BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: *daylia*
Date: 01 Mar 06 - 08:45 PM

A philosophy tutor of mine once said that the views of anyone who has not studied the subject they are discussing can be pretty safely discounted as of no value.

Autolycos's law of astrological ignorance states that anyone who is a fierce adverse critic of astrology is certain never to have made any kind of serious study of it.


Exactly. And that's why I'm taking Clinton's last comment with a big grain of salt. Anyone who has seriously studied astrology for even a short period of time knows -- not believes, but knows (there's a mighty important difference between those two words!) -- the valuable truths and insights it has to offer.

And yes, I do know all about wordiness and Gemini Rising, Ivor. Gives a bit of the "jack-of-all-trades" syndrome too, at least in my case.

daylia

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 01 Mar 06 - 08:51 PM

That's only if you think there has to BE a burden of proof in the first place, TIA...I don't necessarily see that there does.

There are many wonderful things in life which cannot be proven and never will be, but can only be experienced. In saying that, however, I am neither defending nor attacking astrology. I don't give a dang about astrology one way or another.

The concept of "burden of proof" is one most beloved by sceptics when they can trot it out as an objection to things that can't be proven anyway (or disproven), but which they don't believe in or care for (for their own emotional reasons). It's like a suit of armour. It appears very strong. A suit of armour, however, is of no useful application in a jello wrestling contest.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: *daylia*
Date: 01 Mar 06 - 09:16 PM

Actually in real life, the onus of proof is always on the one who needs or wants or makes the demand for "proof".

You really want "proof", TIA? Do what I do. GEt off your butt, get out there and find it. Don't trust what others say, no matter how lettered or respectable or whatever. Go find it for yourself.

And if you can't be bothered going to all that effort, well then it's really not all that important to you, is it? And that's just fine too, as long as you don't bother people who have made that effort with "extraordinary demands".

I gladly share knowledge and experience gleaned through a lifetime of study and effort and experience with those who are honestly interested. By the same token, I'm certainly never obliged to relieve anyone else of their own ignorance.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: Donuel
Date: 01 Mar 06 - 10:00 PM

Astrology is a cottage industry that poor people can play with a minimum of education. Goof for them if it improves their situation.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 01 Mar 06 - 10:03 PM

So is growing pot plants. ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: *daylia*
Date: 01 Mar 06 - 10:13 PM

Donuel, the most knowledgable, powerful and wealthy have always indulged themselves in the very best of all things; including, quite regularly, the very best of astrological information and counsel.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 01 Mar 06 - 10:15 PM

No doubt about that.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 01 Mar 06 - 11:12 PM

I'm astounded how strongly otherwise intelligent seeming people can cling to their stupidstitions....

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: autolycus
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 06:17 AM

It was once thought absolutely stupid for anyone to say that the earth moves round the sun.

"Look sonny,"they'd say,"In the morning, the sun's THERE "(pointing one way)."In the evening, it's there" pointing in the opposite direction)"OBVIOUSLY the sun goes round the earth."

Clinton "I've studied it enough to know it's a lot of bullshit."
As the 'tec says in "Farewell,My Lovely" ("Murder My Sweet" in the US)(1944, screenplay John Saxton),"That's a very interesting comment, but it leaves me rather in the dark." Would care to , I think you'd say 'Put up', I'd rather say, offer expanded information about your study of astrology?

Ivor

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: *daylia*
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 06:54 AM

Ah Ivor -- you're back. Good! I've been pondering your comment -

Real astrologers, incidentally, don't predict in the ways you seem to be demanding. Prediction is not the heart of the subject. Nor is planetary influence. The weltanschauung of astrology is somewhat different from standard western science.

- and wondering, would you expand on this a little please? If not prediction or the influence of the stars and planets, what do you see as the heart of the subject of astrology?

(PS I see that transiting Mars entered my 1st House yesterday - Aries energy firing up the ole Gemini Rising. Hmmm.   No wonder I'm still wrestling with the mood for wrangling. Bring it on I say! ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: kendall
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 07:25 AM

"Never trash another's religion, it's no sillier than your own." Same goes for any belief that can't be proven.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 07:57 AM

*daylia* says:

"GEt off your butt, get out there and find it"

See my earler post regarding annual (failed) testing. Spend very little time on my butt. As a working scientist, spend a whole lot of time "out there finding it".

*daylia* also says:

"Don't trust what others say"

*******Exactly!********

Trust me, I have no "emotional armour". I just made a decision years ago to apply the same standards of judgement in all phases of my life. If someone says they can predict a lot about me just by knowing my exact time and place of birth, I will apply the same standard of judgement as I would if someone told me I could safely step off the roof holding this here carpet 'cause it can fly. And *I* am not going to step off the roof to prove that it *doesn't* fly.

I will revise:

For me, the burden of proof rests with the claimant.
For me, extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

As a purely hypothetical, if I were to PM a volunteer my exact (to the minute) time and date of birth, as well as the latitude and longitude (to the ninth decimal place in degrees) of my birth, could this volunteer PM back any information about me that I have not already revealed in a prior posting? (Not actually posing this challenge, nor "baiting a trap", just truly curious whether anyone thinks astrology could pass this test).

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: *daylia*
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 08:01 AM

kendall, "proof" is plentiful, and very easy to come by. The only ones who think otherwise are those who demand that someone else provide the "proof" for them, or who'd rather wait all safe and snug and sound, for the Blessings and Approval of the Great God Science before they investigate it for themselves.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 08:02 AM

OOPS. That was me at 7:57. Sorry.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 08:08 AM

Science is a method.

It is (subconciously or unknowingly) used even by its detractors when a truly life and death decision is made.

No one sets foot on a flying machine that has not been proven (in the scientific sense) to actually fly.

I am not denigrating anyone's personal experience, nor claiming that science can know everything. But I am comfortable with being surrounded by a vast array of phenomena that are as-yet unexplained, and am willing to wait for explanations that are true for all observers.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 09:03 AM

The fact that other people believe in things you do not believe in (and they virtually all do...) should not be the cause of offense or confrontation, it should not demand that one rise in opposition or contradiction, but rather stimulate one's curiosity. Wouldn't that be a more useful reaction than continually attacking and deriding other people's beliefs just to prove that you are smarter, wiser, more realistic or better informed than they are? What if you are? Does that mean you get a special prize or something? Who really cares? (Remember, EVERYONE thinks that what they believe makes sense....and it does, to them. That will never change. You can't change it, and it's not your business to browbeat everyone else in the world into agreeing with you about everything. It will not win you any awards at the conclusion of your limited existence here nor will it succeed in making you a better person than those you have disagreed with.)

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: *daylia*
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 09:27 AM

WEll, studying astrology is not a life or death matter, TIA. It's more of a curiousity; an area of study that many people find revealing, fascinating, helpful, insightful -- but it's certainly no threat to anyone, or necessary for survival.

As a purely hypothetical, if I were to PM a volunteer my exact (to the minute) time and date of birth, as well as the latitude and longitude (to the ninth decimal place in degrees) of my birth, could this volunteer PM back any information about me that I have not already revealed in a prior posting? (Not actually posing this challenge, nor "baiting a trap", just truly curious whether anyone thinks astrology could pass this test).

Natal charts provide detailed information about every aspect of life, but I have no idea how much info you've already posted about yourself on this site. So I'm not sure such a "test" would be worth the effort.

Suggestion: go to the site I linked to (Astrodienst), type in your birth time and place, and go over the personal chart, analysis and interpretations for yourself. THat should take you about 15-20 minutes, and you'll then have an answer to your own question (or at least, a very good start towards finding that answer)

Other people can't possibly know you or your personal life circumstances half as well as you do yourself. So why give undue power and authority to other people's perceptions/opinions about you?

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 09:31 AM

Why is it that most people know their birth time that accurately? The time of my birth has remained a bit uncertain, being only known in an approximate way. (could have been either before or after midnight, and no one knows for sure)

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: *daylia*
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 10:06 AM

LH have you checked with your mother?   Having been quite present and very involved at the time, I do remember my own kid's exact birthtimes very well (I made it a point to look at the clock!)

My own mother remembered mine as well, although not all my siblings are as fortunate. Natal charts are often drawn up without the exact birth time (I think 12 noon is most often used as a last resort). Such reports still provide information that's useful in a general sense, but accuracy is definitely compromised without the exact time of birth.

Also, I'm still thinking about Bill's question about using the moment of conception rather than the moment of birth (first breath) to calculate a natal chart. First, it seems to me that until the first breath is inhaled and exhaled, the baby has yet to "make it's personal mark" on the universe (ie interact with the physical universe as a viable, independant and unique human being.

And second, even if the exact time of conception could be determined (not too likely outside a laboratory), how would it work for twins, then? Would the moment of conception be used, or the moment the zygote divided into two (in the case of identical twins), or possible two separate moments of conception (as in the case of fraternal twins)?

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: kendall
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 10:17 AM

No amount of belief can create a fact.

No one can, with certainty, say that astrology is either true or false.
Since it can't be proven either way, all we have is opinion, and my opinion is as good as yours. My opinion is; I don't know.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: Purple Foxx
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 10:17 AM

Just submitted my details at astrodienst who assure me my town of birth does not exist.Ah well

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: *daylia*
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 10:23 AM

LOL! That's very astute of you, kendall. Much wiser than airing blind, unsubstantiated opinions, comfortable long-held prejudices, or other people's second-hand anecdotes as "proof".

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: *daylia*
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 10:29 AM

Purple Foxx, the town may be so small it's not listed at that site. If you do honestly want the info, you could calculate and enter the latitude/longitude of your birthplace instead. Or just use a neighbouring city/town, the closest one possible, and know that the results will be slightly less accurate.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: Purple Foxx
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 11:13 AM

Took your advice Daylia.
Some assertions broadly correct.
Some assertions completely wrong (both women currently in my home highly entertained to hear of my "Highly religious nature" for some insight into why this might be check out my postings to the ongoing thread on belief in god.)
All assertions (from Astrodienst)were couched in very elaborate conditioning clauses.
B.T.W. Would like to clarify that neither this nor any other posting from me is intended as an attack on you personally
I'm not really a grumpy old git I just write like one.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: *daylia*
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 11:14 AM

Man am I feeling nitpickly today!   :-) But I just wanted to ask TIA why she thinks the tenets of astrology are so "extraordinary" that they require "extraordinary proof". Is it "extraordinary" only because it cannot be explained, proven or disproven via scientific methods of
investigation (yet)?

From a historical perspective, it is not astrology that's "extraordinary", but modern science and technology!

Astrology has been around and evolving for thousands and thousands of years. To the best of my knowledge, every culture in history on this planet developed some form of astrology. It is hardly "extraordinary" in my view -- rather, astrology is a very common, everyday, well known, ever evolving and extensively practiced area of study, research and discovery.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: *daylia*
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 11:22 AM

No attack percieved, PF! Glad you took the time to check it out for yourself. Did you use the latitude/longitude, or a neighbouring city?

I know what you mean by the "highly religious nature" bit though -- that came up in my twin's chart too, and it's not very accurate. Yet, anyway. Time will tell. Not many under-25's are "highly religious" these days.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: Purple Foxx
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 11:48 AM

Used neighbouring city (Only 20 miles difference.)
I'll be 44 next month!

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: *daylia*
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 12:00 PM

All assertions (from Astrodienst)were couched in very elaborate conditioning clauses.

Sorry bout all these posts, but I just reread your post and noticed this, Purple Foxx. I'd like to point out that human beings are very complex. Individual reactions/responses, even to identical conditions/stimuli (ie Mars conjunct the Sun in the 1st House, to use an astrological example), are as varied as human nature and the circumstances of life itself.

So for example, while Mars conjunct the Sun in the 1st House always implies an abundance of energy and passion, a fiery personality and a strong will, people will express these qualities in highly individual ways. One might become a star athlete, another the passionate outgoing "Don Juan" type, and yet another the most determined, flamboyant, accomplished and influential Buddhist monk imaginable.

Computers are wonderful as time-savers, but they only "see" as progammed. A computer does not take into account subtle nuance, and it cannot "read between the lines". It is not a psychologist or a counsellor. And that's why, for the sake of being as useful as possible to as many people as possible, the computer at Astrodienst is programmed to "couch it's assertions in very elaborate conditioning clauses". Humans are very elaborate creatures, the products of ongoing and extremely complex conditioning and circumstance.

Even so, I find the analyses and interpretations at Astrodienst very helpful and accurate, most days. But if I wanted the very best analysis of my natal chart possible (and I could afford it!) I'd take it to the very best HUMAN astrologer I could find.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: *daylia*
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 12:07 PM

WEll, a twenty-mile difference would put your Ascendant (and therefore all your house cusps) a couple degrees or so off, I think. So some of the interpretations are likely also a little "off". I'm no expert though -- Ivor probably knows more about this than I do.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 12:13 PM

"every culture in history on this planet developed some form of astrology"

Every culture THOUGHT the world was FLAT and at the center of the univers too... Every culture THOUGHT they were the only ones too...

Every culture treated women/children as property at some point.... Should we go back to that?

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: GUEST,*daylia*
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 12:19 PM

Every culture developed certain means and methods for making music, for acquiring, cooking and sharing food too. Should we give those up as well?

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: Bill D
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 01:00 PM

"... until the first breath is inhaled and exhaled,..."

Isn't that just an off-the-cuff guess? It seems to me that answers like that are precisely how the entire 'theology' of belief systems, religious OR astrological, are developed. Someone confronts a puzzle in the schema and chews on it and comes up with a plausible, poetic, but non-testable reply.....and if they have any influence, or bother to weave it into the rest of the concepts cleverly enough, it eventually gains nodding credence by others.

The history of mankind is **FULL** of elaborate, competing systems for explaining and predicting how life works and the rules and formulas for dealing with it. Some of them directly contradict many of the others....some are just 'awkward' to correlate...(like competing versions of Christianity).

   When I hear that astrology is thousands of years old, and that I should not presume to judge anything that I "have not personally studied in detail", I shake my head in frustration at the presumption that I cannot see basic, fundamental flaws in those admonishments. That is, even **IF** astrology happened to BE accurate, it cannot be supported using the notion that "many clever people for years have worked it out and agree on the basics". Like Tarot, Ouija boards, Crystal Balls and various religions....you just believe and accept because you feel like it.
   If I began preaching and teaching that Irish Elves living in secret underground passages really controlled most of our lives, and got a BUNCH of followers and wrote some sacred texts with elaborate detail, based on personal visits from the Supreme Elf....you would use exactly the same arguments to explain why you shouldn't believe me that I employ to doubt and question other belief systems!

Explaining why you think certain metaphysical concepts are 'valid' to others implicitly suggests that others ought to believe them also. There's no way around it....if you go beyond saying it is 'just fun and an interesting game', you are telling me that I am either stubborn, lacking in understanding, brainwashed, or locked into some purely arbitrary competing notion of how things work.

In fact, I have studied the basics of "how stuff works, and how you can tell IF you are using the right methods" for almost 50 years...and under very close scrutiny by some pretty high-powered experts for about 12-14 of those years.
   That is why I almost NEVER say "you are 'wrong' in your conclusions", but merely say "you have claimed more than you can defend reasonably".
   I SEE why the history of the race is full of 'beliefs'...it is in our nature to want answers, and my attitude gives fewer 'secure' answers. It is in many ways easier to just pick a comfortable set of premises and navigate in a smaller pond with a clear formula, rather than be told "we can't really answer that kind of question, and maybe will never be able to!"

....*shrug*...it just doesn't bother me to 'not know' a lot of stuff.....there's SO very much that can be learned that I can't be sidetracked into a lot of areas that require 'belief' before 'proof'.......and I'm sorry to report that 'proof' is a hard, technical concept that is pretty inflexible, and is NOT some arbitrary set of guidelines that applies differently when someone doesn't like challenges to their favorite notions. It is so very important to be totally aware of the difference between 'valid' and 'true' and the implications of claims about either.


ah, well....there I go again...*smile*...............I suppose I did this once again mostly to help myself clarify my own position....in a forum like this, most will skim over it and either ignore or pick out some line to object to.

It ain't easy, folks, to wrestle with 5-6 lines of thought at once...and issues like this HAVE that many to consider!

no easy way to stop, either............so.................

∞

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: M.Ted
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 01:19 PM

I think of astrology as kind of a self-help version of stone soup.

Most everyone knows this story, in which someone, a person or group of people is/are seeking food and the person or people they are seeking food from endeavor to hid it. By pretending to make soup from a stone, the stranger or strangers manage to get the necessary ingredients for a feast that benefits everyone.

The astrologer(or, nowdays, the astrological program) takes birth information and creates a personal map of celestial bodies--a dynamic maps that reflects influences and effects--and then the subject correlates their life and experiences with the overarching chart to fill in the picture.

It can make it possible for a person to get a bit of distance from the elements in their life, and to get some insight into what's happening and where it's going.

You may say, who needs that phony construct stuff, when they can go into therapy?

The deal is that people, being what they are, often will keep things from their therapists for years--whereas they will spill their guts to someone named "Karma", who has a silk scarf wrapped around her head, at the drop of a hat.










There is an old idea that you can predict about 50% of what will happen based on what you know about what is going on--astrology is useful, at least for certain people, in organizing and assessing the 50% that we can figure out.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 01:34 PM

"Should we give those up as well?"

No... because those have been shown to work...   Unlike Divination, Dowsing, Sailing Off The Edge Of The World.... all of which fail any decent double-blind test at a rate that consigns them to the realm of random chance

You wanna throw dice to decide your action, go right ahead... Don't try to tell me that "The Force" is controlling those dice.... Cause I've flown from one side of this galaxy to the other, and I've seen a lot of strange stuff, but I've never seen anything make me believe in one All Powerful Force, controlling every thing... There's no mystical energy field controls MY destiny... It's all a lot of simple tricks and nonsense....

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: Bill D
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 01:48 PM

Yep, M.Ted....you said that well. That IS one of the few explanations/justifications I can see that make sense. If that were all that were claimed, I'd not fret....too much ;>)

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: *daylia*
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 02:15 PM

Isn't that just an off-the-cuff guess?

Hmm=. It's more of a suggestion, Bill. And it's quite testable.

A baby's first breath is the first time a viable (ie living and capable of sustaining that life independantly) and unique human being personally exchanges very physical, observable and testable elements (ie air) with the physical universe.

The proverbial "Breath of Life" is (obviously) just that, in other words. Unless you can think of a time prior to the first breath where a human being directly exchanges (testable) physical matter with the (testable) physical universe. I haven't, as yet!

So, really it's no wonder that traditionally, physical human life is said to begin with the first breath (and not, say, after the cutting of the umbilical cord or at the moment of conception as you suggested). Guess I'll find something else to wonder about!

That is, even **IF** astrology happened to BE accurate, it cannot be supported using the notion that "many clever people for years have worked it out and agree on the basics". Like Tarot, Ouija boards, Crystal Balls and various religions....you just believe and accept because you feel like it.

I don't "believe" a thing about astrology, Bill. I know (not believe, but know) what I do to date through direct first hand personal observation and experience. There's a big difference. Some people use astrology, Tarot, Ouija boards, hypnosis, meditation, prayer etc because --- guess what!! --- they've found these things really do work for them and they enjoy it. I see no problem with this. What does it matter if science can not or will not explain these things? Notta --- except to a scientist on a bad hair day, I suppose.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 02:22 PM

"they've found these things really do work for them"

No... they've deluded themselves into THINKING that they work.... Cause all that fullblop fails all the double blind tests.... It only works as often as random chance allowes it to work... Science HAS explained it... The problem is you refuse to see the explination....

again... refusal/inability to see something despite evidence is the 'classic' definition of deluded....

From dictionary.com

de·lu·sion Pronunciation Key (d-lzhn)
n.

   1.
         1. The act or process of deluding.
         2. The state of being deluded.
   2. A false belief or opinion: labored under the delusion that success was at hand.
   3. Psychiatry. A false belief strongly held in spite of invalidating evidence, especially as a symptom of mental illness: delusions of persecution.

Note #3....

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: *daylia*
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 02:23 PM

There's no mystical energy field controls MY destiny.

Don't think so? Look in the mirror, Clinton    :-D

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 02:26 PM

Just did.... no mystical energy field... just light reflecting off a couple of different surfaces before reaching my optic nerve....

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: bobad
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 03:31 PM

Just some random musing on the first moment of life.

The whole concept of 'life' is simply a human construct to distinguish one state from another (death).

That a baby doesn't have life until it's first breath because it hasn't exchanged physical matter with the physical universe is not really true. In the womb the baby is sustained with physical matter from it's mother who is of the physical universe.

Life can be considered as a continuum in that every cell in the living body is living. A new entity is created when two living cells fuse to form a new living cell which in turn......ad infinitum. I suppose if one wants to establish the exact moment of the creation of the new entity it would have to be at the moment of cellular fusion and the exchange of genetic material.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: *daylia*
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 03:56 PM

That's true, bobad. A baby is very much alive before it is born. Hmm.

Perhaps the first breath was said to mark the beginning of life for a much simpler reason. Childbirth was a much riskier experience for both mother and baby, before recent times. After a baby is born, until it breathes on it's own it's life remains uncertain. And unless it breathes, it dies. So the first breath proves that the baby is indeed viable.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 05:01 PM

Well, of course I've checked with my MOTHER about my time of birth, daylia, for flip's sake! Who else would I have gotten that information from? Nobody else has a clue about it, I can assure you, because she was the only one present in the room at the time, and for awhile afterward.

This is complicated somewhat by the fact that I have never known my mother to tell any story about anything without significant and quite exaggerated distortion of the facts... (It's not that she deliberately lies, she just has a tendency to unconsciously embellish things, which makes for a better story. If she says that 500 people died in a train wreck that destroyed 50 rail cars, you will presently find out it was closer to 15 people and 5 rail cars.)

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: M.Ted
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 05:12 PM

For those with great faith in the acuity of science, a bit of food for thought here Parapyschology research more scientific than hard science research--

It is an article about a study done by parapsychologist Rupert Sheldrake, who, possibly fed up with the scorn of scientists about the legitimacy of his, reviewed hundreds of published papers and interviewed a large number of researchers in a variety of fields to determine the extent to which the "Gold Standard" of double blind testing was used in "Hard science"--

He found that, while it is used more that 80% of the time in parapsychological research, he found that it is only ocassionally used in medical and psychological sciences, and nearly never in biological and physical sciences--

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 05:13 PM

"Cause I've flown from one side of this galaxy to the other, and I've seen a lot of strange stuff..." - Clinton Hammond


AHA!!!!!!!!!!! I knew it! You're finally admitted it, Clinton, you're a goddamned alien. Probably cold-blooded too. Maybe even green-blooded. This explains your total lack of human empathy and your ruthless, arrogant disregard for people.

Well, the cat is out of the bag now, buster. I have informed the authorities. You will shortly find unsympathetic men in black suits at your door, and will get to spend the next few months being subjected to vivisection and genetic testing and being spun around in giant centrifuges to see if it gives you motion sickness and other delightful stuff like that.

They'll probably try irradiating you too and see if you can take 80,000 rads. They do stuff like that with captured aliens.

If you've got any gigs next month, I'd suggest cancelling them now, cos you ain't gonna be there, sucker.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 05:15 PM

It's a quote from Star Wars, you heathen

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 05:16 PM

How's this for a blind test:

Went to the Astrodienst site and got my "real" profile. Then did three others with a) false birthdate, b) false birthplace c) false gender.

I am posting all four on the bulletin board above the coffee machine, and will ask all who work here (who know me quite well) to vote for which is the "real" description of me.

I will undoubtedly learn something, but in the spirit of LH's earlier post regarding beating people over the head, I will keep it to myself.

But, to believers and non-believers alike: try a similar test, and perhaps you will learn something as well.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 05:18 PM

Sure, sure...try and wiggle out of it. I didn't see any quote marks around it.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 05:21 PM

Wiggle out of what?

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 05:22 PM

That is a cool idea, TIA. I'm kind of curious to see what results you get. What would be even cooler would be for someone else to generate several such charts for you (only one of them being based on your real birth date, etc)...then have you read them all and decide which one is most like you...then see how it came out.

And then do that with several other people.

Sort of a double-double-blind test.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 05:23 PM

I smell and 8th grade science fair project!!!!!!!!!!!!

You'll be listed in the references of course LH.