BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?

Subject: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: GUEST,Paul
Date: 21 Nov 01 - 10:17 AM

I'm interested in knowing, or at least starting some sort of disussion about 'star signs'(Taurus, Leo etc)

Do you think it's total rubbish?

Is it a bit of fun?

Is it quite important to you?

Interested in any views,

Thanks,

Paul

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: Morticia
Date: 21 Nov 01 - 10:20 AM

No, I'm very skeptical...which is a typical Aquarian trait *BG*...

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: Sorcha
Date: 21 Nov 01 - 10:21 AM

No, I just want everybody to be happy! (Libra--grin)

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: SharonA
Date: 21 Nov 01 - 10:22 AM

I'm of two minds about it. (Gemini)

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: GUEST,Paul
Date: 21 Nov 01 - 10:25 AM

Not a good start, in hoping for a 'discussion'...

Time yet, though

Paul

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: Kim C
Date: 21 Nov 01 - 10:26 AM

Well, I think there is something to it. The zodiac does seem to correspond to people's personality traits. If you read about Virgo, by golly, that is Me to a T. However, I think most daily newspaper horoscopes are rubbish. Does that make sense?

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: Fortunato
Date: 21 Nov 01 - 10:29 AM

You have approximately 37 million minutes of life in all. Spend them how you want.

Cheers (sic), Fortunato.

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: mooman
Date: 21 Nov 01 - 10:33 AM

It's all a lot of bull!

mooman (Taurus)

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: catspaw49
Date: 21 Nov 01 - 10:39 AM

Yeah....Cool.......All that kodiack stuff.......like wow man, I'm a believer.........star signs and stuff..........great....................yeah, I'm Feces............

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: Sorcha
Date: 21 Nov 01 - 10:51 AM

Honestly, I think that PROPERLY done by a knowledgeable, trained person, it can provide guidelines, but not absolute knowledge or truth. Make your own decisons based on wise advice.

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: LR Mole
Date: 21 Nov 01 - 11:32 AM

For me, it's like any other opportunity for wisdom:interesting, and possibly even illuminating, but as soon as somebody wants something from you in the name of it, GET AWAY. There will always be more hustlers than truth(or even real thought) available.

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: The Walrus at work
Date: 21 Nov 01 - 11:36 AM

Are the heavens arranged to warn me not to spend too much money on a Tuesday? I think not !

Walrus (If you are interested, Gemini, Year of the Monkey)

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull
Date: 21 Nov 01 - 11:38 AM

bunch of crap.

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: katlaughing
Date: 21 Nov 01 - 11:44 AM

Paul, you might find this thread very interesting. It got contentious and discouraging, but also had some interesting postings.

This seems ot be one of those subjects where you'll get a lot of jokes and derision or some sort of hostile pontifications.

I personally believe it can be a tool, BUT I do NOT think people should order their lives according to what it may indicate.

Thanks,

kat

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: Cllr
Date: 21 Nov 01 - 11:46 AM

Appalling rubbish, for the extremely gullible or the extremely bored only.Cllr

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: GUEST,An Croenen
Date: 21 Nov 01 - 11:53 AM

How could all these millions of people on earth be devided into - what is it, twelve? - kinds of people and then be treated to twelve predictions of what is going to happen in their lives? I wonder. Somehow it doesn't make sense. Still, horoscopes appeal to my irrational side (old flames etc. :)) and reading them is to a certain extent an entertaining tool to reflect on life. For those of you who want to know: I am a capricorn and (chinese) fire goat. Apparently. Not hugely flattering, all this goat business.

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: Kim C
Date: 21 Nov 01 - 11:59 AM

I think my Chinese sign is infinitely more interesting than my regular zodiac - I'm a ram, and believe it or not, so is Mister. Not only that, we are both Virgos, although he is on the cusp of Libra, depending on whose date system you use.

Like some of the others of you, I think it can be a tool, like tarot cards, but not something to set the clocks by, to so speak.

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: Sourdough
Date: 21 Nov 01 - 12:02 PM

Saw an interesting piece on television as a part of a documentary. A magician and debunker of a great many paranormal claims did an experiment for the camera.

He took a classroom of college students and after collecting in advance their birthdates and places of birth, with exact times if possible) he prepared and passed out at a class meeting, horoscopes to each person and asked them to judge how accurately he had portrayed them.

Whether or not they were believers in astrology, they had to admit that he had described them pretty well and not one person in the class felt that he had totally misread them. Most everyone was at least a little su[rised at the accuracy and the specificity of his readings.

He then asked each person to pass their reading to the person behind them.

You've probably guessed what happened. THe students discovered that they had all received exactly the same reading.

While this does not prove that astrology is a waste of time, energy and intellect, it suggests that there are other explanations to "a good reading" than a knowledge of the stars. I think the principle that is often called Occam's Razor is useful here, where there is more than one explanation but no proof, accept the simple explanation as your working hypotheis. I'll stick with self-delusion as an explanaion. (It's something i know. I am a victim of, too, but in other fields.)

Sourdough

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: katlaughing
Date: 21 Nov 01 - 12:13 PM

There is also a Native American method, in which each person is said to travel round to each sign (not the same names as the usual), during one lifetime.

It is an over-simplification to think that astrology consists of twelve only of anything for all the people in the world. A good astrologist takes into account MUCH, much more than just one's sun sign. The horoscopes one reads in the papers and magazines is rubbish as no two people will have exactly the same reading because of all of those other variables taken into account by a well-educated and experienced astrologer.

kat

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 21 Nov 01 - 12:28 PM

I'm with John... it's a steaming heap!

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: Bagpuss
Date: 21 Nov 01 - 12:57 PM

I think that there are seasonal trends in personality and aptitudes and I believe that some of these have been verified scientifically. However I don't believe in the reasons astrology gives to these trends. They are just a story we tell to explain these things.

I also think that there is something of the self fullfilling prophesy in astrology. Because we know so much about what our star sign is supposed to be like, we emphasis those parts of our personality that fit in with the model until we start to become the model.

Bagpuss (who is only a stuffed toy with no birthday and therefore no sign)

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: GUEST,harpgirl
Date: 21 Nov 01 - 01:01 PM

I was born under the Exxon sign....

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: SINSULL
Date: 21 Nov 01 - 01:07 PM

My sign? "Caution"

A day for disappointments: Astrology is crap and Velikovsky was wrong. Think I'll go back to bed.

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: GUEST,Wesley
Date: 21 Nov 01 - 01:10 PM

Nope - A non-believer here.

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: Bill D
Date: 21 Nov 01 - 01:13 PM

I was once asked to provide my birthdate, time & location by a friend....doing so reluctantly, I remarked that I did not put much stock in those things...thumbing thru her books and calculating, she replied.."Uh-huh, that's JUST what your horoscope says you'd say!"

arrrgghhh..

(my palm reader, my Phrenologist, my Tarot reader, and the local Gypsy with the crystal ball ALL recommend that I stay away from Horoscope readings)

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: kendall
Date: 21 Nov 01 - 01:39 PM

We create our own reality. I dont see how that stuff can be true, but, a wise man is never sure of anything. (Taurus- Dog)

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: GUEST
Date: 21 Nov 01 - 06:23 PM

Alchohol creates my reality...

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: Firecat
Date: 21 Nov 01 - 06:29 PM

I definitely believe in them. I'm a Capricorn with Taurus rising, born in 1984 which I think is the Year of the Rat! I'm a typical Capricorn, and I've definitely got some Taurean traits as well.

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: kendall
Date: 21 Nov 01 - 06:30 PM

Reality is an illusion brought on by the lack of booze.

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 21 Nov 01 - 06:42 PM

As Bagpuss says, it seems pretty likely that the time of year you are born has some effect - it determines the age you are when you start school, whether you are one of the older kids in your class, or the youngest, whether it's sunny when you start walking or cold and rainy, and so forth.

Things like that could well go a long way to explain why the sort of generalisations about people's star signs quite often seem to work.

Bringing the stars into it just seems to confuse matters and make that kind of things sound a bit daft, so it doesn't get properly looked at. (I'm a Sagittarian, and the stuff they write about them on coffee mugs seesm to fit me reasonably well.).

I was reading a study the other day suggesting that this kind of thing is important in determining who gets a chance to get help in becoming a good footballer, and so on. October is apparently a good month to be born in. (That's football I'm talking about, not that American version of rugby where they dress up in space-suits - though I imagine it might well apply there as well.)

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: Benjamin
Date: 21 Nov 01 - 06:49 PM

I can't say that I do. Who we are has a lot to do with our up bringing which has nothing to do with the stars. At least that's what I've always thought. One girl told me that with the exact time I was born (to the minute I think) her mom could make a chart that had everything I would want to know about me (for about $10). Seems a little far fetched to me but not eveybody agrees. Still, if it means anything, I'm an Aquarius born in 1980 (year of the monkey, and always a leap year if that means anything)

Firecat, just out of curiosity, what is a typical capricorn with taurus traits? I'm not familiar with either (being neither).

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: GUEST,Lyle
Date: 21 Nov 01 - 08:21 PM

Cllr says, "Appalling rubbish, for the extremely gullible or the extremely bored only."

Sir, you are 90% accurate; To be 100% accurate you should have said: "Appalling rubbish, for the extremely gullible, bored,and stupid only."

Lyle

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: kendall
Date: 21 Nov 01 - 08:30 PM

Well, we all have an opinion, anyone got any facts?

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: Sourdough
Date: 21 Nov 01 - 10:00 PM

Well, Kendall, I tried.

Sourdough

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: Peg
Date: 21 Nov 01 - 11:43 PM

The daily zodiacs based on sun signs are by and large crap. Monthly forecasts based on sun signs, moon phases AND the rest of the planetary activity through the signs (such as Susan Miller's forecasts at www.astrologyzone.com) can be surprisingly apt and accurate...but of course one must be aware of one's own moon and rising sign/ascendant in addition to their sun to get the full benefit from reading them...

Real astrology is an art and very complex and takes many years to learn. I think a lot of people who dismiss it as poppycock would have a mighty tough time of it if they actualy tried to cast a natal chart; the mathematical calculations involved are very challenging indeed. Of course most contemporary astrologers use software created for this purpose...but it is easy for people to dismiss something they clearly know nothing about...

Ancient man had astrology which influenced their studies of botany, medicine, psychology (or its equivalent) and social phenomena. Today we have astronomy, which we look to for explanations of everything from air pollution to bacteria to extinction of species. Not so very different, if one looks at the big picture of human development.

Consider: ancient man did not have TV or books. Or electricity. Since light came from the skies, and everything from plant growth to ocean tides to bodily rhythms clearly followed moon phases (and still do), and celestial events like meteor showers or eclipses or retrograde movement of planets were very noticeable because they represented a deviation from the norm as observed night after night by those who followed the stars, centuries of mapping and comparing these movements led thinking men (and some women, one would guess) to develop a highly complex and imaginative system by which to also map the human personality: a psychological blueprint, if you will.

It is no more silly nor no more a waste of time than believing in any other arbitrary system of divination or pseudo-science or collection of correspondences applied to naturally-occurring phenomena, and that includes numerical probabilities (i.e. numerology), aesthetics, religion, postmodernist interpretations of literature, quantum physics, or music.

Peg

Libra-Scorpio cusp, Capricorn rising, Capricorn moon, Venus-Neptune conjunction in Scorpio

born on October 23rd; a date coincidentally calculated by biblical scholars as the Day of the Creation, in 4004 B.C.

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: SINSULL
Date: 21 Nov 01 - 11:46 PM

I did read a study claiming that babies carried through the hot summer months and born in September had lower IQs than those carried during the winter. Didn't believe it - one has to think that the health and nutrition of the mother, her use of alcohol and tobacco or whatever might play a part. Economics, stress, ...any September babies care to defend themselves? (assuming they are capable of it).

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: Peg
Date: 22 Nov 01 - 12:02 AM

Sinsull;

well just on the surface, thinking of the poor appetites many people have in hot weather...and thinking of the fact that we need more calories than usual in the coldest winter months and those months (January, February, March) would coincide with the first trimester of pregnancy when it is especially important that the mother get sufficient calorie intake, then there may be some possibility that natal nutrition is a partial culprit in this...but I would want to know what other factors were considered, as you mention (drugs, alcohol, exercise, socioeconomic status, etc.)

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 22 Nov 01 - 12:09 AM

I'm a September baby, Christmas conception. It depends entirely on where you are. In the UK, nutrition would be at it's best in the 3rd month onwards, it's those first 3 that are the lean months, the ones before most people realise they are actually pregnant, the ones they tell us are the most important after the 3 months before actually getting pregnant, which would be just after the harvest, so fairly good, nutrition wise, but horrible for winter colds/flu etc.

I wouldn't say I'm stupid (just naturally blonde!), in fact, the opposite when I compare myself to my work colleagues (who never read this site, being interested in beer, sex and raucous music..... er.....), none of whom have a September birthday.

There was a theory that babies born in late summer/autumn were unlucky - based entirely on the fact that if you were born in August, your mum was unable to help with the harvest, so it wasn't really you that was unlucky, but your dad/family, who had one less able body to help out. June weddings were popular because it usually meant the first baby was born in March/April, and you were allegedly well enough by August/September to help with harvest, carried through the winter - all that extra body heat meant less fuel used - I was so hot I wore short sleeves and sandals with 3 feet of snow on the ground! The planting could still be done before you got too fat and then you just sat and waited out the cold months of spring before the sprog appeared. It was usually 'detachable' by August, in that it would start to sit up and could be left for a while, and you were fit enough to help with the harvest.

As for horoscopes, being a Virgo (with insomnia) is it any wonder I've gone on for nearly a page!

I'm sceptical, I'm not convinced that if they are the same planets, why don't astrologists all get the same reading? Three different people will come up with totally conflicting information from the same set of stars...

Having said that, there is a chap at work who can't take a dump without consulting his horoscope.... he says I compete with men too much as a typical Virgo. I just say I'm really a dragon, why should I drag myself down to the level of men?

As far as the Chinese horoscope goes, I am that dragon (1964), I married a ram (I think, he could be a rat or a monkey), but I don't know what the Bratling is... March 1996 anyone?? Probably the duck.

LTS

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: Peg
Date: 22 Nov 01 - 12:24 AM

The very smart Liz (thanks for that discussion of harvest-based economies offering a partial justification for those study results; i had that thought except that it was not clear what era that study was referring to) said:

"Three different people will come up with totally conflicting information from the same set of stars..."

I think that may be because not all astrologers are concerned with or looking at the same information...some might be hacks using substandard software that does not offer accurate calculations...others might emphasize moon movement over other planets...and interpretation of data is as individual as the astrologer doing the interpreting...

peg

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: Kaleea
Date: 22 Nov 01 - 12:29 AM

According to many scholars, the three wise men found the baby Jesus because it was fortold by their advisors who studied the stars. There are other references to those who study the stars in the Old Testament. However, since there have been some "new" planets discovered in recent years, how does that affect astrology, if Astrology is based on the study of the planets & other bodies in the Heavens? Things that make you go . . .hmmmmmmmmmmmm.

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 22 Nov 01 - 12:33 AM

Most traditions/superstitions (including the lucky/unlucky) stem from the Middle Ages, and were popularised with the Victorians, so connecting it to an agricultural economy makes a lot of sense. Trying to connect it to an industrial society - which is what most of us didn't become until some 200 years ago (and some of us still have to catch up with, NZ, Dorset and Alabama!) gets difficult. Connecting it with today's society is farcical, except in those countries where agriculture is still the main or only economy.

The scary thing is, I've had occasions when all 3 of my horoscopes have been right on the same day.....

Ho hum!!

LTS

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: Art Thieme
Date: 22 Nov 01 - 12:36 AM

As I've said previously, I was born a cancer and didn't take to that --- so I had a sign change operation.

Now I'm a Feces.

Art Thieme

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: katlaughing
Date: 22 Nov 01 - 12:44 AM

Liz, the Bratling would be a Rat.:-)

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: catspaw49
Date: 22 Nov 01 - 12:56 AM

ART!!!! I knew we had something in common! Look back up the thread at my first post!!!

Born under the sign of Feces, you live in a sepia toned world. You have a stinky personality, sometimes rock hard and sometimes disgustingly mushy. You are often irregular in your actions and require some assistance in moving and you're known to flop down in a field and just lay there.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 22 Nov 01 - 01:10 AM

Ah, that explains a lot about the child. But I've always liked Rats, better than pigeons any day!

LTS

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: GUEST,Boab
Date: 22 Nov 01 - 02:57 AM

guest Paul-- "total rubbish" is a lenient form of "absolute crap" is it not? "Dangerous nonsense" can be another apt label, considering the naivete of some "believers".

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: Firecat
Date: 22 Nov 01 - 04:24 AM

Benjamin, a typical Capricorn is , on the positive side, supposed to:-

Be cautious and realistic (I am!),
Be hard working (Yep, sounds familiar!),
Be scrupulous (Yep!),
Be fearless (I slip up there cos I'm terrified of loads of things!),
Be an admiring spectator (Yep!),
Be conventional (no comment!),
Be concerned (Yep, I'm a worrier!),
Be loyal to tradition (If I'm not, what am I doing here?!),
Be respectful of authority (I am if they're respectful to me. Treat others as you wish to be treated and all that),
Have good organizational skills (er.. I mess up on that, too!)
Give sound advice (Yep!), and
Calculate risks but take them where necessary.(Yep!)

However, on the negative side, we Cappies are:-

Egotistical
Slave drivers
Unforgiving
Perfectionists who are never satisified
Fatalistic
Status seeking
Have a tendency to believe that our way is best
Take very critical views and
Anxious, allowing inner fears to dominate our decisions.

All of the above fit me! We also like:-

Hot, simple food,
Antiques and history,
Duties and responsibilities,
Not being pressured by others,
Sexual love (not me though!)
Privacy
What's regarded as best, eg a Rolls Royce
Membership of an exclusive club
Home and family
Colourful food
Personalised gifts
Presents wrapped in magical paper
New books and
diamonds!

We don't like:-

Untidiness
Being teased
Familiarity
Surprises
New ideas
Loneliness
Being made to feel useless and
Being embarrassed in public.

We get on well with Capricorn, Aquarius, Pisces, Taurus, Virgo, Scorpio and Sagittarius. We're more or less indifferent to Aries, Cancer and Libra, but we really don't like Gemini and Leo (That explains the ex! He was Gemini!)

Taureans, however, are supposed, on the positive side, to:

Have a careful and conservative outlook (yep!)
Be dependable and offer enduring loyalty (I've been told that that's right)
Be calm and patient
Be artistic (Yep!)
Be thorough
Be attentive
Value the talents of others
Be very loving (That's me!)
Be resourceful
Be gentle and placid
Be an excellent cook
Have a good sense of time and be orderly

On the negative side, Taureans:-

Have a tendency to be self indulgent
Can be stubborn, obstinate and get stuck in a rut (That's DEFINITELY me!!)
Can be materialistic
Can be slow moving
Can have little to say
Can delay action by lengthy pondering (I confess! That's me!)
Can be easily embarrassed (Me again!)
Are boring(!) and
Can be insensitive.

They like:-

Soft, sensual textures
Sensual pleasures
A good bank balance (I do!)
Certainty and well tried routines (Me again)
Gifts of value, attractively wrapped
Savouring the moment of pleasure
Doing the same thing over and over (that might be where the boring trait comes from!)

They DON'T like:-

Being disturbed (Yep!)
Change (Yeah!)
Lending things (And again!)
Being told to hurry up (I hate that!)
Sleeping in strange beds. (I hate that too!)

They get on well with Taurus, Gemini, Cancer, Virgo, Capricorn, Pisces and Aries. They're more or less indifferent to Leo, Scorpio and Aquarius, but they really don't like Libra or Sagittarius.

See what I mean about I've got some Taurean traits?

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: Gervase
Date: 22 Nov 01 - 05:08 AM

Liz, Bagpuss and Kevin have got it bang on, I think. It seems quite logical that day length, temperature and nutrition during pregnancy and the early months will have an effect on a person.
But as for all the mumbo-jumbo about stars, planets and the like...well, it's a nice little earner for a lot of people and a crutch for the gullible, I suppose.
On two newspapers I've worked on we had a panic over the horoscopes, with the relevant astrologers failing to file their copy (one was a prat called Justin Toper and the other a ghastly old paedophile called Patric Walker, who made so much money from his baloney that he was able to buy a Greek island).
I suggested to the features sub that an easy way out was simply to take some horoscopes at random from past issues, mix 'em up and bung 'em in. Thus Virgos got last week's Capricorn reading, the Geminis got a Pisces from a month or so back and so on.
It worked a treat - the gullible loons who follow such things continued to write in with their testimonials as to the amazing accuracy of the predictions, while the columns themselves continued to be padded out with crap.
Lord Rothermere, the strange but charming old fascist who owned the paper, was a a passionate believer in the accuracy of horoscopes (as was Hitler), and would insist on knowing what Walker's predictions were daily. Naturally they were always terribly auspicious - so much so that Walker's salary just kept going up and up. Shrewd guy!
Personally I'm a great believer in reading entrails. A nice plate of calves liver tells me I'm in for a treat at supper time.

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: Gervase
Date: 22 Nov 01 - 05:14 AM

...although as a counter to the above, I once did a straw poll in the office and a quarter of the reporting staff were Geminis (myself included).
But maybe it's like footballers being born in October - we Geminis tend to be the youngest and runtiest in any academic year, so we develop rat-like cunning and a penchant for stitching up the big folk!

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: katlaughing
Date: 22 Nov 01 - 06:12 AM

Peg, thanks for your posting further explainiing the vagaries of astrologists in general and the knowledge and education a good one must have.

It seems this is still a subject which cannot be discussed on the Mudcat without the silencing of those who might believe, lest they be derided as "stupid, naive, etc."

There is much of interest in the correlation of one's astological makeup and the mathematical vibrations of the planets which could be explored music-wise, but why bother when one knows they will be shouted down?

IMO, a discussion of beliefs could be more courteous.

kat

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Nov 01 - 08:09 AM

Isn't it curious how so many of the Harry Potter cult are so derogatory about the subject of astrology?

I haven't seen any mention here of the fact that astrology was a persecuted academic discipline (lest we forget about contemporary astronomy's roots in ancient astrology), targeted in Europe by the Christian Church in their efforts to wipe out paganism. Of course, most astronomers will vehemently deny the connection, just so they won't be persecuted themselves by people like those derisively posting about astrology here.

Let's face it, ancient astrologers were so stupid, the only thing they could come up with were places like Newgrange in Ireland, and Stonehenge in England. Astronomical observatories built with knowledge and technology we haven't been able to figure out yet.

Yup, nothing to the idea of mathematical relationships between heaven and earth, I'm sure.

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: Wolfgang
Date: 22 Nov 01 - 09:17 AM

Let's see what Nostradamus had to say about astrologers:

Quatrain 6;100:
INCANTATION OF THE LAW AGAINST INEPT CRITICS

Let those who read this verse consider it profoundly,
Let the profane and the ignorant herd keep away:
And far away all Astrologers, Idiots and Barbarians,
May he who does otherwise be subject to the sacred rite.

correlation of one's astological makeup and the mathematical vibrations of the planets which could be explored music-wise

Kat, I know all words in that line but still don't understand what you are talking about. I've tried to find information on the web, but the expression 'mathematical vibrations of the planets' hasn't shown up in several searches. What is a mathematical vibration of a planet, please and how could it be determined?

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Nov 01 - 11:18 AM

Wolfgang, can you explain how astronomers track the movement of heavenly bodies in relation to one another?

How they calculate orbits, trajectories, etc?

What influence gravitational pull has between heavenly bodies?

Explain for us scientifically how the earth's moon effects earth's tides?

How chaos theory might be germane to the discussion of astronomical observation?

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: Wolfgang
Date: 22 Nov 01 - 11:42 AM

Yes, I can, at least for a subgroup of the questions, but why should I?

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: katlaughing
Date: 22 Nov 01 - 11:46 AM

Mathematics with info on Pythagoras, harmonics, etc.

My brother will be over, today, Wolfgang. He has studied this much more than I. When he gets here, I will ask him for more explanation.

Thanks, Guest.

kat

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: Wolfgang
Date: 22 Nov 01 - 12:21 PM

Interesting, kat, but it doesn't answer yet my question.

By the way, which GUEST have you thanked for which argument? You can't have possibly meant GUEST 22-Nov-01 - 11:18 AM. (S)he should know better than to use such a stupid argument. People should be able to explain expressions or arguments they use and not be judged by their ability or inability to explain concepts they have not talked about.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: Alice
Date: 22 Nov 01 - 12:31 PM

In the 20th century, astrology has surged back into popularity. It regained its foothold in Europe, especially in Nazi Germany. "How can a pseudoscience like astrology flourish within the most sophisticated technological society in human history? Many commentators have associated the popularity of astrology with scientific illiteracy. In 1990, Edna Einsiedel surveyed 2,000 adult Canadians. She found that 45 percent thought astrology was at least partially scientific. At the same time, one in five Canadians of those surveyed did not know that the Earth goes around the Sun, and half did not know that the Earth goes around the Sun in one year." Correlation does not mean cause. Because x planet is somewhere when y with a certain personality trait is born, the placement of x does not mean it caused y's personality trait.

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: katlaughing
Date: 22 Nov 01 - 12:49 PM

My brother will have more info, Wolfgang, as I said. No, I meant Guest 8:09a. I should have made that distinction, sorry.

Okay, I've found my brother's booklet and until he arrives, will include a short quote here. I know this does NOT answer your question, but it still may be of interest to others.

"The entire scheme of the solar system can be represented with earthly music and put on recordings to listen to. One such recording is the Planetary Songs of Johannes Kepler. As we all know, the planets revolve around the Sun in elipses, and vary in speed at perihelion (nearest to the Sun) and aphelion (furthest from the Sun). Kepler compared each (then known) planet's angular velocity at perihelion and aphelion and equated this ratio to a musical interval. Sliding scales occur withing the extremes of these ratios. For example, Saturn rakes 29.5 years to go up and down a musical major third. Kepler actually noted all of the interevals each planet "intones" and expressed them in 17th century musical notation. These transcendant planetary songs can be accelerated so that humans can hear them in physical sound. One recording, noted by musicologist Dr. Jocelyn Godwin, is Harmony of the World, LP 1571, Yale Univertisty School of Music.

"In a modern table of the planets' angular velocities as seen from the Sun, the tones generated by all of the planets, including Pluto, is given by Dr. Godwin. Of 74 tones produced from the perihelion-aphelion intervals, he points out that 58 belong to the major triad CEG in the modern Western key of C."

© Delton L. Hudson all right reserved

There is much more, but he would express it much better and clearly than I.

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Nov 01 - 01:13 PM

Alice,

And what percentage of the 45% of the 2,000 adults who responded that they thought astrology was partially scientific, also did not know that the earth revolved around the sun?

What percentage of the 45% of the 2,000 adults who responded they thought astrology was partially scientific, also did not know that the earth revolved around the sun in one year?

It sounds like Edna's survey is as stupid as your suggestion that the rise of astrology's popularity in Europe was related to the rise of fascism in Nazi Germany is specious.

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Nov 01 - 01:19 PM

It seems to me, the (supposedly) scientifically literate population is more ignorant of the history of astrology, than the (supposedly) scientifically illiterate public is about scientific (supposedly) "fact".

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: Wolfgang
Date: 22 Nov 01 - 02:05 PM

Couple of GUESTs here tonight (my time) who have difficulties with arguing and/or thinking? GUEST 22-Nov-01 - 01:13 PM calls a survey stupid when all (s)he can tell from Alice's link is that a report by somebody else about the survey lacks a vital information. Funny argumentation.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 22 Nov 01 - 04:18 PM

For those bemoaning the lack of astrology in Harry Potter - wait a while or read the rest of the books. He does a whole class of it....

LTS

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Nov 01 - 04:38 PM

I wasn't bemoaning the lack of astrology in HP. Merely pointing out the seeming double standard--defending the "accepted fashion" of witchcraft and magic in HP on the one hand (in the good witch/bad witch thread about fundamentalist responses to HP), and then some of those very same defenders of HP turning around and attacking astrology here, rather like a bunch of fundamentalist rationalists.

I find that curious, is all. No one need agree.

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 22 Nov 01 - 04:46 PM

Ah, see the point. I think the point is that one is obviously fiction and the other is a bloody good book and film.

LTS (*BG*)

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: katlaughing
Date: 22 Nov 01 - 07:22 PM

Well, brother was still ill, so no more elucidation from him, today. He will be at work, tomorrow, no matter, so I will call him and get some info then.

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: GUEST,kendall
Date: 22 Nov 01 - 07:48 PM

Firecat, I am a Taurus, and, everything you wrote about Taurus is true in my case except, I am not boring!

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: Benjamin
Date: 23 Nov 01 - 02:12 AM

Interesting, Firecat! I've been told that Aquarius don't get along with Taurus. As for traits, the only one I remember is "Rebelious" which many people have confirmed to be true with me (I have no idea what their talking about). Could you list the traits for an Aquarius (I can never remember them!)? I'd like to see how many I can confirm to be true!

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: GUEST,micca at work
Date: 23 Nov 01 - 07:14 AM

Gervase et al, I had a similar experience in that I worked in a Scieence dept that had a staff of 14 (teachers and Technicians) of which 5 were Librans!!!! which is statistically unlikely at least!!

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: catspaw49
Date: 23 Nov 01 - 07:28 AM

Micca, if they'd been Geminis you could have increased your staff significantly.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: Micca
Date: 23 Nov 01 - 08:02 AM

Spaw, it was hard enough to get them to make decisions as it was!!

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: Gervase
Date: 23 Nov 01 - 10:07 AM

Hey, we Geminis have no trouble making decisions. It's just that they're usually the wrong ones.

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: GUEST,Penny S. (elsewhere)
Date: 23 Nov 01 - 12:29 PM

Musically, Flanders and Swann had a song about this one, which starts with a long explanation of what the planets are doing, with appropriately mysterious music, and finishes with the bathetic "all to warn me to be careful, in dealings involving a friend."

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: Zodiac / Star Signs - do you believe?
From: Alice
Date: 23 Nov 01 - 05:57 PM

Guest, the link was a quote from the page it is linked to. I am very aware of the history of astrology, including the fact that many cultures throughout time have had their own unique versions of astrology, and the symbolism of the constellations described in different cultures are not consistent with each other. It is a random method of generating words and symbols. Depending on which type of astrology you are using, the stars and planets will have different and sometimes opposite symbolic meanings.