Well Daylia, it seems I now know more about certain basic aspects of astrology than you do. You keep telling me I have to know more about it to understand it properly. Maybe you do too.

You didnt just say you werent an expert, you said you weren't an expert, but you did KNOW certain things. These things that you knew were not backed up by someone more expert in astrology than you. [Well I'm no expert, but I do know that astrology doesn't predict a thing. Astrology is a description, not a prediction. That's been explained several times already on this thread. So the answer's no, Bagpuss.]

Belief can be shaken, knowledge cannot??? If what I quoted to you doesn't shake at least on bit of knowledge you thought you had, then it isn't because knowledge cannot be shaken, it is because you refuse to allow it to be shaken.

And I never managed to get to the point of what I was trying to say which was that given what that astrologer said and given that there has indeed been such a study of time twins which showed what he expected from astrology was false, that should be enough to make anyone question the validity of what they believe/"know".

If you were really interested in whether what you believe in is true, you might read this study as a starting place. If not, then maybe it shows that you are happy to believe in something that is not true because it brings you some sort of happiness to do so. And that's fine, but we will all know where we stand. Here is the study in question.

"You want to argue? Bother someone else."

I am only bothering those who choose to be bothered by participating in a thread which centres on a debate about the validity of astrology. If you never wanted to be part of such a debate, then why were you here all this time. You were fighting your corner, and as much a part of the debate as the rest of us. In fact if you weren't here the thread would probably have died long ago. Debate needs two sides you know.

Bagpuss