think that matters, the core issue is people vote for who helps them and their tax bracket the most.

    1. Re:Founding fathers by Gavagai80 · · Score: 1

      Well the founding fathers took care of the people-voting-for-their-interests problem by denying anyone except white male land owners the right to vote. That's how they achieved their fantastic government which kept most of the people in unfathomable squalor and many in slavery or indentured servitude.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
    2. Re:Founding fathers by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      "The Founding Fathers" primarily refers to the groups of people that A: Signed the Declaration Of Independence or B: Took part in the creation of the Constitution or C: Had a prominent role in getting the Constitution ratified by the states or D: Were American Revolutionary War Leaders/Heroes. The right to vote was determined on a state-by-state (or smaller) basis and voting eligibility standards largely predated the Declaration. Remember, the United Stated was originally a federation of independent political entities.

      In short, you are wrong and your claim is malicious and either ignorant or dishonest.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
  29. April Fool's Day... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    OK, after reading the names Bill Nye & Ken Ham, I had to force myself to read on, reluctant to continue knowing the article was going to be crap. And it was.

    This article does not identify the source or scope of the study, could be four randoms kids for all we know. And then the article continues to make all these far out assumptions based off of the study. OK, Horoscopes and Astrology is crap. I'd even wager half of American teens can't distinguish between Astrology and Astronomy. Cripes, half of adults cannot distinguish between the two.

    It's just garbage article like this that get my knickers in a twist. Stop wasting time and money on junk like this.

    1. Re:April Fool's Day... by tsqr · · Score: 1

      It's just garbage article like this that get my knickers in a twist. Stop wasting time and money on junk like this.

      Agree that this was a crap Slashdot article. However, if you had followed the links to the report by the National Science Foundation, you would have found the answers to your questions re: source and scope, and as a bonus, you would have found a lot of extremely interesting information.

      If you've been come to Slashdot looking for wisdom and insight in the posted articles, you already know it's a fruitless pursuit.

    2. Re:April Fool's Day... by Ex-MislTech · · Score: 1

      No, the wisdom and insight was in the comments such as yours.

      Its here, its just shows up after the story is posted.

      --
      google "32 trillion offshore needs IRS attention"
  30. Majority of young Americans would like Beta, if th by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Majority of young Americans would like Beta, if they ever came here in the first place.

  31. Will South Carolina "teach this controversy"? by mbone · · Score: 1

    Will South Carolina now "teach the controversy" with astrology the way they say they say they want to do with creationism?

    No, of course not, as what they are really trying to do is promote their religion in public schools, and astrology is not part of their religion.

  32. Re:Let's face it ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hmm. I want to moderate this comment simultaneously "insightful" and "flamebait".

    Oh, well-- I guess AC doesn't need the karma anyway.

  33. Science versus noise by tomhath · · Score: 1

    People are exposed to all kinds of "science" today: animal rights, anti-GMO, organic food, vegan diet, astrology, political science, economics...

    What's science? Maybe all of the above, maybe none of the above.

    1. Re:Science versus noise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People are exposed to all kinds of "science" today: animal rights, anti-GMO, organic food, vegan diet, astrology, political science, economics...

      What's science? Maybe all of the above, maybe none of the above.

      Economics fits most definitions of science (observing phenomenon, creating a theory that explains the observations, generating falsifiable hypothesis from the theory, and testing the hypothesis). The others are (in order), an ideology, an opinion, a common noun, a behavior, a superstition, a field of study. If you're at all confused about this you should go back to eliminatory school.

  34. Re:Religion by some+old+guy · · Score: 1

    The invisible tentacles of the Flying Spaghetti Monster reach everywhere.

    --
    Scruting the inscrutable for over 50 years.
  35. Anti-nuclear, anti-GMO, anti-vax by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

    The logical next step is astrology at the college level.

  36. Hold `on`... by LoRdTAW · · Score: 2

    dammit `~My `keyboard is on` the fritz so` forgive random` quotes, apostrophes `and tildes. I tried to delete them but `the `backspace key also inserts them! Yay!

    First ``they `say this:
    "half of all Americans say astrology, the study of celestial bodies' purported influence on human behavior and worldly events, is either "very scientific" or "sort of scientific."
      `An`d `then` t`hey` say `this:
    "By contrast, 92 percent of the Chinese public think horoscopes are a bunch of baloney."

    So `they used` two `different `words which mean two `different things but used them in `a `comparison as if they were the `same` thing.`Great reporting!

    My guess is astrology sounds very close to astronomy in both spelling and pronunciation` so it is leading to confusion. I` read throug`h t`he` report ``but `the `problem is `no` exact sample `question `was given and we don't know how the people were asked. It simply `states that "Since 1979, surveys have `asked `Americans whether they view astrology as being scientific." `I `guess it `must read something `like this: "Do `you think `astrology is` a `science?" with` a few check `boxes under it with "not `at all" "sort of" or "very `scientific".

    I `bet if they replaced astrology with horoscopes then we would `see `a completely dif`ferent `dataset`.

    1. Re:Hold `on`... by RichMan · · Score: 1

      Bad wording "study of celestial bodies' purported influence on human behavior"

      Specifically horoscopes are crap.

      But human behavior is influenced by the stars and the moon.

      We work during the day. We sleep at night. The position of the sun is major determination of human behavior. So the premis that humans are not influenced by the celestial bodies is easily disproven.

      Fishing boats work to the tides generated by the moon.

    2. Re:Hold `on`... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm `total`ly `not` that` guy, but I th`ink he make`s some gr`eat points.``

  37. come on... by kefalonia · · Score: 1

    ...they just meant "short off scientific"!!!

  38. Literacy, Numeracy, Sciency by RichMan · · Score: 1

    a) literacy - some people may just see "study of the sky", they know about NASA and don't differentiate Astrology from Astronomy
    b) Numeracy - basic education, if astrology is accurate and those are "lucky numbers" then why is the astrologist working for $50 a reading and not sitting pretty somewhere with the powerball jackpot.
    c) Sciency - (a) and (b) and just general education.

    d) all of the above. Education. See yesterdays story about not teaching evolution.

    America the world is laughing at your middle ages ideology.

    1. Re:Literacy, Numeracy, Sciency by Ex-MislTech · · Score: 1

      The real reason it was called the dark ages.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      I think what got us out of it somewhat was the Renaissance.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      Technology, if it can remain nuetral will free us from this
      attempt at a 2nd dark ages.

      --
      google "32 trillion offshore needs IRS attention"
  39. Be more concise. by Pyramid · · Score: 1

    Just say, "Study finds more people are stupid than before".

    --
    ~Any apparent grammatical or typographic errors are caused by defects in your display device.
  40. wonder if by milkmage · · Score: 1

    " nearly half of all Americans say astrology is either 'very' or 'sort of' scientific. " ... they're confusing astronomy?

    i'll check for replies later, i have go to read my horoscope

  41. Keep an open mind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Carl Jung wrote a book called "Synchronicity", in which he proposed that things are interconnected in ways we don't see. As evidence he found astrologically notable angles between sun and moon natal positions in married couples. My point being that someone who truly values science as a tool needs to avoid using it as a dogma and keep an open mind. Too often people "believe" in science, then end up refuting competing beliefs with religious fervor.

  42. Left of the curve by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

    When you think of how stupid the average American is, you have to remember that half of them are even stupider than that.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
    1. Re:Left of the curve by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      First off, credit Carlin.

      If I have 10 people, 9 with an iq of 120, and 1 with an IQ of 90, 90% would be smarter then average.

  43. Feudalism 2.0 by rdelsambuco · · Score: 1

    Redifine "science." Redifine "education." Redifine "justice." War is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength. Let's just finally set the Enlightnemnet aside becasue feudalism will probably work better going forward, anyway.

    --
    I comment occasionally so that I can mod others -1 overrated or -1 offtopic.
    1. Re:Feudalism 2.0 by Ex-MislTech · · Score: 1

      All hail Ingsoc !

      --
      google "32 trillion offshore needs IRS attention"
  44. It's the contrails! by mark_reh · · Score: 1

    All this dosing with stupid-drugs from the sky is finally having the desired effect.

    Get out you spray bottles of vinegar before it's too late!
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

    Seriously, politicians love stupid voters because they are easily manipulated. They cut taxes that fund schools, then try to get religion taught as science. Idiot Americans sit around watching "reality" TV and think they're actually seeing objective reality. What do you expect?

  45. obummer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe the also think obbumer is the messiah...

  46. Homonyms FTW? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    During this survey, was there a point made to explain the difference between Astronomy VS Astrology? I have to wonder if some folks didn't assume they meant Astronomy and answered accordingly.

    I'd like to think people aren't as nutter as this study suggests.

    1. Re:Homonyms FTW? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd like to think people aren't as nutter as this study suggests.

      Then this article isn't for you. Good luck dodging all the 'Majority of Americans believe $clickbait' articles on slashdot. Sincerely.

  47. Well I've recently become more convinced by RivenAleem · · Score: 3, Funny

    Every day you hear about more things they are spotting in space, with bigger more powerful horoscopes they can see more exoplanets and stars etc. Considering how much our Curiosity alone has Discovered about the surface of Mars, it's not surprising Astrology is gaining a lot of credibility.

    1. Re:Well I've recently become more convinced by Areyoukiddingme · · Score: 1

      Every day you hear about more things they are spotting in space, with bigger more powerful horoscopes they can see more exoplanets and stars etc. Considering how much our Curiosity alone has Discovered about the surface of Mars, it's not surprising Astrology is gaining a lot of credibility.

      Wow. That was.... Wow. You should be ashamed that you could even construct that sentence. I mean, there's comedy, and then there's what you just perpetrated. That was a comedic field of land mines, and should be banned by international treaty.

    2. Re:Well I've recently become more convinced by RivenAleem · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry, I was attempting to write in the voice of someone who'd make such errors. I'll gladly jump on your landmine metaphor as punishment.

  48. Just to play devils advocate by tom229 · · Score: 1

    Of course astrology can never be considered a strict science that can be tested with the scientific method. But I don't see why it couldn't be considered a social science. Social sciences are often a lot of "best guess" postulations about human societies and behaviors. Astrology could certainly fit into this field for some.

    --
    If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
    1. Re:Just to play devils advocate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Evidence is required in the social sciences. But go ahead: See if you can get anything to correlate with one's astrological sign in a properly-controlled study.

    2. Re:Just to play devils advocate by bunratty · · Score: 1

      Why do you say astrology can't be tested? I have heard of scientific tests of astrology, and I think they all show that the forecasts do no better than chance. I found a segment from Carl Sagan's Cosmos about the topic.

      --
      What a fool believes, he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.
    3. Re:Just to play devils advocate by tom229 · · Score: 1

      I'm sure you could develop a scientific test to prove economist's forecasts do no better than chance, yet it is still considered a valid social science. Social sciences can't be held up to the same rigorous proofs that the real sciences can.

      I'm no believer in astrology. The idea that human behavior is influenced by some hidden natural cycle that can be measured in conjunction with the rotation of the earth around the sun is certainly far fetched. I'm just saying... let's not get all religious about what can be considered science. Science doesn't only include the topics that the loudest majority agree with.

      --
      If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
    4. Re:Just to play devils advocate by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      'Properly-controlled' does not go with 'social sciences'.

      Statistics are socially constructed anyhow. So they can be ignored.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    5. Re:Just to play devils advocate by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      The thing about economists is there are enough of them to predict everything. One will be right.

      The problem with economists is that the ones who are listened to are the ones who tell politicians what they want to hear.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    6. Re:Just to play devils advocate by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Could you develop "a scientific test to prove economist's forecasts do no better than chance"? I rather doubt it. They get a lot of things wrong, but they do examine what actually happens, and in some cases can predict fairly well. One of the issues is that, much like climate science, the political part is what most people see most.

      If astrologers conducted some sort of objective tests, and modified their practices and beliefs accordingly, it would be scientific. It does appear that doing that would result in disproving most of the field.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  49. Astrology is a proto-science by mdsolar · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Astrology used to keep astronomers fed. And, the observations that used to accompany astrology became the basis for astronomical advances. As a proto-science, astrology has appeared in Jungian archetypal motifs in psychology as well as sharing vocabulary with astronomy and planetary science. There are connections between astrology and these sciences just as there are between alchemy and both chemistry and nuclear physics or between herbalism and pharmacology.

    1. Re:Astrology is a proto-science by abies · · Score: 1

      Astrology -> Astronomy
      Alchemy -> Chemistry
      Herbalism -> Pharmacology
      Economy -> ???

      I wonder if we will live till the point where Economy will also give the birth to some real science...

    2. Re:Astrology is a proto-science by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 1

      In the case of chemistry there was a seminal moment when alchemy was rejected and rationalism brought forth.

      cf Boyle, Robert "The Skeptical Chymist" 1661.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R...

      While the observations were useful, the philosophies are completely different.

    3. Re:Astrology is a proto-science by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      While the observations were useful, the philosophies are completely different.

      Quite right, my chemistry teachers never tried human transmutation.

    4. Re:Astrology is a proto-science by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Money-> Economy

    5. Re:Astrology is a proto-science by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      cf Boyle, Robert "The Skeptical Chymist" 1661.

      The same Robert Boyle that self-identified as an alchemist in 1675? That Robert Boyle?

    6. Re:Astrology is a proto-science by Ex-MislTech · · Score: 1

      And yet out of struggling with Alchemy even great scientists learned from it.

      http://discovermagazine.com/20...

      --
      google "32 trillion offshore needs IRS attention"
    7. Re:Astrology is a proto-science by johnjaydk · · Score: 1

      Economy -> ???

      Economy is the precursor to reading tea leaves, everybody knows that. They teach that in B-school.

      --
      TCAP-Abort
    8. Re:Astrology is a proto-science by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Learned from it?

      What that proves is that even great scientific genius's will waste their time following dead ends.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    9. Re:Astrology is a proto-science by GuB-42 · · Score: 1

      Economy -> ???

      -> Profit

  50. How many mistake Astrology with Cosmology? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I know I did once. When I was younger and got asked what I think about Astrology, I answered as if I was asked about Cosmology. Having not cared about horoscopes and all that shit I couldn't even imagine that something bogus like that could have such a serious sounding name like Astrology.

    1. Re:How many mistake Astrology with Cosmology? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And let's not forget Astronomy which is also so close.

  51. Re:Typo/misread? - Unlikely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    These days, people get "then" and "than" incorrect more often then* they get it correct.

    * The incorrect "then" was intentional :)

  52. Re:Religion by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 1

    I used to be an atheist until God talked. I'm not all as excited as I used to be about fighting superstition. You are like a ten year old who hasn't discovered girls yet. God can synchronize and does synchronize all the events of the world.

    I do not believe god 'talked' to TempleOS, nor do I believe god 'synchronizes' the events of the world.

    Neverthless, I'll risk a little karma and ask: Why was he modded down?

    What about his post was troll / offtopic / flamebait etc?

    There is no "I disagree" mod on Slashdot. Please don't substitute one of the above in its place.

  53. Interpret the results correctly by argStyopa · · Score: 2

    The results are there but the interpretation is flawed.
    I'd be FAR more likely to believe US kids are stupid and confused 'astrology' with 'astronomy', than that they believe astrology is a science.

    We were being given a college tour for one of our kids at a LEADING institution (retail price north of $50k/year) and the pretty young tour guide was showing us around, and identified one of the science buildings as "...and there's the building with various science classrooms including geology, biology, and astrology...", which prompted a sudden look up* by most of the male parents in the group, eye contact, and a shrug. I didn't notice a single mom or kid react.
    *she was wearing yoga pants

    --
    -Styopa
  54. A Nation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Abundant with retards.

  55. Not surprising by Chrisq · · Score: 0

    The majority think that Islam is the religion of peace - so why wouldn't they believe in astrology too. Both are patently not based on fact

  56. If it's debunked or junk, is it still science? by davidwr · · Score: 1

    Are debunked/junk sciences like phrenology considered "science"? If so, maybe astrology can be called a science, but ONLY with a proper qualifier like "junk" or "debunked."

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  57. Re:Typo/misread? - Unlikely by ranton · · Score: 2

    This would be a reason to worry less if it were a single data point. But this sort of explanation doesn't help explain the apparent increase over time unless you think people are getting less careful about reading questions or using context recognition.

    Others on this thread have mentioned that people may simply not be as familiar with astrology as they were in the past. If the percentage of 18-24 year old adults who even know what astrology is is dropping steadily, then the number of people who mistake astrology for astronomy would probably be steadily going up at a similar rate. If a survey was already focusing on scientific concepts, I could see myself confusing the terms. Although in the context of "Is astrology a science" I would probably notice the difference since why would anyone ask if astronomy is a science?

    --
    -- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
  58. Pish posh! by azav · · Score: 1

    Well, DUH!

    We all know that for all the 6+ billion people in the world, there can only be 12 possible futures for their upcoming day.

    For you though, looking at your astrological horoscope, I predict you will face challenges today.

    --
    - Zav - Imagine a Beowulf cluster of insensitive clods...
  59. Confusing Beta by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I just got redirected to the Beta site:( I'm obviously not participating in the boycott, but I have a very had time reading and following the conversation on this site. Please don't do this!

  60. Re:Crappy economy = more reliance on faith? by swb · · Score: 2

    That's a pretty good observation.

    On one hand, you have a set of "rational" social values regarding going to college, being a moral, law abiding person, working hard, etc. all leading to good outcomes and yet none of it seems true anymore -- the plutocracy steals with impunity, working hard doesn't produce any rewards, college leads to lifelong indebtedness, etc.

    On the other, you have an economy that never seems to get better for anyone but the rich, an environment that at best produces strange weather and otherwise is nothing but bad news, never ending military conflicts, etc.

    It does sound like a common pretext to abandon science and reason and escape into religion.

  61. Re:Religion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think you may find that due to his constant rambling schizophrenic posts, he actually starts at -1 by default.

  62. Re:One day of working for a paper would convince t by spiritplumber · · Score: 1

    Thanks, I didn't know that! No mod points today, though. Do you have a link to this I can show some friends?

    --
    Liberty - Security - Laziness - Pick any two.
  63. Re:Crappy economy = more reliance on faith? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The economy has done nothing but improve over the last 7 years.

  64. That's nothin' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Majority of Young American Adults Think Astrology Is a Science"
    That's nothing. A plurality of them think climatology is a science too!

  65. Re:One day of working for a paper would convince t by WillAdams · · Score: 1

    It was easier back in the day when a given city had multiple newspapers, but you should be able to still find two different publications w/ two different size/versions of the horoscope page for a given day.

    --
    Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
  66. Mainstream science by John+Allsup · · Score: 1

    Mainstream science is so full of bullshit these days that the general public, faced with two piles of bullshit, one containing a priceless gem, and the other not, can't see the difference and, sadly, don't seem to care. It's a sad world when that happens. At least we can plant pretty flowers in the bullshit and hope that some good can be made of it. One day the gem will be uncovered.

    --
    John_Chalisque
    1. Re:Mainstream science by Ex-MislTech · · Score: 1

      Many organizations benefit off keeping the sheeple busy with distraction.

      Much like the bread and circuses analogy.

      While they keep them entertained and in fear from the "terrorists"
      while spending as much as the next 25 nations combined on military.

      So it is my opinion that it is to some ppls benefit to have things like they are here.

      Namely Religion, Mil-Industrial, Big Agri, Big Pharma, Big Medica

      Them like most human endeavors have been corrupted.

      A part of the looters gold pile has been found offshore....my what a huge pile...

      http://www.democraticundergrou...

      --
      google "32 trillion offshore needs IRS attention"
  67. Re:Religion by rjstanford · · Score: 1

    Well, it is actually totally off-topic. The discussion is about a survey in which people expressed their beliefs about a particular type of practice. That doesn't mean that any conversation on any belief is automatically on-topic. I believe that whiskey is delicious although I didn't when I was younger, TempleOS believes that God is real, similarly... neither of those beliefs, however sincere, have any bearing on the actual topic other than acknowledging that beliefs can change over time, and both of us (indeed, this entire thread) should be modded "Off-Topic" as a result.

    --
    You're special forces then? That's great! I just love your olympics!
  68. Is this new? by franblets · · Score: 1

    Somehow I have the sense that young folks might always start out believing and then convert to a more considered opinion. Are there any previous studies?

  69. Hey babe! by PPH · · Score: 1

    What's your sign?

    A theory must make useful predictions. And an affirmative answer to the above question tells me quite a bit about how my evening will progress. So astrology is a valid theory. QED.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  70. That's because.. by DiscountBorg(TM) · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The Right tends to be more of a certain Christian belief that has a deep seated fear of 'new agey', 'spiritistic', 'occult' etc practices, whereas the left has the Christians who don't care about that kind of stuff, and the secularists who are every bit as irrational.

    I've noticed this trend too, having grown up amongst fundies then moving to the big city as I got older. You find pseudoscience everywhere.

    My experience on the religious Right: Yoga, Meditation and Astrology open your mind to Satan. Pray to God, son.
    My experience on the Left: Lengthy discussions of star signs, after laughing at those damn fool fundamentalists.

    --
    "The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place." George Bernard Shaw
  71. Yet another problem created by democrats! by JohnnyConservative · · Score: 0

    Yet another problem created by democrat education policies! They probably also believe man made global warming and the falsified data those false claims are based on!

  72. Panic much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Page 25 of 53 says this value of skeptical regard has varied between 55 and 66% since 1985. The question is not about why do people believe but rather why is it stuck and what might the value have measured pre 1985. Also, what the concept scientific vs concept makes sense might vary.

  73. Meanwhile, in old Fall River by jabberw0k · · Score: 1

    Lizzie: "Mommy, can I go play outside?" Mommy: "Go axe your father."

  74. Re:Let's face it ... by PPH · · Score: 3, Interesting

    What the theocrats in this country have failed to understand: When you raise a generation lacking critical thinking skills to further your own agenda, they will become susceptible to any and all ideologies. On the other hand, perhaps that's the idea. Its not so much about a belief in a god, its about raising an army that is easily led.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  75. Re:They're probably mixing up Astronomy and Astrol by compro01 · · Score: 1

    So we may have a literacy/language problem rather than a scientific knowledge problem.

    I'm not entirely sure which is worse.

    --
    upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
  76. Re:Let's face it ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When you say "voluntary stupidity" do you mean ignorance? Religious people are not necessarily stupid and some of them are very intelligent. Just watch some videos of Matt Dillahunty on YT. Then realize that he was a fundamentalist Christian for 30 years and was training to be a minister before suddenly asked himself "why do I believe this?"

  77. Re:Crappy economy = more reliance on faith? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    However, you are *doing the same thing*. However your 'on-ramp' is jumping to conclusions about people that you disagree with.

  78. I was in this survey by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    scientific: "based on the principles of science"

    So, astrology is very, very, very, very, very, very loosely scientific?

  79. Re:Majority of young Americans would like Beta, if by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 4, Funny

    Majority of young Americans would like Beta, if they ever came here in the first place.

    The majority of young Americans don't even know what VHS is these days, let alone Beta. ;-)

  80. Re:I'm not surprised. by Agent0013 · · Score: 1

    Well here is the main point. I don't care if you believe in Jesus or Astrology. You just can't claim it is a science either way. Actually, I guess you could do some testing of astrology and testing the predictions is a main point of the scientific process. Once you see that the predictions do not hold, then your astrology theory would have to be dropped. So, if you treat it scientifically, you would have to abandon it as false.

    --

    -- ssoorrrryy,, dduupplleexx sswwiittcchh oonn.. -Quote found on actual fortune cookie.
  81. Great experiment to completely debunk Astrology... by Mysticalfruit · · Score: 1

    Create flash cards that have a horoscope but replace the sign with a number. Then create another set of flash cards that have the astrological sign on one side and the corresponding number on the other side. Have a decent sample size of people try to match up the signs.

    This experiment has been run many times and the result is that it's completely random.

    Without knowing the sign ahead of time every other horoscope works equally well for any other horoscope. You get out of it what you read into it.

    --
    Yes Francis, the world has gone crazy.
  82. Questionable Assumption by ronys · · Score: 1

    Since when do young Americans think?

    --
    Ubi dubium ibi libertas: Where there is doubt, there is freedom.
  83. Re:Crappy economy = more reliance on faith? by houghi · · Score: 1

    I looked it up and the cards were not clear. However another source tells me no.

    --
    Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
  84. Re:Majority of young Americans would like Beta, if by Hognoxious · · Score: 2

    That's only because they think Beta is the opposite of Wers.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  85. Newton feared he was like astrology by peter303 · · Score: 1

    Newton proposed a force- universal gravitation- which he could not expain what it was, but only how it worked. Furthmore he said said this force acted the same on things you could see in front of you as well as far off in the distant heavens. He feared he'd be mistaken as a supernaturalist for proposing such a mysterious force.

    However scientists are a pragmatic lot. They dont care if you cant explain everything as long as you can predict phenomena better than you can before with a new theory. And Newon's theory could predict motion on Heaven and Earth much more accurately than anything before.

    1. Re:Newton feared he was like astrology by ImprovOmega · · Score: 1

      Wasn't Newton all into alchemy in his later years?

    2. Re:Newton feared he was like astrology by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Newton wasted much time on alchemy. All that proves is everybody is wrong about something.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  86. Re:Religion by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 1

    Ah, that makes sense. Thanks for clarifying.

  87. Stylish Trends in Education. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My son had skills prior to arrival, so he got paired up with the most stunted boat anchor in the class. He lost interest in school, and soon quit taking calls from the twit, baffled yet again by his homework.
    They touted it as the "No-Child-Gets-Ahead" or something.

  88. Re:I'm not surprised. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, the Jesus thing happened a long time ago so it's hard to examine the validity of the account. Nobody was around to do a paternity test on Jesus and see if Mary might have not been the virgin she claimed to be. Astrologers make testable short-term predictions all the time, so it's much easier to see that they're wrong (or rather, no better than chance).

  89. Re:Religion by 3.5+stripes · · Score: 1

    God of the gaps just means you got too bored to find out the real answer.

    --


    He tried to kill me with a forklift!
  90. Was it defined for them? by Culture20 · · Score: 2

    A lot of young people confuse the terms astrology and astronomy. Unless astrology was described prior to the poll, it requires a huge grain of salt.

    1. Re:Was it defined for them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > confuse the terms

      But there is no confusion to the Republicans. They know damn well what it means since they employ astrologers. They even put them on the stage at their huge national hate rallies. As the article noted, the leader of their hate movement paid one to try to "see the future." Those people are nuts. They hate science.

  91. Re:Let's face it ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, America has certainly declined from the time when it was commonly believed that the Devil lived in the woods west of New England, witches were burned in the town squares, and cocaine was used as a way to calm down a fussy baby. Why doesn't it look up to the amazing countries, like Europe, whose culture, scientific progress, and society have certainly not fallen into the trashbin over the last 100 years!?

  92. Re:One day of working for a paper would convince t by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anecdotal, but I happened to stumble upon just such a thing. It was a totally random sample of the same paper on two different dates some distance apart. This was possible because that paper wasn't bought that often either. The previous issue was still around, and I read the horoscope in there at some point, and it stuck. It stuck so well, that when I read the same exact text in the new issue I thought I had the old paper in my hand for a few minutes. The confusion was great, because the star sign was different two, and I was sure I read that text for another star sign... Was my memory playing tricks on me? I eventually found the other issue and compared them. I wasn't seeing things.

  93. Re:Let's face it ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When you say "voluntary stupidity" do you mean ignorance?

    I mean voluntary stupidity, or, possibly "willful ignorance" if you like.

    See, it's voluntary stupidity when you choose to reject scientific facts and assert that your interpretation of the bible trumps reality. It's voluntary stupidity when you decide that the Earth must only be 6000 years old. It's voluntary stupidity when you think that if you don't provide sex education to kids, kids won't have sex. It's voluntary stupidity to say that Intelligent Design is a valid scientific point of view.

    So, if you allow your religion (or anything else) to over-ride actual facts and science, that is simply voluntary stupidity. And when you encourage it for one aspect of your life, you end up with it in many more aspects of your life because people are incapable of actual critical thinking and reasoning.

    Not all religious people are stupid in my mind, just the ones who can't reconcile reality with their beliefs and continue to insist things which can't possibly hold be facts.

  94. Science is a religion too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is a religion with the ontology that there is an objective reality separate from the self that is out there to be investigated and manipulated. Modern physics has been showing for some time that such separation does not exist, yet the mainstream definition of science still clings to the Cartesian world view. Let me share with you an excerpt from the first chapter of Alan Oken's "Complete Astrology" which shows how astrology incorporates and goes beyond science:

    "Since the Renaissance, Man has continued to investigate the world of the rational mind and has, as a result, developed a great technological civilization. The scientific community has dominated the consciousness of Man since it was released from the emotional fetters of the Church. But its hold is as strong as the Church's, for not only does present-day science demand a rational explanation for everything, it also blinks Mankind with the illusion that the conscious, rational mind is the highest product of the evolutionary process. The intellectual community has, in effect, put a false value on logic while minimizing the power of Man's intuitive and psychic faculties. In essence, all thoughts and/or phenomena which cannot be reduced, or more accurately, brought down to the level of the word are not considered as holding any proven truth. [...]
    [...]
    Astrology is one discipline which serves to link the intuitive mind to the rational mind, while serving Man in his everyday life situations. Yet it has met with tremendous resistance among both the ignorant and, not surprisingly, the highly intellectual segments of society. [...] Limited minds, no matter how intelligent, lock out higher levels of consciousness. If an individual tries to understand through his rational processes that which is larger than his reason, he will limit himself by his own definition of infinity."

  95. Context. by DiscountBorg(TM) · · Score: 1

    Agreed, it's not a misread. If you RTA, the stats clearly line up with other demographic groups and other findings.

    --
    "The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place." George Bernard Shaw
    1. Re:Context. by Sockatume · · Score: 1

      I did read the article, but the implications of its variance by demographic group didn't occur to me. Thanks!

      --
      No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
  96. Let me guess by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They are the same people who think a tomato is a vegetable?

    1. Re:Let me guess by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      In the USA, a tomato is a vegetable by act of congress. Because of taxes and damn the scientific definition of 'Fruit'.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  97. That's your horoscope... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now, you may find it inconceivable (or at the very least, a bit unlikely) that the relative positions of the planets and the stars could have a special, deep significance, or meaning that exclusively applies to only you. But, let me give you my assurance, that these forecasts and predictions are all based on solid, scientific, documented evidence, and you would have to be some kind of moron not to realize that every single one of them is absolutely true.

    But I digress.

  98. Cryonics vs. Cryogenics by Gavin+Scott · · Score: 2

    Indeed, I think it's probably a good sign that kids today probably don't know what Astrology is and figure that it's "the one with the telescopes".

    Similarly how many people here know the difference between Cryonics and Cryogenics? One is the study of ultra-low temperature, and the other is the movement surrounding freezing your body after you die with the goal of resurrecting you later when technology advances far enough. But do you know which is which without looking it up?

    G.

  99. Re:Majority of young Americans dont know clockwise by See+Attached · · Score: 5, Funny

    Due to the ubiquity of digital clocks, many dont know clockwise from counter-clockwise! Righty-Tighty, lefty-loosey - might be asking alot!

    --
    Time for a new Political party in the US (or two!) One is off the rails Other cant pony up a leader.
  100. Re:They're probably mixing up Astronomy and Astrol by Quirkz · · Score: 1

    Or they give it "sort of" credit because it starts with planets and stars, even if they don't take the rest of it seriously.

  101. Astrology is another word for Astronomy, right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What percentage confused Astrology for Astronomy?

  102. What is being taught in school by Steelwings · · Score: 1

    If they are teaching Creationism as a science then Astrology must be a science too.

  103. Re:Great experiment to completely debunk Astrology by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

    Have a decent sample size of people try to match up the signs.

    By "people" do you mean astrologers? Even if astrology worked I wouldn't expect a significant result if you just asked random joes.

    The other old standby (one I got to run once) is to have an astrologer create horoscopes for a group of people, then ask the group to pick their own horoscope out. It's not perfect - if the astrologer has the birth years of the group, they could slip things like "you get crotchety with modern technology and enjoy Diagnosis Murder" into the old geezer's chart to give themselves a head start - but needless to say, the one I ran was a complete wash-out for the horoscope writer (who was only a hobbyist and didn't really have any expectations of success, but was interested to apply a scientific test to their work).

    --
    systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
  104. My introduction to the mystical art by judoguy · · Score: 1

    I was maybe 8 or 9 and had a great little 3" reflector, could even see the rings of Saturn. I was in a grocery store one day and saw a star book on the end cap. Got it, took it home, opened it up and WTF? I was astonished. What a load of crap.

    --
    Peace is easy to achieve, just surrender. Liberty is much harder get/keep.
    1. Re:My introduction to the mystical art by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I feel for you. Been there, done that.

  105. Is the question too loosely worded? by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

    Is the question too loosely worded?

    I'm a staunch rationalist - as, I suspect, are an unrepresentatively high number of people reading this post - and believe that astrology, like homeopathy and the rest, is a load of old bobbins. But if you were to ask me "are they sort-of scientific?", without further qualification, could I honestly answer with a 100% "no"? Astrologers do sums and homeopaths use test tubes in the course of their work. The frameworks of both are based on faulty, if not downright bonkers, assumptions and perpetuated by the unwavering belief of their adherents, but that doesn't mean they can't be "scientific" in part.

    --
    systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    1. Re:Is the question too loosely worded? by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      I was doing sums and using test tubes when I was a young explosive pyromaniac. Doesn't make what I was doing science.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  106. Re:Crappy economy = more reliance on faith? by Ex-MislTech · · Score: 1

    Someone has been drinking the kool-aid.

    It may be better for the 1%, but it sure is not for the working class sled dogs.

    Just because someone stops receiving unemployment checks
    doesn't mean they have a job.

    The U-6 unemployment rate is north of 17%.

    The percentage employed is around 62% by Dept of Labor's own numbers.

    The misery index is at a 40 year high.

    --
    google "32 trillion offshore needs IRS attention"
  107. Provable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can't really prove for sure that their is no "god". But it has been proven that there is nothing to astrology. No credible study has ever correlated astrological sign to personality characteristics or even something like divorce rates. No astrologer has ever been found who can guess a person's sign after interviewing them at a success rate better than the random 1 in 12 chance.

  108. Sort of a science? Of course by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

    "Pseudo-" means "sort of," right?

    --
    systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
  109. It's more science than religion by Crudely_Indecent · · Score: 3, Interesting

    While on par with most religious beliefs, at least astrology has some basis in science. Planetary positions and angular relationships between those planets isn't something that astrologers make up. The data is largely calculated from ephemeris (usually the Swiss ephemeris) and there is a lot of math involved.

    If religion had as much science as astrology, everyone would believe in god.

    The only thing not science about astrology is the interpreted meanings of the positions and angular relationships.

    --


    "Lame" - Galaxar
    1. Re:It's more science than religion by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      WTF?

      Tell us your definition of 'science'. Because using math and data isn't sufficient, not even close.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    2. Re:It's more science than religion by Crudely_Indecent · · Score: 1

      The positions of the planets and angular relationships isn't science? What the hell have astronomers been doing all these years?

      The portion of astrology that deals with the positions of the heavenly bodies is exactly a science, and is provable FACT. When someone is born and their sun sign is, say Aquarius - this means that the sun was in Aquarius when the person was born, which is a provable FACT.

      Astronomy was born from astrology. Many of the terms still used in astronomy came from astrology (conjunction, opposition, aspect, etc.)

      Astrology has one non-scientific aspect (pun intended), the assignment of meaning to planetary positions and angular relationships.

      --


      "Lame" - Galaxar
  110. Re:Majority of American Adults Are Morons... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There, fixed that title for you.

  111. Can something be "scientific" even if it's wrong? by dmatos · · Score: 1

    Would you guys contest that "light is transmitted by fluctuations in the ether" is a scientific theory? It was believed by many scientists, and for a long time. The answer to the question posed in the survey depends not just on the definition of "astrology," but also on the definition of "scientific."

    One of the things that I keep parroting to the creationist crowd is that a scientific theory must explain past events, and predict future events in a way that is testable. Nothing in here says that it has to be true. In fact, many theories that we now use are expressly not true at certain limits. Nope - explanation of past events, and prediction of future events in a testable manner. Those are the qualifications.

    So let's apply this to astrology. Does it explain past events? Well, it certainly tries to. Does it predict future events? Check. Does it predict future events in a manner that is testable and falsifiable? I think that a controlled experiment would certainly do so. The controlled experiment would fail, and that would prove the theory of astrology false, but that doesn't make it "not a scientific theory."

    Given that logic, I'd have to answer "sort of scientific" to this question. But if I were asked "do you believe that the position of stars and planets govern our day to day lives," that would get a resounding "no."

    --

    It may look like I'm doing nothing, but I'm actively waiting for my problems to go away.
    --Scott Adams
  112. Re:Let's face it ... by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

    America has always had a lot more ignorance and stupidity than it should have. Have you forgotten about the Scopes "Monkey" Trial?

  113. Thanks, Bible-Thumpers by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 1

    Your insistence on treating one set of fairy tales as absolute, un-challengeable fact means every piece of nonsensical garbage gets the 'equal protection under ignorant eyes' doctrine.

  114. Sterilize them now by Chas · · Score: 1

    Seriously. If they're stupid enough to believe that Astrology is science, they're a danger to the human race.

    If it becomes a knock-down, drag-out between Eugenics and Dysgenics, I'll go with the lesser of two evils and pick Eugenics.

    --


    Chas - The one, the only.
    THANK GOD!!!
  115. We Are Doomed by JimSadler · · Score: 1

    The quality of mind of such a large portion of the American population is so low that I can not see our nation surviving for very long. No known types of education or educational technology can elevate such low mentalities to reasonable functioning entities. The cry out used to be that little johny can't read. The new cry out should be that little Johny can not think. Worse yet little Johny refuses to consider thinking as part of his life.

  116. Article and Subsequent Link Missing Details by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I couldn't find the "exact" phrasing of the question asked. It would be a trivial mistake to confuse astrology with astronomy.

    MORE IMPORTANTLY....

    Also, "astrology" could be seen as a proxy for this question, "Why do so many pro baseball players have August birthdays?"

    It has to do with cutoff dates for youth leagues (e.g., Little League). If you are older than your peers, you get more attention, more training, and are more likely to go pro. Astrology? Not exactly. Does it relate to when in the year you are born? Hell yes.

    There are a great many things exactly like that which is why I would want more specifics.

  117. Astrology is science... originally by Martin+S. · · Score: 1

    The literal translation of the latin origin of 'Astrology' is 'stars logos' which roughly translates to "explanation of stars" or "account of stars". (The literal meaning of Astronomy is from "numeratus" or the counting stars and adopted with accurate measuring devices).

    http://www.etymonline.com/inde...

    It was the study of the movement of stars, it is the modern popular semantics of the term that is bunkum.

  118. Probably the same people by The+Iconoclast · · Score: 1

    who thing Stephen Hawking is a cosmetologist

    --
    Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati
  119. Possible mixup? by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

    How many are weapons-grade morons who believe in mystical future-telling, and how many simply mixed up astronomy with astrology and would have corrected themselves if the survey made the difference clear?

    --
    "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  120. Re:They're probably mixing up Astronomy and Astrol by Your.Master · · Score: 2

    I am. The scientific knowledge problem is much worse. The "literacy/language" problem is trivial and unimportant.

    Come on. People get screwed up easily, and astrology is not an every-day word nor an important word, unless you actually look up an astrological prediction frequently. Just listen to a parent describing the characters on a show their kids like but they can't sit through, and you'll find some amusing word or syllable substitutions in major character names. I'm highly confident that with a little time, we kind find some word I've used more than Astrology in the past year, which is not some specific jargon, and which appears in major dictionaries, yet you have never heard of in your life. It just doesn't come up that often.

    I would expect people who are really into astrology to be the most sensitive to the distinction (barring maybe people who are actually astronomers), and people who don't care about being a Leo or a Virgo or whatever to be the most hazy on it.

    Plus, real linguists know that astrology really was the term for what we now call astronomy. After all, the word itself even has the form of a science-name: latin for stars, logy for study. Study of the stars.

    We have much worse literacy problems than mixing up astrology and astronomy. Like this: http://usatoday30.usatoday.com....

  121. Demand fairness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If they are teaching astronomy, then it is only fair that all possible theories are taught. Astrology must be added to the science curriculum

  122. Aaaaactually by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Astrology is about the alignment of the PLANETS. Not the stars.

    Actually.

  123. Close by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The controlled experiment would fail, and that would prove the theory of astrology false, but that doesn't make it "not a scientific theory."

    You're almost there, except that you're saying you know the result before you run the test.

    That's not science. And that's the problem.

    I'd be very surprised if any of the skeptics here have actually taken the time to honestly study the phenomenon (beyond looking to charismatic leaders who deride the concept using combinations of designed to fail examples, broken logic and theatrics).

    The fact that Astrology actually works is too scary for most to even consider considering, because it essentially breaks the Matrix.

    1. Re:Close by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      +1, excellent troll.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  124. Re:One day of working for a paper would convince t by Biosci777 · · Score: 1

    Ah, but what if it was the arrangement of the stars that caused that amount of space to be available!

  125. Left vs Right and believing in non-science (Christ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hmmm...interesting to point out the study showing belief in "non-science" (pseudoscience) of astrology on the left, when I'm quite certain that you'd have a much higher rate of belief in the "non-science" of Christian religion on the Right.
    Double points for the (Right leaning?) Reagan's - star reading and Bible reading in the same session! :)

  126. Left vs Right (Christians) pseudoscience? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    [sorry if re-post, but I entered captcha then didn't see my anonymous post?]
    Hmmm...interesting to point out the study showing belief in "non-science" (pseudoscience) of astrology on the left, when I'm quite certain that you'd have a much higher rate of belief in the "non-science" of Christian religion on the Right.
    Double points for the (Right leaning?) Reagan's - star reading and Bible reading in the same session! :)

  127. Astrology or Astronomy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did you verify they knew they weren't just being stupid about what you were talking about?

  128. laziness inflation by epine · · Score: 1

    IUT's called not being lazy and getting a second job.

    I'm thinking you're descended from Pilgrims wearing extremely black clothes.

    Plus I was very unamerican and drove a 15 year old car refusing to buy a new one, and lived in a 800 sq foot home

    No, perhaps you're Puerto Rican.

    People can afford what is important to them.

    Ah, you're Jewish Asian American.

    There's research that shows the highest willingness to make this kind of sacrifice for gains far into the future are people who combine elements of status insecurity and class superiority.

    I've listened to several highly informed commentators lately who agreed that what it would take to get American schools to the level of the Asian tigers is to put children through hell on earth of cramming 12 hours per day for years on end to pass some standard exam that admits only a privileged few.

    Good thing we no longer dangle children down chimneys or mine shafts.

    No one thinks the American educational system is perfect at the K12 level (the cream of the American university system is presently unrivalled), but people who dig deep largely report that the problems are economic and social where the gated communities are doing very well, thank you, at what they value most: drama, sports, and cheerleading. This is a different path to success.

    I could dig up a dozen such authoritative voices from my notes, but instead I'll simply echo the most recent exchange I've reviewed which discusses this problem:

    Ira Glass | Talks at Google

  129. Is it possible they are confusing terms by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When I was younger, I sometimes had to pause to differentiate the terms astronomy and astrology. I knew what they were, but if I was not careful, I could accidentally swap the terms. If young adults are being asked about how scientific something is, they might be confusing the two terms and using the word "scientific" to determine which word they think the survey means. It is easier to believe that 49% of young adults confuse similar words than it is to believe that 49% actually believe astrology is scientific.

  130. How does gov stop extra treatment? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How does the government stop doctors from performing extra tests and extra treatment to increase his/her income? Heck, how does it stop patients that demand extra treatment when they probably don't need it?

    1. Re:How does gov stop extra treatment? by Macgrrl · · Score: 1

      Drs who 'over service' are investigated. I had a GP a few years back who worked crazy hours in a small practice in an area that was short on Drs, she was investigated for over servicing and was told she couldn't take on any new patients.

      Generally extra tests are performed by a path lab or imaging lab that isn't directly associated with the originating Drs practice - so they see no additional income from referring you beyond you going back to get the results.

      I was diagnosed with cancer last year because of a Dr ordering what might have been considered an extra test (I needed a blood test because of some medication I was on, she decided to do a full work up because it seemed like a good idea at the time). If my GP had not done the extra test, it's likely I wouldn't have been diagnosed so early, would have gotten much sicker than I was and would have required chemo in addition to surgery.

      Given the current standard HR policy of requiring a Drs certificate is you have a sick day, I would say most of my Drs visits these days are to get a note saying 'yes she really was sick' when I have a bad head cold or a migraine. I would be better off at home resting, but have to drag myself out to get a bit of paper and to be told to go home, rest, stay warm and keep up my fluids - all things I already know. Most Drs don't have time for unnecessary tests, they're too busy issuing repeat scripts and medical certs.

      --
      Sara
      Designer, Gamer, Macgrrl in an XP World
    2. Re:How does gov stop extra treatment? by Cimexus · · Score: 1

      Technically nothing really stops them - but the government will not pay an unlimited amount. There are schedules that dictate what a certain service should cost, and when such a service is deemed to be necessary. So a doctor that's ordering expensive, pointless tests will find that the government refuses to pay them. And if the patient themselves is also not liable (e.g. they didn't specifically ask for the tests etc.), then they just have to eat the cost. Which is a good way to discourage doctors doing useless tests.

  131. Astrology or astronomy? by Workaphobia · · Score: 2

    Without RTFA, was there any attempt to remind survey participants that astrology is the one with animal symbols, and astronomy is the one with black holes? If not, this isn't measuring acceptance of astrology, so much as measuring name recognition.

    --
    Evidently, the key to understanding recursion is to begin by understanding recursion. The rest is easy.
    1. Re:Astrology or astronomy? by quantaman · · Score: 2

      I'm tempted to agree. I'm not sure that they were explicitly confused but they may have been mostly ignorant, ie they rated astrology highly not because they confused it with astronomy, but because they associated with astronomy.

      I actually saw a similar thing with a fairly well educated co-worker. We had a discussion one day and I discovered that he believed in homeopathy, as it turned out this was just because he didn't know what homeopathy was. He thought it was just another form of naturopathy (which is better... though not much), he did some research after our discussion and realized homeopath was nonsense.

      The only time I hear of astrology is from skeptics making fun of astrologers, I'm not sure ordinary young people really know what astrology is.

      --
      I stole this Sig
  132. Re:One day of working for a paper would convince t by tinkerton · · Score: 1

    This works both ways. I've had some experience with intelligent people trying their best to convert me to homeopathy and to astrology - in vain - and in both cases there's a family of practices and a hierarchy. The top of the hierarchy has absolute disdain for those at the bottom. Newspapers are at the bottom. Any serious astrologist will regard the stuff in newspapers as bollocks. At the same time the serious astrologist will easily dismiss people who associate newspaper astrology with real astrology because clearly these are people who don't know what they're talking about.

      The 'serious' guys have their own strict procedures that gives it all a more scientific feel. It feels so much better if you start with actual calculations from the ephemerides. I've known a physicist who strongly believed in astrology.

    The serious homeopathy of course works with absurd dilutions prepared following strict procedures.
    The homeopaths attract many well educated medical practitioners who use complex anamnesis/diagnostics routines close to the procedures used in allopathy. There's a lot of mouth to mouth reputation building causing people to distinguish between the crackpots and the serious homeopaths. Again, and even more than with astrology, this is not just a playground for the intellectually challenged..

    There's one thing to take away from all this, and that's that once you allow yourself to be submersed in pseudosciences, it'll turn out to be a lot more convincing than you expected. I wouldn't trust too many people to be up to it. A lot less than the 42% in the article (100% - 58% of the 18-24 year old in this case). More like less than 10%.

    I've done it a few times. I'm really tough :)

  133. Astral seasons different than traditional seasons? by dave562 · · Score: 1

    I am not a believer in astrology, but is it so far fetched to consider that there might be "celestial" seasons that influence human behaviors in ways similar to the way terrestrial seasons (Spring, Winter, etc) influence plant growth, reproductive cycles of animals, and the like? Is it really so far fetched that a baby that is born in the depths of Winter and spends its first six months with shorter light cycles and colder temperatures might develop a different temperament than a baby born at the peak of Summer?

    A lot of what gets classified as astrology (horoscopes, etc.) are often times so vaguely written that they are nearly universally applicable. On the other hand, to make blanket statements along the lines of, "There is no way that the motions of the universe, the earth's position relative to the sun, etc." have no influence on human behavior is probably being short sighted.

    I often times think that people who get so focused on "scientific proof" are almost as crazy as religious fanatics who refuse to accept science and remain wedded to irrational beliefs in the face of otherwise irrefutable proof. There are some things that science cannot yet measure or account for.

    One day we might look back and realize that astrology is just as real as the Higgs Boson, Or not. Who knows?

  134. Re:Majority of young Americans would like Beta, if by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or Vcord-II.

  135. Re:Religion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    HEY! c'mon now, TempleOS' Aquired Brain Injury is nothing to make jokes about!

  136. systematicity by markhahn · · Score: 1

    People often confuse systematicity with science. Which means they don't really get the point of science, of course. But this also explains things like Kabala, Homeopoathy, betting systems, orthodox religion, some diets, as well as the astrology thing.

  137. Clichéd but what about the media? by theolein · · Score: 1

    I recently had the opportunity to compare modern American comics with Franco-Belgian comics( "Bandes Dessinées"), and one thing that struck me almost from the beginning was the way that the majority of American comics seemed to involve fantasy characters and worlds that had very little whatsoever to do with reality, especially with respect to the physical universe.

    I realise this doesn't necessarily mean anything, but it did certainly make me wonder.

  138. Period? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Majority of non-Americans think a period is a finite stretch of time, and the dot signifying the end of a sentence is a full stop.

  139. Well Played! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My favorite comment so far...

  140. Astrology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We don't know the specific questions, but the fact that nearly 25 percent of Americans with graduate degrees think astrology may be scientific suggests that the questions may not be well phrased. Perhaps the first question should have been "What's the difference between astrology and astronomy". Or perhaps they should asked specifically about horoscopes.

  141. Re:Majority of young Americans dont know clockwise by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

    Do the majority of young Americans think "alot" is a word?

    --
    Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
  142. That's ok.... by leereyno · · Score: 0

    A majority of Young American Adults also think the world is getting hotter and that money is something the government gives you.

    --
    Muslim community leaders warn of backlash from tomorrow morning's terrorist attack.
  143. Lots of Americans think circumcision is good thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So it's no surprise they think astrology is science.

  144. The majority of young American adults think climate science is a science.

  145. Theology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Even worse: The majority of people thinks that theology is a science and should be taught at universites.

  146. Re: Majority of young Americans dont know clockwis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "alot" is a word. Not the one he thinks though, it's a verb with similar meaning to allocate.

  147. Re:Majority of young Americans dont know clockwise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "might be asking alot!"

    Yeah, and you younguns don't know that there's no such word as "alot". Look it up in Webster's or OED, it isn't there. They (you) also don't know that looking up non-slang words on the Urban Dictionary or wictionary is brain-dead stupid.

    A lot. TWO WORDS. Grow the fuck up, kid.

  148. Have No Star Sign by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I refuse to have a star sign.

  149. Slashdot Headline Writers Need to Discover What an by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Irrational beliefs held by large populations will always be with us.

  150. Really? "Think" is the word we use here? by arctus · · Score: 1

    Majority of Young American Adults Think Astrology Is a Science

    Majority of Americans Think Angels are real

    Majority of Americans Think Evolution is a ploy by the Devil

    Majority of Americans Think the NSA is a benevolent organization

    Majority of Americans Don't Actually "Think"...

  151. Re:Majority of young Americans would like Beta, if by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My daughter came home one day and told her teacher had shown them a film from a strange black big box. I wondered what that was and after a while I found out that he had simply played a VHS cassette. Now that was funny.

  152. Mellow Out, This Is Funny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because the only thing we're seeing is that adults believe that astrology is astronomy, i.e. don't even know what astrology is called.

  153. Advice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think people just want daily advice on their lives that appears targeted to them individually. Astrology fulfills that niche as a "good enough" solution. Most people discredit astrology because "anyone reading it can take something out of it about themselves". This is precisely why it's both attractive and useful. Psychologists should try harder to fill this particular niche using modern methods. Maybe a daily personality-type advise column based on Meyers Briggs?

  154. It IS science by FreedomFirstThenPeac · · Score: 1

    Astrology IS science, and as such it is falsifiable. And every test has shown that it does not predict yesterday's news. So applying it in decision making is bad decision making.

    --
    "There is no god but allah" - well, they got it half right.
  155. A Majority of etc. believe in global warming by Naif+Mabat · · Score: 1

    A Majority of etc. believe in global warming, or at least did in the recent past. It's possible that as the GW fad passes the bulk of residual irrationality is oozing back to its more traditional locales like astrology.

  156. Is our children learning? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And Alaska and Hawaii are off the coast of Mexico

  157. The majority.... by IndieVoter · · Score: 1

    ...bought the 'Hope and Change' hype, and still have the bumper sticker. At least young American is consistent.

  158. Re: More Young Americans see Astrology a Science by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My name is Bruce Jonathan Fick, so now I'm anything but anonymous. As for coward, HA ! In your dreams. The only thing there is to fear is fear itself.
    Science is the scientific method itself. Period. It can be applied to virtualy anything appropriate as a way to discern the truth about a subject. It starts
    with the statement: I do not know to eliminate prejudices that bias the logical study of a topic. After naturalistic observations in which you assemble
    objects/qualities homogenous to include w/in a set or circle, you can then see where other objects interlap the primary set of.objects/qualities you're
    studying. Thus natural science is the logical study of a topic in which you observe, then use pure reasoning to induce or deduce further statements
    about your topic of study which have truth value once you establish a logic vocabulary. Natural science can't interfere with the natural motion of objects.
    But experimental science does routinely. Astronomy uses natural science to catalog celestial objects & phenomena. Astrology most certainly CAN be
    a natural science if you study it by the scientific method. But it's no ordinary science. Astrology falls w/in the realm of Psychology as an extension of it.
    Astrology's based on the theory of synchronicity. Ie as above so like below. " On Earth as it is in Heaven ". It studies by co-relations, not cause & effect.
    Carl Yung if memory serves was a Neo Freudian Psychologist who originated the theory of synchronicity postulating that people born during a certain
    month of the year demonstrated the personality characteristics owing to the month & season in which their birth occurred. Ie there's a 1 to 1 co-relation.
    here, the cause & effect part being left to an unknown which hasn't been weighed & measured. Astrology, Historicly is much deeper than that though.
    By associating 12 Constellations on the Celestial equator with Earth's horizon, you can measure this correlation by the hours on a clock, or months of the
    year, or even Ages of 2400 years ( for hrs in a day of celestial time ) of World History. The Cosmos we live in is as elaborate a clock timepiece as Big
    Ben is. No surprise the Earth hurtles through space displacing it at 24,000 miles an hour. Time is a quantum emergent phenomenon. Astrology is the
    study of a time pattern based on Earth time, Celestial time, and Lifetime as Dr. Mitchio Kaku, a fellow scientist, has narrated his 3 part Documentary on
    the Science channel. Astrology measures not only individuals from their destinies Divined at birth in their Horoscopes, through their lives by studying
    their progressed charts, all the way to their deaths. It forcasts the milestone events common to all people in their development. As each Zodiac Constellation
    represents a part of the human body, an individual will progress through 12 stages in their lives from infants to extreme advanced old age & anticipated
    rebirth as a reincarnated soul. ( Recommend anyone interested seeing the movie Cloud Atlas to understand my point here ) Astrology also represents
    a 12 stage evolution of human collectives, & their nations on the Earth. The USA is associated with the Constellation Gemini which itself is associated
    with communication & transportation as each Zodiac Constellation also has a planet said to " rule it ". Mercury is thus associated with Gemini. ( If you've
    ever seen the Mercury dimes minted from 1916-1945 you catch my drift. Obverse shows the Greek God with winged feet representing freedom of thought,
    freedom of expression. Reverse shows the Fasces symbolizing Fascism stuggling to dominate the World during the 2 World Wars fought during the 20th
    century ). Back in the 1960s there were many books written on this topic , including some rare books published by the London Astrological Society. Back
    then they called Astrology a " Psychic science " referring to it's parapsychological set of qualities. Astrologers cast the birth charts of humans & nations
    alike acc

  159. Re:And in other news... Complexity by bbsalem · · Score: 1

    The rules, the complexity, of any economic system is a way for businesses to export their risk onto their customers. It is the primary means by which people you pay for a service parasitize their hosts. Cell Phone service plans are a prime example. Not only does this lock in the prices set by the vendors but it also gets consumers to pay for their risk of doing business.

    Americans are really dumb about economics and politics. You will see these obvious arguments blaming government regulation for these problems, when these same people are loath to admit that business operators went to the government to write regulations to minimize risk, to pass the cost of it onto the consumer, and to create closed markets for businesses like ISPs, phone companies, and insurance companies. Even with all the heat and little light on The Affordable Care Act, most people argue as if it is anything but what it really is, a taxpayer subsidy for the insurance companies and indirectly the whole health care system. One hears these simplistic arguments about government vs. private enterprise as if the two are at war. Nothing can be further from the truth. Both major political parties are in bed with business; the political rhetoric parroted by most American partisans rings hallow. They just don't know what they are talking about, and that included science. American is an anti-intellectual and antisocial country. Most people came here to avoid some obligation they felt in their place of origin, to them freedom means selfishness and that ignorance is bliss, and it shows in the prevelance of pseudoscience.

    I am predicting that ACA is a failure and that the nightmare for conservatives of a single-payer nationalized health care system will result, the reason is that our system is too expensive and that in order to meet the needs of people here, the government will have to do something like expand Medicare and force doctors and clinics into some socialized plan. ACA is probably not going to meet the economics goal of minimizing risk for insurers. That will result in more and more pressure on them until the system of private insurance is basically dead. The government will have to step in as doctors and clinics go out of business and more and more people are unable to find health care.

  160. Youth and UFOs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It has also been said that a majority of young Americans also believe more in UFO's than they do in Social Security.

  161. The Business of Ignorance. by bbsalem · · Score: 1

    Just admit it, that if you work for a social media company, or do advertising and marketing, or even if you are in financial services, YOU are the source of the problem WRT ignorance about what is true or not, weather astrology or Creationism, or for that matter market economics is true. You can't be spreading the white lies that are normal for business and marketing, along with some black lies too, and expect people to have enough critical thinking skills and skepticism to see the truth in general terms, when your goal in life is distraction and propaganda. There is no material difference between public relations, propaganda and advertising, and what may be OK in an impression-driven trip to the supermarket has far more dire results in citizenship and debating public policy.

    Especially if your game is social media, you have a particular fault because all the flaws in human behavior become heightened in the frenzy created by ephemeral off-the-cuff buzz-driven knee-jerk response demanded by that medium. It is a sorry substitute for thinking, sound judgement and deliberation, all of which tske silence and time. So, in pursuit of a fast buck, not only is the generation that grew up with the influience of your wares perhaps less well-equipped to think rationally and to be informed, but through your marketing you are contributing to their disadvantage.

  162. Re:Majority of young Americans dont know clockwise by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

    Righty-Tighty, lefty-loosey - might be asking alot!

    I had to think for a few seconds there - you're talking about screw threads, aren't you?

    You've not had to deal with many "left-hand" threads, have you? A couple of encounters (and they're not that uncommon) and you'll be getting into the habit of checking every bolt to determine it's sense of turn. If you do encounter one in the wild, then you're likely to encounter more.

    I had a trainee trying to unscrew the pillar valve from a (full) cylinder of (extremely flammable) hydrogen once, before I realised just how dangerous "knowing the rule and applying it" could be. I'm more careful since then, but you've got to break that habit of rote learning as soon as possible.

    --
    Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  163. Re: Majority of young Americans dont know clockwis by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 1

    "alot" is a word. Not the one he thinks though, it's a verb with similar meaning to allocate.

    No, it isn't. The word you are thinking of is, "allot".

  164. Do any Astrology Skeptics Have Evidence? by Neuromatic · · Score: 1

    As a scientist with a pet interest in astrology (REAL astrology, involving precise dates and times for astronomical 'events', not two-sentence daily horoscopes), I find myself deeply disappointed by the preponderance of astrology skeptics here who seem to take it for granted that astrology is a baseless vocation devoid of any scientific merit. As probably one of the earliest human scientific activities (by 'scientific' here I mean repeated observations involving a limited set of changing variables and careful recording or tracking of outcomes), astrology seems to me to deserve serious attention. As an activity conducted before 'we knew what we know now', yet after we'd already developed our enormous pattern-recognizing cortex, astrology really seems to deserve a second look now by the scientific community, with all of our advanced analytical methods, and our means for controlling against variation among the population sample. I find myself shocked at how often people who claim to be "defending science" do not use evidence to back up their claims. I do claim to be a repository for such evidence. I can only vouch for the uncanny correspondence between my life events (since I began following my astrological self 15 years ago) and those predicted by the precise arrangement of astronomical bodies. If anyone happens to know of any scientifically valid research looking into the utility or accuracy of truly astrological claims, whether those results support or debunk the basis of astrology, please share!

  165. Actually the name astrology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Actually the name astrology refers to a science - the study of stars. UNFORTUNATELY, the pseudo science (or religion) usurped the name leaving the science to be renamed astronomy. Another problem was that those studying the science helped make their living by doing astrology as well.
    The big risk now is education. There are some pushing the teaching of these pseudo sciences in science courses on essentially an equal footing with the expectations that the students will be able to discern the difference given a few crude tools. That might work for the best 10% of the class, maybe even the best 50% but the rest are not likely to pick up on things. Heck! I bet more than a few here even still believe in the totally falsified dendro phrenology of mickie mann.

  166. http://seriouslyforreal.com/funny/a-very-accurate- by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This sounds like science to me, lol

  167. Anchoring by NewYork · · Score: 1

    I think these Young American Adults are Disillusioned/Desperate/Underemployed/Unemployed due to https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik...

  168. Good luck with Private school.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Most Expensive private school are filled mentally damaged kids dumped by their rich selfish disfunctional parents. Some of the best schools in the United States are public school.. Private schools, especially bording schools are just a cover for a glorified full time baby sitter.. If you are a parent, get off your butt and teach them the world.. The schools are only there to supplement your teaching. A screwed up kid can EASILY be traced to a more screwed up parent... not the teacher.. Every time.. Genetics are a common factor... And God has a sense of humor..

  169. Don't get me started on by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    what a majority of Americans do with the '

  170. But... Astrology WAS a "Science" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Like a thousand years + ago...

    We spend very little on public education in the USA. The quality of that education is obviously proportional to what we spend on it.

    At the same time, one must admit that our CULTURE here is part of the problem.

    The media does nothing to educate the public at all. Arguably, the media works hard to dis-educate the populace at every opportunity, immersing people in "entertainment" and emotional conflict, for fun and profits.

    This article is just another in a long series of surveys showing how our CULTURE here is a ongoing disaster of patriotism and narcissism masquerading as class-ism.

    Greed and superstition masquerading as religion, and fear are the undeniable primary US attributes exposed by these surveys.

    While those of us that do not hold such views laugh or nod our heads in disgust and dismay, and go on about our day feeling slightly better about ourselves, because WE aren't ONE OF THEM - we ignore the moral imperative that is literally SCREAMING OUT AT US ALL.

    WE MUST change this. If articles like this leave you feeling more uneasy than smug and superior - GOOD !

    YOU have a conscience and and awareness. Now you need to DO something about it. TALK to your friends about it, talk to your family about it. Talk to the people you respect about it. Ask them what we can do to change this, because it MUST change, or we'll all pay, and pay dearly in ways none of us ever imagined, in our wildest nightmares.

    Please...

  171. Where's the "-1: woo woo" mod when you need it? by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

    youngsters are much less likely to dismiss astrology out of hand

    An open mind is one thing. Having it so wide open that your brain falls out is quite another.

    since they are aware that there are other things affecting their world than just cause and effect chains.

    Huh? If something is having an effect on something then how can it not be a cause?

    As to your suggestion that these youngsters know an obscure and obsolete meaning of the word "science" and responded accordingly, I think that's pretty unlikely.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  172. Majority of Young American Adults Think Astrology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This news can only be a joke!
    If it is real, someone is playing the game "fool me I like"!
    If most of these people believe in a statistical system that proves calendars tax collection, used in companies end up conditioning the minds of people, I'd say that's quite possible!
    What a star 150 million kilometers away can determine in my life?
    Taxes and death are the only two immutable truths of our world, the rest is myth!

  173. Lumpy how'd "eating your words" taste? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ROTFLMAO @ "Chumpy" -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

    (You sure "talk a good game" -> http://games.slashdot.org/comm... but you can't even produce a MERE SCRIPT!, windbag...)

    You aren't even on the level of a "script kiddie", & full of HOT AIR!

    You certainly won't reply there in that 2nd link I posted either, as that would remove your downmods to my posts like this one you can't validly disprove or justify your downmod on -> http://games.slashdot.org/comm...

    Oh, I suspect that IS the case here (simply logging out of a registered account & trolling by ac is a common troll trick around here OR using alternate registered 'luser' accounts sockpuppets to do the job will also, & Lumpy is LOADED with those & trolling - which doesn't matter: He PROVES he's all talk, no action (or skills, OR brains, lol))

    (You're all TALK, & NO action "CHUMPY!)

    * :)

    (You know it, I know it, & so does anyone reading AND laughing their asses off @ you now... lol!)

    APK

    P.S.=> Answer the question in the subject-line Lumpy - since you had to "eat your wrods" in the 1st link above flavored with your FOOT IN YOUR MOUTH + the "bitter taste of SELF-defeat", lol...

    ... apk

  174. Lumpy how'd "eating your words" taste? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ROTFLMAO @ "Chumpy" -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

    (You sure "talk a good game" -> http://games.slashdot.org/comm... but you can't even produce a MERE SCRIPT!, windbag...)

    You aren't even on the level of a "script kiddie", & full of HOT AIR!

    You certainly won't reply there in that 2nd link I posted either, as that would remove your downmods to my posts like this one you can't validly disprove or justify your downmod on -> http://games.slashdot.org/comm...

    Oh, I suspect that IS the case here (simply logging out of a registered account & trolling by ac is a common troll trick around here OR using alternate registered 'luser' accounts sockpuppets to do the job will also, & Lumpy is LOADED with those & trolling - which doesn't matter: He PROVES he's all talk, no action (or skills, OR brains, lol))

    (You're all TALK, & NO action "CHUMPY!)

    * :)

    (You know it, I know it, & so does anyone reading AND laughing their asses off @ you now... lol!)

    APK

    P.S.=> Answer the question in the subject-line Lumpy - since you had to "eat your wrods" in the 1st link above flavored with your FOOT IN YOUR MOUTH + the "bitter taste of SELF-defeat", lol...

    ... apk

  175. Lumpy how'd "eating your words" taste? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ROTFLMAO @ "Chumpy" -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

    (You sure "talk a good game" -> http://games.slashdot.org/comm... but you can't even produce a MERE SCRIPT!, windbag...)

    You aren't even on the level of a "script kiddie", & full of HOT AIR!

    You certainly won't reply there in that 2nd link I posted either, as that would remove your downmods to my posts like this one you can't validly disprove or justify your downmod on -> http://games.slashdot.org/comm...

    Oh, I suspect that IS the case here (simply logging out of a registered account & trolling by ac is a common troll trick around here OR using alternate registered 'luser' accounts sockpuppets to do the job will also, & Lumpy is LOADED with those & trolling - which doesn't matter: He PROVES he's all talk, no action (or skills, OR brains, lol))

    (You're all TALK, & NO action "CHUMPY!)

    * :)

    (You know it, I know it, & so does anyone reading AND laughing their asses off @ you now... lol!)

    APK

    P.S.=> Answer the question in the subject-line Lumpy - since you had to "eat your wrods" in the 1st link above flavored with your FOOT IN YOUR MOUTH + the "bitter taste of SELF-defeat", lol...

    ... apk

  176. Lumpy how'd "eating your words" taste? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ROTFLMAO @ "Chumpy" -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

    (You sure "talk a good game" -> http://games.slashdot.org/comm... but you can't even produce a MERE SCRIPT!, windbag...)

    You aren't even on the level of a "script kiddie", & full of HOT AIR!

    You certainly won't reply there in that 2nd link I posted either, as that would remove your downmods to my posts like this one you can't validly disprove or justify your downmod on -> http://games.slashdot.org/comm...

    Oh, I suspect that IS the case here (simply logging out of a registered account & trolling by ac is a common troll trick around here OR using alternate registered 'luser' accounts sockpuppets to do the job will also, & Lumpy is LOADED with those & trolling - which doesn't matter: He PROVES he's all talk, no action (or skills, OR brains, lol))

    (You're all TALK, & NO action "CHUMPY!)

    * :)

    (You know it, I know it, & so does anyone reading AND laughing their asses off @ you now... lol!)

    APK

    P.S.=> Answer the question in the subject-line Lumpy - since you had to "eat your wrods" in the 1st link above flavored with your FOOT IN YOUR MOUTH + the "bitter taste of SELF-defeat", lol...

    ... apk

  177. Lumpy how'd "eating your words" taste? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since you mention eating: ROTFLMAO @ "Chumpy" -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

    (You sure "talk a good game" -> http://games.slashdot.org/comm... but you can't even produce a MERE SCRIPT!, windbag...)

    You aren't even on the level of a "script kiddie", & full of HOT AIR!

    You certainly won't reply there in that 2nd link I posted either, as that would remove your downmods to my posts like this one you can't validly disprove or justify your downmod on -> http://games.slashdot.org/comm...

    Oh, I suspect that IS the case here (simply logging out of a registered account & trolling by ac is a common troll trick around here OR using alternate registered 'luser' accounts sockpuppets to do the job will also, & Lumpy is LOADED with those & trolling - which doesn't matter: He PROVES he's all talk, no action (or skills, OR brains, lol))

    (You're all TALK, & NO action "CHUMPY!)

    * :)

    (You know it, I know it, & so does anyone reading AND laughing their asses off @ you now... lol!)

    APK

    P.S.=> Answer the question in the subject-line Lumpy - since you had to "eat your wrods" in the 1st link above flavored with your FOOT IN YOUR MOUTH + the "bitter taste of SELF-defeat", lol...

    ... apk

  178. Lumpy how'd "eating your words" taste? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ROTFLMAO @ "Chumpy" -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

    (You sure "talk a good game" -> http://games.slashdot.org/comm... but you can't even produce a MERE SCRIPT!, windbag...)

    You aren't even on the level of a "script kiddie", & full of HOT AIR!

    You certainly won't reply there in that 2nd link I posted either, as that would remove your downmods to my posts like this one you can't validly disprove or justify your downmod on -> http://games.slashdot.org/comm...

    Oh, I suspect that IS the case here (simply logging out of a registered account & trolling by ac is a common troll trick around here OR using alternate registered 'luser' accounts sockpuppets to do the job will also, & Lumpy is LOADED with those & trolling - which doesn't matter: He PROVES he's all talk, no action (or skills, OR brains, lol))

    (You're all TALK, & NO action "CHUMPY!)

    * :)

    (You know it, I know it, & so does anyone reading AND laughing their asses off @ you now... lol!)

    APK

    P.S.=> Answer the question in the subject-line Lumpy - since you had to "eat your wrods" in the 1st link above flavored with your FOOT IN YOUR MOUTH + the "bitter taste of SELF-defeat", lol...

    ... apk

  179. Lumpy how'd "eating your words" taste? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ROTFLMAO @ "Chumpy" -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

    (You sure "talk a good game" -> http://games.slashdot.org/comm... but you can't even produce a MERE SCRIPT!, windbag...)

    You aren't even on the level of a "script kiddie", & full of HOT AIR!

    You certainly won't reply there in that 2nd link I posted either, as that would remove your downmods to my posts like this one you can't validly disprove or justify your downmod on -> http://games.slashdot.org/comm...

    Oh, I suspect that IS the case here (simply logging out of a registered account & trolling by ac is a common troll trick around here OR using alternate registered 'luser' accounts sockpuppets to do the job will also, & Lumpy is LOADED with those & trolling - which doesn't matter: He PROVES he's all talk, no action (or skills, OR brains, lol))

    (You're all TALK, & NO action "CHUMPY!)

    * :)

    (You know it, I know it, & so does anyone reading AND laughing their asses off @ you now... lol!)

    APK

    P.S.=> Answer the question in the subject-line Lumpy - since you had to "eat your wrods" in the 1st link above flavored with your FOOT IN YOUR MOUTH + the "bitter taste of SELF-defeat", lol...

    ... apk

  180. if astrology is by gzuckier · · Score: 1

    if astrology is the theory that the positions of the starts at your birth affect your life, then shouldn't geology be the theory that the positions of the rocks at your birth affect your life, and biology the theory that the positions of the living things at your birth affect your life?

    --
    Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
  181. Be fair by gzuckier · · Score: 1

    "First Lady Nancy Reagan famously employed the services of an astrologer after the assassination attempt on her husband."
    and yet, the astrologer never told her that there were WMD in Iraq so we need to invade there, but not to worry it will be a smashing success, seed democracy in the Middle East, and leave us beloved of every Arab and/or Muslim on earth.
    She should have given the astrologer's phone number to Li'l Bush..

    --
    Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.