DaveOrion

Karma is a bitch huh??? I've also noticed that Lady Sage hasn't been around for awhile, just now saw a comment about her in another thread. I'm not up on all the TFP gossip & I'm surely out of the Loop, but does anyone know why she's gone??? Pan too it seems........

__________________
Syriana...have you ever tried liquid MDMA?....Liquid MDMA? No....Arash, when you wanna do this?.....After prayer...

MSD

She has irreconcilable differences with certain members and does not wish to coexist with those members.

Ustwo

If by karma you mean 'high privacy browser settings' and bitch you mean 'short lived cookies', you would be correct.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

wheelhomies

pls don't forget about those experiments.

__________________

DaveOrion

Yea, this thread really is dead jed, not only that but we seem to have lost a wonderfully talented member because of it. Thanks must go out to those 'certain members' for their ability to post with tact, respect, & consideration for another members position.

Please don't give me the 'thick skin' speech, we've all heard it a thousand times before.

__________________
Syriana...have you ever tried liquid MDMA?....Liquid MDMA? No....Arash, when you wanna do this?.....After prayer...

ubertuber

You're really making a ton of assumptions with this post.

I wouldn't put those out there if I wasn't dead certain I knew what I was talking about.

__________________
Cogito ergo spud -- I think, therefore I yam

Baraka_Guru

Now we've seen a gross misinterpretation of the idea of karma in an open thread about astrology categorized as paranoia.

It is entirely possible the thread is dead.


The only hope of salvaging anything is to read roachboy's last post and go for another approach.

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

ubertuber

I'd actually be interested in reading some of the studies ustwo mentioned.

*EDIT*

I found this blog post which recaps and summarizes one of the major studies done on astrology. The study was originally published in Nature. There's also a list of other studies done. I haven't yet found the original text of these articles, but I'm still digging.

__________________
Cogito ergo spud -- I think, therefore I yam

wheelhomies

hehe...i really didn't mean to "categorize" astrology as paranoia. this section is just not as active as most of the others, so i thought i'd add a little something to it.

i would like to discuss it more and from a different angle, but i want to see ustwo's experiments beforehand. i'm curious to see what specifically they addressed in astrology.

and i am truly sorry if the posts in this topic caused lady sage to leave.

__________________

777

I found this great site that does a birthchart for free:

http://www.0800-horoscope.com/birthchart.php

It's fun, I run birthdays through there for most of the people I know. So for, most people agree that it's accurate. Give it a try, and let us know how you like it.

__________________
"I don't know that I ever wanted greatness, on its own. It seems rather like wanting to be an engineer, rather than wanting to design something - or wanting to be a writer, rather than wanting to write. It should be a by-product, not a thing in itself. Otherwise, it's just an ego trip."

Roger Zelazny

Plan9

Werewolves, zombies, vamp... !

Whoa, what the fuck happened in THIS thread?

__________________
Whatever you can carry.

"You should not drink... and bake."

777

Dude, shut up. There's a thread in progress

__________________
"I don't know that I ever wanted greatness, on its own. It seems rather like wanting to be an engineer, rather than wanting to design something - or wanting to be a writer, rather than wanting to write. It should be a by-product, not a thing in itself. Otherwise, it's just an ego trip."

Roger Zelazny

Plan9

Don't make me sic my Taurus on your Pisces!

__________________
Whatever you can carry.

"You should not drink... and bake."

DaveOrion

I was simply going by this....

Since LadySage left when this thread was evolving, I did assume they were related. I may be wrong, but then again......

Yes Baraka, I know what the 'correct' interpretation of Karma is, but it is also used as a reference to 'what goes around comes around'. While that may not be the correct Buddhist interpretation, the meaning isn't lost on anyone.

__________________
Syriana...have you ever tried liquid MDMA?....Liquid MDMA? No....Arash, when you wanna do this?.....After prayer...

Baraka_Guru

Fair enough, Dave. But what about my advice for rescuing the thread?

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

DaveOrion

Hey, take it and run with it. Its just one thread in an ocean of threads, they go where they will.......

__________________
Syriana...have you ever tried liquid MDMA?....Liquid MDMA? No....Arash, when you wanna do this?.....After prayer...

MSD

It had nothing to do with this thread, but it's a private matter and I'm not going any further into it.

Ustwo

That was one of the studies I was talking about but I admit I haven't put any effort to repost after my little cookies problem ate my last one.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

pan6467

I am amazed at how a place that works for and claims to be "the evolution of humanity, sexuality and philosophy", can put this topic in Paranoia or have so many trying to debunk it and call those who practice it names.

I find it sad really to find so many small minded, individuals that are wanting to preach their views as being "well documented, well researched and they are far more knowledgeable than anyone else" in a forum that is supposed to be open minded, fun, educational and accepting of people's beliefs.

I can understand if this were politics where tempers run high (mature of the beast) or sports, where pride and devotion are the mainstays, but this isn't even "spirituality" this is a belief in an art form that people have practiced for 1000's of years. I also see that the "debunkers" "don't have the time to back up their "proof". That they believe in one thing and since in their small minds that is the "only truth" then someone else's truth must be wrong.

As Shakespeare (arguably) wrote: "there are more things in heaven and hell than are dreamt of in your philosophy."

Readings are what you make them, they can be very accurate or they can be drivel. In the end it is up to whomever has the reading to decide and get from it what they choose to.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

ubertuber

I'll say it again: evolution works through selection, not inclusion. We can discuss anything here, but that doesn't mean that we can't have honest conversations about the quality of the ideas. That was the beauty of the 9/11 thread.

In other words, you aren't helping your ideas get selected if the best defense you can mount is complaining about the other side and a few anecdotes. Surely astrology's supporters have produced more convincing arguments and evidence than have been presented in this thread?

And Pan, you know as well as I do that "the forum" didn't put this thread in Paranoia. The OP did.

__________________
Cogito ergo spud -- I think, therefore I yam

pan6467

"My ideas get selected" selected for what????? I didn't know my ideas were part of some selection process. What do I win if they are selected? If it's a cool trip or something I like I'll come up with some truly inspiring ideas that will get selected and I can win all kinds of neat things.

I don't know I'm not into astrology, never have been.... doesn't mean I don't think there isn't merit in it.

I shouldn't have to "defend" my beliefs to anyone. I don't ask others to, nor do I have the right to have others have to defend their religious beliefs, their philosophical beliefs, their personal beliefs, what right does anyone have to ask me to?

(This excludes politics and sports, which are just fun to argue but get nothing truly accomplished because the people who are truly playing the game and out on the field are the ones making the decisions... we just idly watch and make judgment calls after the fact.)

I honestly didn't know the OP put it here, I thought I read it had been moved from Philosophy... my mistake.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

ubertuber

Evolution is population change due to selective processes. Selection happens through competition.

If you are going to put your ideas here and claim that there is validity to them, then you shouldn't be surprised when you are asked to support them. At times, support may even come in the form of defense, if other people have supported ideas which exclude yours if they are correct.

The TFP is like the internet, and the internet is like the world. Some things are mutually exclusive and there is nothing wrong with trying to sort them out.

It really has nothing to do with your assumed right to advocate beliefs and ideas without anyone questioning them. That right doesn't exist here, or in most places.

I'm still looking for the full text to the Nature article. I've provided a source which lists other studies which refute astrology. It would be good form for someone who believes in astrology to step up to the plate and offer some similar material.

__________________
Cogito ergo spud -- I think, therefore I yam

Ustwo

Sorry your wife is upset, but its still not real.

You are right in that I don't want to take too much time in this, I did once and the post got screwed up and I'd rather not waste it again.

Part of the evolution in human thought is getting rid of the nonsense. Astrology falls under that umbrella. Its an old superstition which has been exploited and abused on a gullible public for centuries. This doesn't make it valid, it makes it a good scam.

But you know what, just for you pan I'll do this, but first, in the words of a 17th century former astrologer....


I really got a kick out of the last line....

Anyways .....

While I couldn't find the original nature article online and despite about 5 years of wanting to subscribe I've never bothered, I did get a pretty good synopsis.



http://psychicinvestigator.com/demo/AstroSkc.htm

TBH its not even worth study, so my cudos to Dr. Shawn Carlson for bothering to do this kind of thing with such rigor when he is far better known for examining real scientific questions.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

pan6467

First, my wife can take care of herself and has nothing to do with my posting... but you'll believe what you want, regardless of proof or truth. Hmmmm.....

See we differ on evolution and our visions.

Your vision sounds to me like wanting everyone to think like you, to act like you and to not look for answers and explore what is around them.

My vision is more simplistic, believe what you want and how you want as long as you do not push your beliefs on me. I won't debunk your beliefs, because I have my own and to be honest, I don't care what yours are, so why do you care what mine are?

Not to sound like an old Steve Martin routine but "Science is pure impuricism and by virtue of it's method it totally excludes metaphysics"

I think it may be safe for me to assume from previous posts in other threads and this that you wish to believe in only what you can see, hear, touch, and physically feel. Cool, that's you man and God bless ya. (Wait God doesn't fall into any of those categories for you, as I believe you are an admitted atheist... so bless yourself.)

I choose to believe in things until proven they don't exist. I believe in life on other planets, I believe in other dimensions, I believe that everyone has some form of psychic powers and we are very limited in the power of our minds because we have been taught for generations to be, I believe there is some truth to any old wife's tale, to the dragon's of yore, to the Gods of the ancient civilizations, in reincarnation, in fate/destiny and in magic.

I choose to believe in those because for me it makes life more enjoyable and less of a bore. If I can sit and daydream about life elsewhere or sit for an hour and meditate and believe my soul has been healed and I am in a better place psychologically and physically, then I have all the proof I need.

If I go to get my palm read or my star chart done or my tarot read and I like what I hear or see and I believe them and in some way I find satisfaction in it because it gives me a sense of security in how I am living my life, then, that's all I need.

On the other hand, if I choose to want to prove them wrong because I don't like what I see and I work to change things in a positive way... then whether they were fake or not it inspired me to change. And anything that inspires positive changes is a good thing.

And again, as long as one doesn't preach to know what belief is best for others.... I don't care what others want to believe.

It's like I tell Jehovah's Witnesses.... I believe in my reality, you believe in yours... our realities may touch but I promise I won't force mine on you so long as you don't force yours on mine.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

MSD

I think you've completely misinterpreted what he's saying. The whole point of thinking scientifically is to find answers by showing reproducible results.

Once again, I think you're looking at it too narrowly. I have no problem with believing in something that is not proven, but it's disingenuous to claim that something exists or is real when evidence cannot be provided in its support, and even more so when evidence can be provided against it.

The problem with this is that believing in something despite contrary evidence hinders rational thought and progress. There is only one reality; we all live in it and we're all subject to the same mechanisms and forces that act on everyone and everything equally. In the end, there is only one right answer, whether we find it or not. The only reason to try to avoid finding that answer is fear that it won't be what we want to hear.

pan6467

No, I know exactly what was being said. It'll show later in this reply.

Here goes:

Who's evidence? If you believe in God, you cannot see, taste, hear, or physically "feel" God. It cannot be proven that you do. Yet millions of people throughout history have believed in some form they have, and it gave them hope and helped their lives. There are those who say that because of their belief they were able to stop drugs, that their diseases went away, that they became better people. Not by some scientific equation, but by their belief in a God, that there is no physical, scientific evidence to support.

Admittedly, it has also been the means for governments and the power hungry to create wars. Try as one might, you will never stop a religion. People will always practice their religion, they just may do so underground.

Better example: I have a seriously bad day. I come home, have read books that talk about the metaphysical energies given off by crystals. They offer suggestions but recommend you experiment and find what combinations work for you.

My combination is thus: I grab my Kyanite necklace put it on, grab my Lepidolite and Malachite place them in my palms, kneel in my "altar" surrounded by differing Quartzes, raw emeralds, rubies, etc etc all placed in ways that I found through experimentation to be the most effective way for me. I clear my mind, being fully aware of what is around me, but I allow myself to draw the natural healing energies from the rocks. I believe the rocks have calmed me and helped me, my attitude has changed, my physical appearance has changed.

Have they truly helped me? The scientific community can say it is all psychological and that it worked solely because I wanted it to and I changed myself.

But, I had to work to find the right combination. I worked to find the right stones and place them in the right areas. Before I got the desired results I had to experiment and did so each time expecting "perfect results" only to find I needed to add or subtract or move something until I found the combination that attuned with my senses and psyche.

Now, to a scientist do I sound nuts? But yet, no matter how I got the desired results, I got them. Thousands of other people do also.

We like to explain away and dismiss that which we do not yet understand.

How do you explain away that which science cannot come up with answers for?

2 parachuters jump out of a plane 5,000 feet above the ground. Neither chute opens 1 plummets to his death, the other walks away with a coupld scratches maybe a broken limb or 2 but relatively ok. Science proves he should have been dead. Now what happens, when the man says he felt his God save him? How do you prove him wrong?

How do you explain away 10's of 1000's (probably far, far more than that) who yearly believe with their entire entity that they saw a ghost, talked to a dead relative, had a vision from God....etc.?

A personal experience: I have "dreams" of future events in my life. I can awaken write down my dream and then go back to sleep. 2 days later, my wife, someone I am close to have that event, that I CANNOT have control over, and I tell them I dreamed it happening and show them the slip of paper I wrote 2 days before. Say that event was being stuck exactly for an hour in traffic because of a traffic jam AND I wrote down the exact conversation we would have. (Now, yes, one could say I could control the conversation... perhaps.) I'm not the only one to have ever had this experience or who experiences it. But what's the scientific explanation?

Who's rational thought?

Man for thousands of years desired to fly but the "evidence" proved that he never would be able to. People, scientists in their day, tried hard as Hell to fly... only to fail. But, people never gave up on the idea, never allowed "science's" rational thought that stated man could never fly sway them, and eventually, we are able, within hours, to fly not only anywhere on Earth but to the moon and now it is a matter of finding the materials, money and so on to move onto Mars. 150 years ago the scientific community would have laughed at those ideas.

50 years ago the idea that we would be able to have wireless portable computers would have been laughable to the scientist. It would be near impossible. But by finding the right radio waves, working on a solution and the belief some had that it could be done, it has become reality.

If forces act on everyone equally then the second above parachuter would have died with his friend. Everyone would get cancer from smoking, everyone who gets Ebola would die. And so on.

And yet, there are those occurrences that have no logic or scientific evidence to base the result upon. BUT THEY UNDENIABLY EXIST. But because we do not have the technology, or we have lost that part contact with that part of our mind, soul, spirit, Earth connection, God connection.... whatever: it is a freak experience and just one of those scientific oddities that can be explained but "we just don't have time to explain it" or "you wouldn't understand".

My point is simple, our beliefs create the reality we control in our lives. I believe that both science and the paranormal, "occult", metaphysical... whatever you desire to call it, can and do coexist and draw strength and weakness from the other. That if you believe in just one and not the other you are doing yourself a disservice. I truly believe you cannot have one without the other in a growing society.

If you rely only on "God" explanations, you open society up to be controlled by "those God put in charge". If you rely solely on a "scientific" explanation of everything you take out "the human factor" and if it is something that cannot have the results duplicated and be controlled it must not exist or be some "fluke". Sole belief in just one or the other, takes away abstract thinking, individuality, that which makes us, us.

Scientifically all kisses set about the same chemical reaction in everyone... yet, situations, psyche and so on also affect one's reaction to that kiss. You may have scientific answers for half the reaction but the other half... there is no explanation for and delve all you want, study, try hard and come up with all the theories that make you happy... the non-chemical, purely emotional, situational, psyche reaction will stay unexplainable.

I also believe that by creating an atmosphere where people can talk about their experiences and be able to work through them without being mocked without being harassed, without being told they are freaks, nuts, etc.... we as a society gain because eventually, some of what is believed "scientifically impossible" may tomorrow be "scientific fact".

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

Cynthetiq

Really? so witches, warlocks, and werewolves, imps, fairies, (the rest have actual whole cultures that believe in the affects and realities of) dragons, elves, trolls, healing balms made of endangered species, Indian Fakirs, and Filipino Faith Healers, are all things that are fostered by beliefs.

So one day those will be scientific fact?

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

pan6467

Did I say they would be scientific fact one day? If I did please show me.
There is no way for me to answer this seriously, as this is more of a flame bait reply.

You totally ignore anything and everything I stated above, refused to address anything I have above and instead put forth flame material. Won't bite, Cyn.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

Baraka_Guru

He said some, not all.

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

Cynthetiq

It's not flame bait, it is a serious question,

you posted:
MAY tomorrow, implies that it may one day in fact be true. So there are whole cultures and worlds that believe trolls and elves exist, that they damage equipment and cause the inability for construction in some areas of Iceland. Roads and houses are built way from elf villages and towns. Iceland is one of the most literate countries in all of the western world, yet they believe in elves and trolls. It doesn't make them more real.

Filipino faith healers can cure disease and infirmed people. Millions believe that a faith healer can cut open human skin without so much as touching them. They can remove tumors and necrotic tissue and seal up the wound without leaving a trace. Millions believe it to be true. Does it make it more or less factual?

Indian Fakirs have practiced for centuries showing the ability to do many mystical things from fire walking to making fire appear from their fingertips. Millions of people see it and believe it. Yet there is a group of anti-fakir people showing just how non-mystical it is.

So again, you've got people countering the current evidence, and if you continue to believe what you believe, that is your prerogative. I feel the same way about certain things. But that doesn't give you a pass on someone stating they don't believe your beliefs and wish to present counter evidence.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

DaveOrion

Pan, I admire your tenacity but you're only preaching to the choir, much as I've done. Some people simply cant accept anything till a significant group of scientists tells them its alright to do so. That way they wont be stuck out on limb, labeled as 'different' or 'free thinking', they're safe inside their secure little wombs of normalcy. Its a matter of the group mentality, in which individuals don't exist, just the collective consciousness of current acceptable scientific reasoning. Its just safer that way for many. Science will advance into the future, and many of 'todays' scientific reasonings will be scoffed at, much as earlier reasonings are today. Its a predictable cyclical course, which many refuse to acknowledge.

__________________
Syriana...have you ever tried liquid MDMA?....Liquid MDMA? No....Arash, when you wanna do this?.....After prayer...

Cynthetiq

I dont' think you understand what that means, because it means that he's talking to those who AGREE with him. It is clearly not the case. Since a few of us disagree, I don't see how we're the choir.

So wait, because some of use have looked at the evidence, don't find it fits in our own viewpoints, they are labeled as groupthink individuals? Because they disagree with the people who do believe, it's "group mentality" and not individuals who make up their own mind after seeing or examining the evidence for themselves.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

ubertuber

If this is really what you think, then I understand where you are coming from better. I can see how you would be skeptical of the scientific process because this post evidences a complete lack of understanding of what science is, how it works, and why people might find it to be a good way of looking at the world.

In fact, 1 person (scientist or not) showing some evidence which is verifiable, repeatable, and more substantial than some anecdotes would be good for me. Following that, a reasonable, testable hypothesis about the mechanism of action would be convincing. "A group" of scientists isn't required. Just some clearly articulated ideas that are based on real, verifiable, repeatable observations.

It's not about normalcy or group think at all. In fact, one of my favorite things about science and scientists is the willingness to throw all of our previous models and assumptions out the window as soon as there is a better model or observation - no matter who comes up with those things. This happens ALL the time.

__________________
Cogito ergo spud -- I think, therefore I yam

DaveOrion

I could not disagree more, throughout history the scientists who are on the cutting edge or scoffed at, ridiculed, and defamed because their current hypothetical models, whatever they may be, don't fit the existing norm. It takes years for any of these to be accepted, no matter what the context, how the strong the arguments are or evidence in their favor. Once again, its safer to stay within current scientific thinking than go out on a limb. This propensity for humans to be accepted, stay within traditional models, be accepted by the group usually goes without saying, but I'm not surprised I hear an argument against it. What other argument do you have??? Nobody wants their clique to be threatened with a valid argument........

Quite right Cyn, my limited blue collar mentality is light years behind yours, please excuse my lapse in scientific as well as metaphoric thought.

__________________
Syriana...have you ever tried liquid MDMA?....Liquid MDMA? No....Arash, when you wanna do this?.....After prayer...

Ustwo

So what? Its not a debate on if theistic thinking reduces stress or makes you feel good. Its a debate if there is a god at all. I place religion right there with astrology, only with less good coming from astrology as a whole. Some religious charities and the like do help out a lot of people and I applaud them, even if I don't think the guy nailed to the cross had anything to do with it directly.

Again, so what does that have to do with truth? If you want to dance naked at the equinox be my guest, I'm sure its a great time, but when you try to convince someone else that its a fertility rite to the earth goddess I'll be the first to tell that person I don't think so.

As a stress relief, whatever floats your boat. I do the same by playing with my 3 year old and groping the wife a bit. Of course I'll tell you its psychological and if you think healing energy is coming out of the rocks, well to each their own, but again, if you decide to attempt to 'educate' others on the healing properties of rocks I will still be the first to say 'no they don't have healing powers, please, don't be silly.' People have been hurt by these wild and false claims, trusting they are true and avoiding medical help. Then you have the people 'cured' who, guess what, would have been cured anyways, but now they credit a piece of quartz. Yea for the evolution of human thought. Might as well start to sacrifice chickens. After all if sacrificing a chicken makes you feel better, who am I to say it didn't appease your angry god.


But we do understand it, its in your head. Its you who don't wish to look at evidence and rely on mysticism.

God musta had a hard on for the dead guy. Really science doesn't prove the other guy should be dead. Science said its most likely he would be dead. Its probability. In something like that where a body is traveling at terminal velocity, how you hit, what you hit and where you hit will determine if you live or die. Some come out with a broken bone or two, others are hospitalized for months, and most are dead. This is a bad example.

Near death can always be a 'religious' experience. When I was quite young my fathers friend was killed while they were together by lightning. This didn't make my father religious, in fact it made him atheist. His reasoning is that if a good man could just die like that out of the blue, there must not be a god. At the time, despite being an atheist myself, I didn't think it was good reasoning on his part, but its the shock that gets you thinking that way.

A better example would be 2 people in a 1000 degree fire for an hour, one lives one dies. There is a problem with this example, both will always die. God apparently can save someone from a fall but not fire.

I thought I saw ghosts as a child, I used to have very vivid almost religious dreams, I had a recurring nightmare that was almost identical to the alien abduction stories (only they weren't aliens). Should I assume there are ghosts, god talks to me in dreams, and that I was abducted by aliens? Should I expect to be taken seriously if I told everyone about it? Should I be offended if they said it was just a dream, and had an over active imagination? Well they were and I did.

Your senses are only so good, they try to interpret what they don't understand. You see a shadow and it looks like a man, because your brain tries to put that together to save time. If you had to identify every face/box/letter/location as if it were they first time you ever saw anything, it would take far to long to interpret and would be anti-survival. This has been shown scientifically. But just like a street magician can get people to think he levitates or makes their wallets disappear, so can the mind be fooled.

Impossible to verify without more examination. If true I'd recommend you apply for that 1 million dollar para normal prize. They will set up the experimental design with you.

War of the worlds was written in 1898, and man had been flying for quite a long time with gliders and balloons and it was sciences rational thought which allowed them to. Most of the detractors are in the age before the age of reason. These people believed in astrology btw You are comparing the type of 'science' that thought mice were spontaneously generated by laundry to real 'science' which only started to flourish on a large scale for the last 300 years. Powered flight wasn't about 'flight' we knew about flight, it was all around us, it was about making smaller engines that could power it, something that steam power just wasn't good enough for.

Attempting to compare astrology or power crystals to mans quest for flight is wrong on another level as well. To find the solution to powered flight, man didn't just give up and call it 'undoable' instead using a lot of science, combining multiple inventions, using wind tunnels and mathematics some bright bicycle makers came up with a solution.

Astrology doesn't do that. It doesn't compare, it doesn't work out which is 'good' and which is 'bad', it doesn't peer review or self regulate. You are told to 'find what works best for you' but you are left in a sea of claims with nothing to go by. When it is studied it falls on its face, it proves nothing, and shows nothing.

If they put you in a room blindfolded one with and one without crystals I guarantee you would not be able to tell which one had the crystals but you don't want to hear that.

Would these be the same type of scientists who predicted things like exponential growth in the powers of computing? While I doubt many would have been able to foresee the future, as precognition has never been proven either, using that to somehow justify that which has been never been able to show any valid proof is wrong.

I'm sorry but biology doesn't work that way. It would be far MORE remarkable if everyone died from Ebola than if some people survived. We are evolved to survive diseases as a species, some have the right locks to stop the bacterial and viral keys. The same applies to smoking or the para shooter, you are just wrong on how this works scientifically. Again everyone doesn't die from smoking, a disease, or even a para shoot jump gone bad but they do all die from an oven, or cyanide gas. One we have either evolved to survive or luck, the other will always be fatal.

But they do, seriously. There are questions in science we can't fully answer, but these are not those questions.

Society can do just fine without witch doctors thank you. I truly believe that with proper education you can have science without superstition and that is what this is all about.

Honesty I don't think you understand science. Scientifically all kisses do not set off the same chemical reaction in everyone, science does not state we are automatrons. And while I do not 'approve' of them, science can very easily figure out how to make people 'happy', and its a thriving subset of the drug industry.

I agree with this, but not for astrology or most of the new age 'stuff'. There comes a point where you say, we looked into it, we examined it, we tested the hypothesis and the theory did not hold up. This is why we live now in an age of progress after millenia of slow advances. This type of thinking is what allows us to be having this discussion via the internet, do heart transplants, fly into space, and dive into the abyss.

You confuse lack of vision with lack science not having answers. Yes I'm sure if you asked a majority of scientists in 1960 if some day there would be a computer in every home connected via a world wide network they would have said no. This was the day of flipping switches to program and computers as big as buildings. That is a vision issue, that is not being a very good 'futurist' but it has nothing to do with the science. The science kept going right along making computers smaller and faster until we got where we are today, using experimentation, inspiration, and the scientific method.

When the same methods are applied to something like astrology it falls flat, and yet we are suppose to play nice about it, allow people to 'think what they want' and spend money on it, and quite frankly be fooled by it.

No.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

Baraka_Guru

A well-articulated response, Ustwo. Good work, and an enjoyable read. So does this mean that you are willing to accept astrology at least on the level of its having a positive placebo effect on some?

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

Shauk

I find astrology to be an interesting topic.

I'm certainly not going to get as bent about it as some of the people here seem to be though.

I'm a Taurus, if that means anything. I gotta say, it's somewhat "on" when it comes to me. Not just because I want to believe it, I had no interest in it until someone else pointed out how much I acted like a "typical taurus"

I dunno, perhaps there is a scientific lapse in being able to prove this.

I kind of theorize about a collective conciousness, people have the same thoughts at the same time sometimes, or feel the same emotions sometimes.

I just wonder if science missed something in gauging the complexity of life from top to bottom, saying we're made up of all these molecules, constantly being affected by solar energies, gravitational pull, chemistry in the brain, radio transmissions and all sorts of invisible things passing through our bodies.

to stick strictly to astrology, you'd have to measure the impact of your molecular make-up at birth, given your location and the time, based on the planets, and, what a lot of people just dont consider, the infinite amount of stars, which all exist, therefore have some sort of effect on SOMETHING.

I think astrology is only able to "guess" because theres not enough scientific ability to actually measure the effect of a planet or a star billions of years away causing whatever sort of butterfly effect that, if you want to be purely scientific, supposedly caused us to evolve from the ocean through some weird big bang theory.

You can't even touch astrology without touching the origin of life, and honestly, I think things are far too complex to be an accident, but I think at the same time it's hard to believe in something like the christain "god".

I wouldn't doubt that we have an origin that is completely unthought of at this point.


overall though, I still reach the conclusion that it's all inconclusive, and theres no point trying to figure it out, I don't think we were even meant to figure it out, I don't know, to me, figuring it out solves nothing. Even if I did know where I came from, I really don't see how it would help me live my life.

I rule nothing out, but I adopt nothing either.

ubertuber

Again, I'm not sure what you're talking about. A cursory examination of scientific history yields scores of examples of the consensus or status quo being altered based on the work of a single individual. This used to take decades, now it takes years or less - the change is due to better communication among scientists. Frankly, the fact that in such a short time a theory can become dominant is astonishing, considering the number of scientists and field of knowledge out there.

Here are a few examples:

1. Ernest Rutherford disproved the "plum pudding" theory of atomic structure with a single experiment in 1910.
   
2. In 1986, Robert Bakker published The Dinosaur Heresies, which COMPLETELY changed the way that paleontologists viewed dinosaur metabolisms.
   
3. In 1952, Alfred Hershey and Martha Chase performed experiments which proved conclusively that DNA, rather than protein, is the encoding medium for genetic information. This was in direct contradiction of the status quo.
   
4. Isaac Newton's view of the nature of light has been nearly entirely discredited by the modern understanding of quantum mechanics, despite the fact that it was a decent enough predictive model to allow him to makes some pretty serious telescopes.
   
5. Gregor Mendel's famous experiments on heritability in pea plants demolished the (then current) theory of blended inheritance, replacing it with allele genetics - nearly in the form we understand it today.

That's off the top of my head with the reply box open. I could continue to provide examples of scientific consensus changing all day, if not all week.

I don't deny that it seems that certain parts of human nature don't accept change easily - Gallileo's experience with the church is a fabulous example. However, science itself is a system which is set up to accelerate the rise of good ideas and do away with inadequate ones. The flaw here isn't with scientists, it's with people who don't subscribe to science. To say otherwise is just ignorant of history.

__________________
Cogito ergo spud -- I think, therefore I yam

Ustwo

Yes, of course.

I think religion does as well.

There is a problem though, for a placebo to work the 'patient' must not know it is a placebo.

Placebos are used in controlled conditions, which someone who knows its a placebo monitoring. While placebos often work, they don't work on everyone, and that must be monitored by someone who can recommend 'real' treatment if its required.

This isn't done and I can't think of how it could be done for astrology. Perhaps a psychiatrist could 'prescribe' an astrology session for a patient, and then see how they do under it, but would the astrologer be in on the placebo?

Also deeper, is that belief in such ideas leaves you open to other pseduo-science and false claims. It embraces a lack of critical thinking on the part of the individual which I think is unhealthy. There are other ways to learn to deal with lifes problem beyond pretending its all in a star chart.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

Cynthetiq

why the dig? I'm stating it from what I understand the idiom to mean. I'm not disparaging you in any way. Just stating that I don't think you understand what you are saying since "if someone preaches to the choir, they talking about a subject or issue with which their audience already agrees."

If that isn't what you meant, then what did you mean?

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.