Is Astrology a science?

AV1611VET said:

What original oversight?

Click to expand...

The absence of the appropriate emoticon as pointed out to you here.
(Do you wanna start a 'who can be the rudest' war here, amongst this board's community?)

SelfSim said:

The absence of the appropriate emoticon as pointed out to you here.
(Do you wanna start a 'who can be the rudest' war here, amongst this board's community?)

Click to expand...

I see what you're doing!

Cute!

AV1611VET said:

I see what you're doing!

Cute!

Click to expand...

Never mind what you think I'm doing .. Where's your respect for the community?

SelfSim said:

Never mind what you think I'm doing .. Where's your respect for the community?

Click to expand...

Sorry, Sim, I have NO idea what you're talking about (assuming you're being serious now).

Show me the exact post where you think I should place a winking smiley; and if I didn't, I'll try to explain why I didn't to your satisfaction.

AV1611VET said:

Sorry, Sim, I have NO idea what you're talking about (assuming you're being serious now).

Show me the exact post where you think I should place a winking smiley; and if I didn't, I'll try to explain why I didn't to your satisfaction.

Click to expand...

Ok .. fair enough .. my misread .. Apologies.
The original interchange concerned a recommendation of adherence to a generally accepted forum behaviour .. twas not about anything you posted, specifically.

I'm not so sure the dihydrogen monoxide phrase hasn't partially taken hold in a more serious way, however. I see the term 'dihydrogen' being used in lots of media reports nowadays. Perhaps its because its easier to print and read than H2?

SelfSim said:

Ok .. fair enough .. my misread .. Apologies.

Click to expand...

Ain't no thang!

SelfSim said:

The original interchange concerned a recommendation of adherence to a generally accepted forum behaviour .. twas not about anything you posted, specifically.

Click to expand...

No biggie.

SelfSim said:

I'm not so sure the dihydrogen monoxide phrase hasn't partially taken hold in a more serious way, however. I see the term 'dihydrogen' being used in lots of media reports nowadays. Perhaps its because its easier to print and read than H2?

Click to expand...

It goes by a bunch of names, actually.

According to Wikipedia:

The parody has been used with other chemical names such as hydrogen hydroxide, dihydrogen oxide, hydroxic acid, and hydric acid.

Click to expand...

However you look at it, it's a classic!

bèlla said:

That’s a hot mess! I hope the moon is better.

Click to expand...

I really can't remember where the moon was in my chart.
I was born around 1.00 am in the morning and recall it was either Aries or Pisces depending on which side of 1.00 am I was born.

Contemplating such nonsensical ideas in my youth is probably best summarized as follows.

Ophiolite said:

Absolutely and irrevocably not.

• No experimental evidence supports the astrological claims.
  
• No plausible mechanism has been proposed to explain the purported relationships between astronomical patterns and human character.
  
• Astrological predictions are deliberately phrased in such a way to seem specific, yet to have a broad application.
  
• The field is replete with con artists (reprehensible) and entertainers (amusing for some).

All that said we should recognise the blending of astrology and astronomy at the birth of modern science. Alchemy and chemistry had a similar relationship.

Click to expand...

I would post my own response, but this post covers pretty much everything I could say, so I'll just quote it.

Funny phenomenon going on here... both the Christians and atheists don't like astrology, so they have to find something else to argue about, because we can't go around agreeing with each other.

Strathos said:

Funny phenomenon going on here... both the Christians and atheists don't like astrology, so they have to find something else to argue about, because we can't go around agreeing with each other.

Click to expand...

You'd think Christians would be more amenable to astrology, given Genesis 1:14...

Kylie said:

You'd think Christians would be more amenable to astrology, given Genesis 1:14...

Click to expand...

Maybe Christians know better?

Deuteronomy 18:9 When thou art come into the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee, thou shalt not learn to do after the abominations of those nations.
10 There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, or that useth divination, or an observer of times, or an enchanter, or a witch,
11 Or a charmer, or a consulter with familiar spirits, or a wizard, or a necromancer.
12 For all that do these things are an abomination unto the LORD: and because of these abominations the LORD thy God doth drive them out from before thee.

AV1611VET said:

Maybe Christians know better?....

Click to expand...

Know better than Genesis? I mean it flat out says the stars are for signs.

AV1611VET said:

Maybe Christians know better?

Deuteronomy 18:9 When thou art come into the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee, thou shalt not learn to do after the abominations of those nations.
10 There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, or that useth divination, or an observer of times, or an enchanter, or a witch,
11 Or a charmer, or a consulter with familiar spirits, or a wizard, or a necromancer.
12 For all that do these things are an abomination unto the LORD: and because of these abominations the LORD thy God doth drive them out from before thee.

Click to expand...

God clearly stated that he put them there to be used as signs. Why would he then tell us NOT to do so?

Kylie said:

God clearly stated that he put them there to be used as signs. Why would he then tell us NOT to do so?

Click to expand...

I think He was talking about astronomy there, not astrology. As in, using stars for marking and tracking calendar dates and such, not using them to try to predict that you were going to win the lottery or whatever.

durangodawood said:

Know better than Genesis? I mean it flat out says the stars are for signs.

Click to expand...

Kylie said:

God clearly stated that he put them there to be used as signs. Why would he then tell us NOT to do so?

Click to expand...

Signs = Constellations

They are pictographs of God's plan of salvation; and Israel's future, written in advanced.

AV1611VET said:

Signs = Constellations

They are pictographs of God's plan of salvation; and Israel's future, written in advanced.

Click to expand...

Interesting. Do you have an example of one of these pictographs? Is it like Pisces = Jesus, symbolically?

Landon Caeli said:

I know enough about it to know I'm a Gemini. Other than that, it's just a pseudoscience.

Click to expand...

Well that explains it. I'm a Gemini, too. And Geminis don't believe in astrology.

AV1611VET said:

Signs = Constellations

They are pictographs of God's plan of salvation; and Israel's future, written in advanced.

Click to expand...

Another example of the IAU's (International Astronomical Union) pure evilness.
Not only have they demoted Pluto but in 1930 they standardized on the number of constellations and their boundaries.
As a result many of the old constellations simply disappeared.

Sorry to disappoint you it's the IAU which defines the constellations not God.

Phred said:

This is simple enough. We all know biology and chemistry and geology are fields of scientific endeavor. But what about Astrology? Do you consider that Astrology is a science?

Click to expand...

Nope.