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

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: *daylia*
Date: 18 Apr 06 - 10:37 PM

YIPPEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 18 Apr 06 - 10:40 PM

"Unless, of course, evidence is available to support it."

And then one must find ways to get people to become aware of the evidence, take it seriously, and trust your word that it is being presented honestly. That is not usually easy at all. Sometimes it can take a lifetime or even longer than that to win acceptance for an unconventional idea, evidence or not. Don't expect it to happen overnight on this forum.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 18 Apr 06 - 10:42 PM

Daylia, stop now. Step...away...from the computer now.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 18 Apr 06 - 11:14 PM

daylia, from YOUR POST:

Here's an excerpt from the article "Astrology as Religion" at the same link. The article offers a valuable first-hand account of the difficulties facing anyone who attempts an honest, empirical investigation of astrology, and closes with some lucid if sobering concerns re the continuing scientific investigation of astrology:


"The spiritual dimension of astrology -- David Hamblin

From his letter in Astrological Journal 32(6), 406-407, 1990, with later postscripts.

Abstract -- The author, a former Chairman of the UK Astrological Association, spent much time testing astrological claims but found no evidence in their favour. Eventually he gave up reading birth charts but retained his interest in astrology. He argues that the spiritual dimension is a necessary part of human existence ....
......
"If astrology was true in the way that astrologers claim that it is true, then the simplest and most unsophisticated piece of research would be able to demonstrate a correlation between (for instance) Ascendant sign and personality traits. Since these correlations have not been demonstrated, it is plain that astrology does not work in the way that most astrologers say that it works, even if it may possibly work in some other way."


It is not the spiritual element that is being called upon for evidence- it is the factual ability of astrology to predict whatever it does predict.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: GUEST,M.Ted
Date: 18 Apr 06 - 11:34 PM

Someone actually mentioned that study much earlier in the thread, Alice. If I remember correctly, the study didn't actually draw up astrological charts on any of the subjects, it simply compared lifestyle and personality information drawn from other types of assessments to determine if there were common personality traits amongst the sample group. The key personality traits that they examined, if I remember, were exteme introversion and extreme extroversion.

One problem with using those two criteria is that there is significant disagreement as to whether they are actually personality atributes, or are simply situational behaviors. Another problem is that the criteria that they used for determining those characteristics are not regarded as valid by many psychologists. A third problem is that most people don't exhibit extremes of personality, and there are no solid, objective criteria for making distinctions between intermediate degrees of introversion and extroversion.

The unresolvable problem with making a "scientific" evaluation of astrology is that, while the movement of the planets and constellations can be fairly precisely tracked, the corresponding elements of personality can't be precisely defined, and they can't be comprehensively enumerated. Beyond that, there is no objective way to measure their interplay.

BillD(who,incidentally, has acquited himself admirably in all this) said this:

"*IF* as I suspect, Astrology is not a reliable indicator, *THEN* practical uses of Astrology would be, in fact, dangerous in many cases."

Is there such a thing as a "reliable indicator"?   Meaning, is there a better indicator in these matters than astrology?

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: Alice
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 09:35 AM

I don't know if I have mentioned this in this thread, but I studied astrology for many years, and in my 20's and 30's created charts for many, many people until I became more educated about critical thinking. More aspects of life than two criteria of personality traits were compared in the study. Natal charts of those born at the same time in the same place on the planet would be the same. I understand the power that mythology has for people to feel some control over their lives and to comfort themselves with a sense of understanding what is mysterious in ourselves and others. Astrologers interpret many of the aspects studied in the twin time study, such as agressiveness, abilities in music, art, sport, etc. I'm just saying, be careful what you believe in.
--
The research team monitored the test persons over several decades, recording observations about more than 100 parameters in connection
with health, occupation, marital situation, anxiety level, aggressiveness, sociability, IQ levels, abilities in music, art, sport, mathematics, language
etc. They tried to collect evidences for similarities between the time twins. However, no similarities could be identified.
--

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: Escamillo
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 09:58 AM

LH, I don´t think that you would suggest that a cloud would tell me something about myself. I have just used your good allegory trying to explain that a cloud describing my personality would appear to me AS WEIRD as a group of celestial bodies arbitrarely selected (and associated with Gods and Goddesses) describing my personality. If it did, then I would immediately ask for an explanation, because it could be very important to the whole humanity.

An explanation may exist or may not, for phenomena that can be somehow perceived. The problem with astrology is that some people claim that there are tremendously important guidelines to follow in order to get an insight of all of us, that only THEY perceive. No physical explanation exists. Only psychology can make an approach
to an explanation of the causes and effects of the phenomena of BELIEF, but not to the obscure calculations, coarse misunderstandings, and mystic associations on which astrologers find a basement for their theories.

Before someone tells me that astrology cannot be explained through the physical approach, I wish to remind them that astrology is based in the physical presence of physical bodies and mathematical calculations of their positions.

That`s why I prefer to share with astrologers the pleasure of admiring the beauty of the Universe. Life is short !

The only thing that upsets me is the tendency of a large number of astrologers to make money with their services. No, it is not correct. Not correct for the "fake" horoscopes published in newspapers, and not correct for the self-named experts who spent their lives in the study of astrology and dedicate their time to elaborate a special chart.

Un abrazo
Andrés (in Buenos Aires, after a short vacation in Brazil beaches. Come to the South ! It is GREAT! It is 2/3 cheaper!)

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: *daylia*
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 11:28 AM

So now you suddenly claim to have studied astrology, Alice?!? Hmmm. WEll, whatever you say, of course! I'm sure lots of people here will take that at face value. However, in light of the highly negative tone of the propaganda you present here, I'm taking your last claim with a big, BIG grain of salt. Just like your tall tales of impending doom and gloom - you know, the ones that sound like you copied them from the front page of some grocery store tabloid.

Not too impressive.

And as far as Bill being 'acquitted' (?!?) goes -- well, whatever you think MTed. His posts here are rife with misunderstanding, misinformation, misconceptions, prejudice, selective bias, slant and tunnel vision - all spiced up with large doses of professional arrogance.

Now, it makes no difference to me one way or the other what or how or why Bill or anyone else here thinks the way they do about astrology.   And I do appreciate Bill's sense of humour and helpfulness, which I see demonstrated so often here on the Cat. That, however, does not mean that I'm prepared to accept everything or anything he says as the God-given truth. Or even just as plain ole ordinary human truth. Because - guess what! It's not the truth    *gasp*   it's just his own personal opinion. And as such, it's worth about as much as anyone else's opinion.

So - how much are other peoples opinions worth, to you? Just curious ....

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: *daylia*
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 11:50 AM

HA! Wondering about my own BAD MOOD here over the last day or so, I just checked my personal daily transits at Astrodienst. Here's what it says

Irritability **

This is a very energetic time for you, when you can assert yourself effectively and accomplish a great deal of work. The problem is that you will be tested all along the line and forced to demonstrate the validity of what you are doing. You may be challenged either by circumstances or by other persons. Your success depends largely upon how well you express yourself in a situation. Being quite unwilling to back down on any issue, you are not moved to make compromises with others. But that is precisely what you should do, especially if you can manage to compromise without giving ground on essential points. Be careful that you don't become so wrapped up in your own beliefs that you cannot see which parts are essential and which are not.


The interpretation above is for your transit selected for today:
Mars Square Sun exact at 23:36
activity period from 18 April 2006 to 21 April 2006."


Also ...

Taking a stand

Very likely you will have to convince someone of something today. This will probably not be an argument, but rather a situation in which you have to present your case with vigor and energy. But if someone tries to talk you into something, you will defend your own position vehemently and successfully. This influence is not as argumentative as it sounds. People will not see you as spoiling for a fight, nor will they be particularly likely to pick a fight. Instead they will respect you for taking a stand for your own beliefs. Your inner confidence in your ideas and beliefs will help you initiate and take advantage of the opportunities that come your way. Do not be reluctant to use them. Under this influence you should be successful.

The interpretation above is for your transit selected for today:
Mercury Sextile Mars exact at 07:32
activity period from 19 April 2006 to 21 April 2006."

Hmm. Trusty ole Mars! I've been feeling like I really don't care if I get into a fight, and this is not my usual mode d'etre. I don't care for fights, and I usually just avoid them wherever possible. But I've been just spoilin for an argument for the last day or so it seems!

Time to knock it off, and do something more useful with all this energy. So please pardon me if I've stepped on any toes in my Arien bloodlust, and please know that I do enjoy reading your posts. Even when I don't agree with a single thing you say!

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 12:22 PM

Well said, Escamillo. ;-)

I don't really mind astrologers getting paid, because the people who pay them usually seem to enjoy the whole thing quite a bit...therefore it's worth something to them.

And if they believe in it, so what? Everybody I know believes various things that I don't regard as sensible or rational. That's life.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: GUEST,Martini
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 12:32 PM

Hi ,

I started this thread and I can't believe we are up to 1000 plus messages. On the same day I also started one on ... "God, do you beleieve, if so which one?" and it disappeared about a month ago. I find it funny that the zodiac should provoke more messages. ( but I don't believe in either of them !!!)

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: *daylia*
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 12:44 PM

And here's the transit the computer selected for Bill yesterday - just like mine, Sun Square Mars -- with a slightly different interpretation.

High energy        

Your energy level will be high, perhaps too high if you are not careful. Watch for signs of irritable impatience with others whenever things do not go exactly as you planned. Be assertive only when the situation calls for it, not whenever you feel like it. Also watch out for baseless conflicts with others, which you may not necessarily instigate yourself. Today you should be particularly careful of conflicts with authorities. Voice your complaints if they are legitimate, but expect a certain amount of hostile reaction to them. Also be careful that the tone of your complaint does not aggravate this hostility. What you get is usually a function of the energies that you put out. On the physical level, try to find an outlet for your vigorous energies."

Bill and I actually have quite similar charts -- the lights (sun and moon) in Aries/Taurus, a well-tenanted 12th house (suggesting psychic abilities and an attraction toward the occult), and Gemini Rising. We are both lively, stubborn, intellectual, philosophical, and enjoy writing.

I, however, am much more likely to indulge myself in creative (vs methodical, so-called 'logical') thinking. I am also very willing to say "damn the torpedoes!" and take the risk of conducting my own personal investigations of mysterious, controversial "occult" subjects like astrology. Preferably on my own, without outside interference - and no matter what anyone else does, or says, or thinks.

In astrological terms, this is probably because unlike Bill, I am not burdened with heavy, restricting, limiting, 'malefic' Saturnian energies conjuncting my Sun (ego), my mind (Mercury), and my personal pleasures (Venus). And I'm glad -- I don't want my need to explore, to think creatively, or to be 'unconventional' undermined in any way.

Anyhow, I'm sure nobody here has any real interest in or use for these astrological interpretations, beyond milking them for any logical scientific 'errors' that is. That way, my posts can be used to bolster everyone's opinions and/or personal prejudices re astrology. I do enjoy exploring and writing about my astrological insights, though. And I benefit from doing so, regardless of how my ideas are received. And so you're all most welcome for all new ammo.

Lock and load!!

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: *daylia*
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 12:54 PM

Well, I don't 'believe in' scientists getting paid to create new weapons of war, or to torture/dissect/destroy/kill/maim other living creatures for "research purposes", or to invent new technological means of polluting and destroying this planet and every living thing on it for the sake of profit, and of human convenience.

Big business, politicians and all the scientists they use as lackeys continue to wreak far greater havoc on this planet, to harm / destroy far more lives - human and otherwise - than astrologers ever have.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: *daylia*
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 01:04 PM

Good for you, Martini! Please know that religion and astrology don't 'believe in' you, either. And thanks for the thread - if you're really the same GUEST who started it, that is.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: *daylia*
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 01:13 PM

bearded bruce, I just noticed your last post. Is there some new point you were trying to make, some insight you're trying to share? Or were you just pointing out, for the umpteenth time on this thread, that to date neither scientists or astrologers have been able to prove, disprove, explain or even just agree on the the hows and whys of astrology?

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: GUEST,Blind DRunk in Blind River
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 01:58 PM

Why the FLIP would anyone flippin' have a stupid fippin' thread about flippin' asterology and keep on with the flippin' thing fer over a thousand flippin' posts? Holy flip down a flippin' mind shaft! You need yer flippin' head examioned, Daylea. Get a fli;ppin' life, eh?

I seen addickshuns before and I know one when I see one, eh? At least get a flippin' addickshuns that is fun! Like booze or dope, eh? Or sex! These are all things that you can, like, be heavy addicted to and have FUN. Know'm sayin'? Pizza is okay too.

Asterology sucks. It is fer old ladies that were long skirts and tie their flippin' hair in a bun at the back or other wierdos like that. It don't make no flippin' sense. I don't flippin' care if VEnus is in Yeranus, becoz it don't matter, eh?

Them stars are nice to look at, but that is as far as it flippin' goes. You can take that to the bank and de-flippin'-posit it, eH? With interest.

"Lock and load" my flippin' ass...

- Shane

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: autolycus
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 02:09 PM

Bobad (and others) - I do believe I/we cannot satisfy your craving for data in the sense you mean re Taureans. The statement was the outcome of some millennia of observation, not carried out according to current scientific practice. So not science, just accumulated wisdom. Sorry.

This whole debate has been rather like two teams wanting to play each other, but each wanting to play a different game from the other. In the philosophy of science, Karl Popper and Thomas Kuhn didn't agree either. And in science , there's an arguement going on between the evolutionists and creationists (tho' let's not go THERE). Any amount of data and arguement hasn't settled the dispute yet. So what hope here.

I've offered all the help that's feasible here,(see previous posts offering same) so, rather like American composer Charles Ives,describing the end ofone of his works that begins combatively how about shaking hands, agreeing to differ, and climbing to the mountain-top to view the firmament?


   Ivor

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: M.Ted
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 02:52 PM

Bill is none of the things that you have described, Daylia--

You like people to listen, but don't like it when they question what you say. Unfortunately, you resort to name-calling, and you do it a lot. It doesn't help your case, and it reduces your credibility to nothing.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 02:52 PM

"Or were you just pointing out, for the umpteenth time on this thread, that to date neither scientists or astrologers have been able to prove, disprove, explain or even just agree on the the hows and whys of astrology? "

"That, however, does not mean that I'm prepared to accept everything or anything he says as the God-given truth. Or even just as plain ole ordinary human truth. Because - guess what! It's not the truth    *gasp*   it's just his own personal opinion. And as such, it's worth about as much as anyone else's opinion. "

"Unlike people like Bill or Alice, my personal knowledge -- please notice, I did not say opinion, or belief, but knowledge -- of this subject is rooted in a lifetime of ongoing personal investigation (ie formal and informal studies PLUS practical application of astrology and psychology) ; but most importantly, the direct first-hand observations and experience these efforts produce. "

You define ALL that Bill says as opinion, but whatever YOU say is "KOWLEDGE". Perhaps Bill's "lifetime of ongoing personal investigation (ie formal and informal studies" of philospphy and human nature should not be so quickly discounted.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: *daylia*
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 04:23 PM

You like people to listen,

Actually, I just enjoy expressing my point of view - not always, but on occasion. If people listen, fine. If not, great. My words are certainly just as credible as anyone else's, and far more credible than most!

If people question what I say, so what? That's only to be expected.   However, when I see posts like Bill's, over and over and over again on threads like these -- ie posts rife with misunderstanding, misinformation, misconceptions, prejudice, selective bias, slant, tunnel vision, propaganda and professional arrogance -- well, I'm making it a point from now to call 'em on it.

Every single time.

As you may have noticed.    =]

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: M.Ted
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 05:19 PM

Unfortunately, Daylia, your words are *not* as credible as anyone else's. You do seem to enjoy expressing yourself, but you resort to name calling a lot--and that makes a much bigger impression on people than anything else you have to say---

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: bobad
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 07:35 PM

Ivor, I don't recall asking specifically for "scientific" data, I was just wondering where these claims came from and you did answer that query - "accumulated wisdom."

Contrary to what some of you think, I am not trying to "win" an argument or disprove your beliefs in astrology. Frankly, astrology is something that I never really gave much thought to one way or the other and am following this thread to try and get a handle on where it's adherents are coming from.

This discussion has led me to conclude that astrology is a belief system and like other belief systems requires faith to accept those articles that cannot be either proven or disproven.

I now understand why believers defend their belief with such passion and emotion when they feel these beliefs are under attack by non-believers.

This being said, I don't feel that the beliefs were being so much attacked rather there was some genuine efforts being made to try and rationalize faith based beliefs and empiricism which are ultimately irreconcilable.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: *daylia*
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 08:33 PM

Well, maybe my posts are not credible to you, MTed. But about name-calling? Hmmmm. Just glancing over a few of my own posts here, and comparing them with the general language and tone of the so-called 'rebuttals' and "arguments' here (especially earlier in this thread, before certain people realized they couldn't get away with their usual twisted slant and propaganda any more) well, all I can say is hey. Poor, poor you!   

And please, feel free to cry me a river. Anytime.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: *daylia*
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 08:38 PM

Oh, and did I mention all the profanity, insults and general stupidity levelled at me, and at the subject of astrology (a subject I do happen to enjoy and appreciate very much, as some of you may have noticed!), over the course of this discussion?

If not, please consider it all very carefully.

THEN go cry me that big, big river.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 08:40 PM

This is post 1024- or 2^^10

From my personal knowledge -- please notice, I did not say opinion, or belief, but knowledge -- of binary, rooted in a lifetime of ongoing personal investigation (ie formal and informal studies PLUS practical application of bit and bytes) ; but most importantly, the direct first-hand observations and experience these efforts produce, I will state that this discussion has fallen into the bit bucket, and is no longer producing valid data.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: M.Ted
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 08:56 PM

You made my point for me.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: *daylia*
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 10:21 PM

Right, then.

Interesting, if predictable, how none of the data I've presented here is considered 'valid' (except, quite understandably, via PM's)   

Not my fellow poster's (amazingly accurate!) astrological charts/interpretations; not the astrological research, articles and writings of scientists and scholars from all over the globe (Tarnas, Hamblin, Seymour, Carl G. Jung etc). Not the historical, psychological quotes and references. Or the laughably propogandist studies passed off as the latest in "science" re astrology. Least of all (of course!) my own personal experiences (first-hand observations, charts, interpretations and astrological analyses).

Ahhh ... incredible indeed. And what an *amusing* piece of work is man ...

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: M.Ted
Date: 20 Apr 06 - 12:20 AM

You tend to alternate cutting and pasting with ranting and raving--it's not a very good way to win people over to your cause.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: Escamillo
Date: 20 Apr 06 - 04:30 AM

"Oh, and did I mention all the profanity, insults and general stupidity levelled at me, and at the subject of astrology (a subject I do happen to enjoy and appreciate very much, as some of you may have noticed!), over the course of this discussion?
If not, please consider it all very carefully. "

Sorry, Daylia, but this includes myself and all others who may have been part of the discussion. Except from some anonymous guest, nobody has mistreated you, or used name-calling as YOU did, or been sarcastic as YOU were. Then if you think that there is a general stupidity among participants, I cordially invite you to leave this thread which once was a discussion about astrology. If you don´t, I guess that you will find yourself alone very soon.

For me, it was enough !

Un abrazo (a hug) for all
Andrés

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: autolycus
Date: 20 Apr 06 - 05:44 AM

Bobad - I appreciate your response and want to point to one thing that happened in our exchanges that happens in all discussions.

That is that you picked up one of my points - 'accumulated wisdom' - while not noticing?/being able to respond to?/? another - 'millennia of observation'.

The former phrase fits well with the idea of a belief system. The latter fits better with our notion of science.

I would have thought that science would have to pay attention to all the evidence. It tends to be belief systems that pick and choose (just as religious fundamentalists pick and choose from the sacred texts.)



Incidentally, I wanted to include (in my list of points overlooked by the science-oriented and sceptical) the heavy role played in all, and I mean all, of this by the unconscious. Interestingly, both astrology and Gestalt psychotherapy are interested in bringing watever is in the unconscious into consciousness.



Lastly (I hope), I suspect an astrology thread is lengthy because astrology is an unacceptable face of the spiritual where the major religions are the acceptable side. Must read that 'Do you believe in God?' thread again.

Best wishes

Ivor

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: *daylia*
Date: 20 Apr 06 - 06:03 AM

Actually, ANdres, I wasn't thinking of you. Your posts are generally polite. And sorry M Ted, you're not talking about BillD here. I'm not trying to 'win anyone over'. Nor do I have a 'cause'. I'm sharing what I know - please note, I didn't say what I opine, or what I believe, or what my peers construebut what I know,, of astrology. Take it or leave it, whatever you please. Your choice = your loss (or gain, as the case may be).

If you don't like the material I present here, don't read it.

If you don't like people posting links and quotes from relevant material to illustrate their point of view, well, try picking on EVERYONE who does this (and most do!) not the just one person with whom you happen to disagree.

IF you want to voice a disagreement with me, please refrain from profanity, insults, slant and propoganda. If I respond to you in like manner and you don't like it, awwwwwww. Poor you!   Go cry me that big, BIG river.

If you are 99% ignorant of astrology, and/or don't care to learn anything more about it than what you already believe, why bother posting here at all? You'd sound so much more impressive, so much smarter if you just said nothing and kept your ignorance to yourself!

ANd most importantly, please don't concern yourselves about me! I'm just peachy no matter what you say, think, or do.

Now, as Ivor pointed out, there's a time to climb to the mountaintops and contemplate the mysterious blessings of the firmament, in peaceful solitude.

And the time is now   {the walrus said)

See you all soon!

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: *daylia*
Date: 20 Apr 06 - 06:05 AM

Oops, sorry bout the italics.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: *daylia*
Date: 20 Apr 06 - 11:44 AM

Oh -- and Andres, here are just a few examples of the insults, ignorance and general stupidity; the profanity, slant and/or propaganda directed at myself personally, or astrology in general. All are copied directly from this thread.

Cluin:   "Astrology however is pure squidge.... I believe in nasal astrology ... Pick a booger out of your nostril first thing in the morning and predict the day's outcome based on it's shape, colour and configuration with regards to the prevailing wind."

BillD    "Me, I'm just the last day of Taurus, so I'm not nearly so full of bull.. (kind of a CUSPidor, so to speak ...got my chakras surgically removed a few years ago, they were swollen, and impinging on my aura. I feel SO much better) .... mmmm....I am not an 'expert' with years of study behind me on how to bake cakes using hot peppers, prunes, marijuana and LSD either, but I don't think voicing a cautionary opinion on the practice exactly makes me stupid.... Not knowing favorite recipes doesn't make me unqualified to comment on the dangers ... If you were invited to join a church, and they told you that "communion" required co-mingling of blood in order to 'establish spiritual connections' and wearing of tinfoil hats to enhance the experience, would you need to 'try' it for a few years, as they insist, to really *see* and experience how it works?"


labougie    "Leave the astrologers alone! OK, they're deluded, but unlike the similarly deluded Christians (and all other Superstitians), they're not actually dangerous. Concentrate on the real problem!"

TIA "...that last post is plain nuts. I believe Daylia gets her info on science from "evil scientist" movies ... Just got through showing what hooey it is, and they draw the bulls-eye around the dart anyhow. Powerful stuff this belief....Now, about dowsing...�

Bunnahabain   "It is also a form of madness that has no bounds. I know rational, intelligent, sceptical scientists who belive in astrology, and numpties who swallow all sorts of rubbish who reject it..... I can't juggle. Does that mean I can't say juggling chainsaws and flaming torches is not easy or safe?�

tabby    "Astrology is such trash: Pure fabrication with no sensible basis whatsoever.   But what a hoax. ... To believe that what kind of day/month/year you are going to have can be predicted without consideration of your free will and your personal circumstances is really quite insane. The entire concept of astrology is insane."

Alice   "I know people who have given all their life savings to gurus they believed in, allowed their children to be abused, deferred having children or gave their children up because of their spiritual following of the guru's commands, spent fortunes on psychic readers, given up education and careers to be the unpaid labor of their gurus and even committed suicide for their non-scientific beliefs. We have only to see the planes of 9/11 and the fields of Jonestown to understand how strong belief is in motivating people and how completely opposed to logic people can become when they have a strong belief."

Bagpuss "I believe that aeroplanes are kangaroos. I just happen to be using different definitions of both words than the entire rest of the the speakers of the English language. I am not wrong, I just define things differently to you all ..... I don't want particlularly want to learn about astrology, as I have been presented with no evidence that it has any truth to it .... And it shouldn't matter whether I am biased against astrology ... Actually I would have been quite impressed if I had read one of those charts and it sounded like me, more than the others. I know I was when I read the kabalarians short report into my name - even though I know that to be an equal amount of hooey."

Gervase "Pardon me while I bark!    ... No, you daft bint, I found out that astrologers weren't actually playing with a full deck .... Deluding the public? It's what astrology is all about!
Of course you'd be happier without all those nasty scientists messing up your lovey fluffy make-believe world and pointing out the fatuous absurdity of your beliefs ....The gist, for most sensible people, is that astrology is complete cobblers but the simple-minded and gullible cling on to it because people like that have a need to believe in something.... Hey, you're not related to those odd coves who used to stand on street corners with sandwich boards announcing the immenent end of the world and that eating meat was murder, are you?   Oddly, in none of the readings was I told I was a gullible fool to be seeking answers through astrology�"

Clinton Hammond    "You can get the same bullflop from a good 'reading' of a bowl of alphabet soup....Give yer damn fool head a shake would ya.... Yer scuppered here... and are just too blinkered to see it..... Evidently your open mind fled the coop a long time ago...."

Paul Burke   "People who believe in astrology are morally inferior to those who do not"

flamenco ted   "Last night I had a chat with the Fairies that live at the bottom of my garden, and even they don't believe that Astrology is real."

And even my longtime friend Little Hawk, who claims to have no interest in astrology whatsoever, and that he just doesn't 'get it' (So why is he posting so often on this thread, I wonder!)

"Chongo wants to know if you can do a chart for a chimpanzee? ... You need yer flippin' head examioned, Daylea ... Asterology sucks. It is fer old ladies that were long skirts and tie their flippin' hair in a bun at the back or other wierdos like that. It don't make no flippin' sense. I don't flippin' care if VEnus is in Yeranus, becoz it don't matter, eh? Them stars are nice to look at, but that is as far as it flippin' goes."


I think that's about enough for one morning. So again, to all who feel hurt by my sarcasm, or offended by my blunt "tell it like it is -- don't mince words -- just call a spade a spade" approach - well, Boo hoo for you!   Just watch you don't get yourself all dehydrated now.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: M.Ted
Date: 20 Apr 06 - 01:09 PM

People posted their own ideas, and, since this is a discussion forum, they are entitled to do that--even if you don't like what they have to say. You've said what you have to say. And you've said what you think of the people who disagree with you as well. It's time for you to let it go.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 20 Apr 06 - 01:41 PM

I'm posting on this thread because I am fascinated by psychological issues and anomalies of all kinds, specially those that lead to compulsive behaviour. It is people's pscychologically compulsive reactions to one another that interest me on this thread, not the subject of astrology itself, which I am neutral on. It's how people relate to each other that interests me. Shane is simply reacting exactly the way "Shane" would, for amusement's sake. He is a demonstration of the absolute outer edge of ignorant, moronic, dead stupid, meatheaded conformist reaction to things. As such he stands as a warning the rest of us. ;-) Chongo also reacted the way "Chongo" would...as an aggressively independent "man of action", again demonstrating the hilarious predictability of character types in given situations.

I wonder what it is, for instance, that makes BillD always drop in on threads that are about esoteric stuff he doesn't believe in and argue endlessly about it? If the weather was AS predictable as BillD, we'd all know exactly when to carry an umbrella, wouldn't we?

And I wonder what it is that makes Daylia respond so defensively to people over something like this to the point of still battling it out hundreds of posts later with many of those same people? I used to do the same over threads about UFOs, but I finally decided that I really didn't need more of that kind of aggravation with people who, like me, aren't going to change their views about UFOs.

It's like an ongoing auto wreck reading this thread. Not pretty...but you just can't help taking another look at it.

Every day I open up the Mudcat. I think, "I wonder if the great astrology mega-mudcatfight is still raging today?" I look. Holy shit, it still is! Unbelievable. Well, let's take a look.

It's a change of entertainment from reading Shambles' complaints about censorship on the forum.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: *daylia*
Date: 20 Apr 06 - 02:57 PM

I wonder what it is that makes Daylia respond so defensively ...

Well, LH, if I don't present what I know about astrology (or any other subject I enjoy) when the opportunity presents itself (if I care to, that is) -- or fail to 'defend' that knowledge and/or myself if necessary - who will?

Besides, in the 3 or 4 years I've been around Mudcat, I've never seen anyone else call people on their habitual use of twisted slant and propoganda re subjects like these. I'd never given it anything more than a silent arrrgghhh ... oh well! myself. But somehow, this thread was kinda like the straw that broke the camel's back.

Better late than never, I figure.

Ted, I do appreciate your concern, and thank you for your insights and suggestions on this thread. Please be assured that when I decide it's time to move on, that's exactly what'll happen. And for what it's worth, I've spent a lot of my time and energy in the role of peacemaker over the years, and I've discovered that "peacemaking" is not always an appropriate response. So I've been enjoying wearing a different style of 'clothing', for a change.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: *daylia*
Date: 20 Apr 06 - 03:51 PM

Oops, I meant to post this above as well. And I also wanted to say *thank you* to the Mudelf who cleaned up those italics!

...It's how people relate to each other that interests me. Shane is simply reacting exactly the way "Shane" would, for amusement's sake. He is a demonstration of the absolute outer edge of ignorant, moronic, dead stupid, meatheaded conformist reaction to things. As such he stands as a warning the rest of us. ;-) Chongo also reacted the way "Chongo" would...as an aggressively independent "man of action", again demonstrating the hilarious predictability of character types in given situations.

LH, this is quite the intriguing psychological anomoly in and of itself! Thanks for the low-down on Shane and Chongo. And I wonder ... do you suppose they might be in some way, manifestations of the unconscious, undeveloped, unexpressed, largely unknown parts of your own psyche? If so, I bet with the correct birthtime we could get more insig ....

oh, never mind...

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 20 Apr 06 - 04:14 PM

Sure, Shane and Chongo are clues to something about me. That's why I created them. Shane is sort of like the complete opposite to me in every way possible (except gender & nationality?). He is the kind of person I detested and completely despised when I was younger, but now look upon with a certain degree of amused compassion. It's Shane's relative innocence that is his most charming feature, in my opinion. He actually thinks he's among the "cool" people of this world. But then, a lot of people think that, don't they? They can't ALL be right! ;-)

Chongo is the adventurous, devil-may-care, take anything on, man of action that I never had the nerve (or the innocence) to be. He has no doubts about his chosen path in life. I have plenty of doubts about mine.

That makes it fun to slip into the "Chongo" persona for a bit now and then...as it is fun to slip into the "Shane" persona.

Every human personality is like a part in a play, some roles being more dramatic than others. That's what's so fascinating about it. I watch people playing their roles out and I wonder if they are aware it's a role? I think very few of them are. Chongo and Shane have no idea they are just playing roles they made up in their own heads. That makes them very certain of their opinions on everything...whether or not their opinions can be judged as valid from another viewpoint.

The question is, who am I? I could recount personal history, but that wouldn't do anything except perpetuate the role I've been playing in this life, and it's temporary. Very temporary. And I know it.

Who I am or who you are goes way beyond the circumstances of this life. It's a mystery that remains unanswered.

If astrology works, then its primary task would appear to be accurately identifying the role a person is temporarily playing in this life. Since most people believe that they ARE that role...that would make astrology seem to be quite useful for them if they have confidence in it...or totally useless if their role does not include believing in things like astrology. ;-)

BillD's role appears to involve, among other things, identifying and challenging what he views as irrational belief or behaviour. He appears to me to be, in his own mind, a sort of crusader against irrationality, and the term "crusade" suggest a noble cause, doesn't it? Hence, his persistence. You appear to be a crusader for the legitimacy of astrology. A crusade is a war. A war involves finding opposition and doing battle until victory is achieved (by someone). And there you have the source of what fuels this thread and keeps it going beyond 1000 posts.

Since no one is in a position to win a decisive victory here, however, this war will either go on forever...or until people simply lose all interest in pursuing it further.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: *daylia*
Date: 21 Apr 06 - 08:05 AM

Every human personality is like a part in a play, some roles being more dramatic than others.

Psychologically, people are many "personas" (ie "inner characters") all rolled into one - some conscious, well-adapted, sophisicated, and strong; others undeveloped, neglected, troublesome. This is not carved in stone, however - it seems that throughout life at certain critical junctures, conflicts arise, enabling us to recognize and develop the 'weaker characters' and bring them into balance, so that we become more complete as human beings.

Astrology offers a portrait of these 'inner characters', as well as valuable clues as to how they might manifest within our consciousness behaviour, and in our daily lives. Astrology also offers insight as to when/how these "critical junctures" arise, through the study of personal planetary transits. People with more awareness and understanding of their own inner needs, conflicts, drives (ie 'personas') and 'critical junctures' find that they no longer feel 'victimized' by life and by their own minds/emotions. No longer at the mercy of their own inner demons and conflicts, the process of integration and self-actualization becomes easier and more rewarding, and life becomes more productive.

One of the precepts of psychological astrology is that any weaker, underdeveloped, unexpressed, unacceptable 'personas' or 'inner characters' tend to be projected outwards and reflected back to the person through other people. And so, for example, people who've denied and/or repressed their own 'psychic' or 'occult' (for lack of a better word) nature, interests and abilities throughout their lives are irresistably drawn toward people like you and I Little Hawk, and into discussions like these -- so that they might eventually recognize and come to terms with these less developed aspect of their own personality.

And about being on a crusade for the legitimacy of astrology here -- well, I agree, that must be how it appears. But things are not always what they seem, LH. If I've been on a crusade here, it's not been about astrology at all. It really doesn't matter what you or Bill or Ted or anyone else thinks about astrology.

No, any "crusade" here been a personal one -- an ongoing effort to stand my ground, speak the truth, call a spade and spade and not back down / disappear when the going gets tough. For once in my life, in discussions like these! And I think I've done very well, considering. So, thanks to the Mudcat, to astrology for the fascinating 'subject material', and to all who've challenged me here for playing these essential 'roles' in my own inner drama.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: *daylia*
Date: 21 Apr 06 - 08:14 AM

PS -- hey LH, we could draw up a chart for your Shane and Chongo 'personas', just for fun, to see how accurate they are! All we'd need is exact birthtime, and we'd list Orillia as birthplace. I suppose the first post they ever made here on Mudcat would be equivalent to the "first breath', if they were real people (or chimps, sorry Chongo). That would be easy enough to find, I think! So if you want to wade through your posts here to find the first time Chongo and/or Shane made an appearance and post it here, go for it! And I'll provide the charts.

Hee hee!!

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: *daylia*
Date: 21 Apr 06 - 11:05 AM

...people who've denied and/or repressed their own 'psychic' or 'occult' (for lack of a better word) nature, interests and abilities throughout their lives are irresistably drawn toward people like you and I Little Hawk, and into discussions like these -- so that they might eventually recognize and come to terms with these less developed aspect of their own personality.

Hmmm. It would have been better to say "...people who've denied and/or repressed ... often, at certain times in their lives, find themselves irresistably drawn toward people like you and I and to discussions like these." Human beings are extremely complex, and so are the seemingly endless biological, social and enviromental variables (ie influences / restrictions / limitations) acting upon them. And that's why nothing about astrology, or the people it describes is ever absolutely definitive.

Now, if I could just balance out that oh-so-Arien damn-the-torpedoes-full-speed-ahead! approach, and develop enough patience to let a post sit for a day or two while ponder it, I'd save myself a lot of re-posts (corrections) here! I have both Sun (symbolizing ego) and Mercury (mind) in Aries. And for anyone who's interested --- this is from the Astrodienst website, re the meaning of Aries ...

"Aries is full of energy, looking for action and new things to discover, but its intention can change rapidly. Aries likes to be a pioneer, the first to be somewhere or do something. It wants to achieve things, and there is a strong need in Aries to be itself and express itself directly.

Aries is often impatient, lacking in persistence and stamina. Its style is to strike frequently and lightly rather than make a strong, sustained attack. Yet its energy level can be high enough to have the same impact as a more sustained approach.

As a fire sign, Aries puts out energy more easily than it takes it in. It can be very enthusiastic, assertive, and sometimes angry. But its anger is usually short-lived: once the energy has been expressed, the matter is concluded."

I'd say that's a highly accurate description of me. And, imo, all that's really required to observe/verify this is a quick glance over a few of my posts here on Mudcat. But Little Hawk knows me fairly well, and doesn't have any interest - apparent or otherwise - in "legitimizing' astrology either. So, if he's still around, maybe he'll offer a relatively informed, unbiased opinion as to the accuracy of that description.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 21 Apr 06 - 02:46 PM

Yes, I'd say that's an accurate description of you, Daylia.

I'll see if I can find Chongo's and Shane's birthdates...

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 21 Apr 06 - 09:33 PM

Okay, the date of Chongo's first appearance, as far as I know, was:

19 Dec 03 - 10:45 PM

That was the launch of the first Chongo Chimp story thread on Mudcat.

Birthplace? Either Orillia ...or Chicago...depending on how you look at it.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 21 Apr 06 - 09:38 PM

Shane first appeared on 13 Feb 01 - 09:32 PM    (I think...)

Place of Birth? Either Blind River...or Orillia...depending on how you look at it.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: *daylia*
Date: 22 Apr 06 - 07:51 AM

Sheesh LH, I intended this as an amusement, and now you've gone and made it all, like, WORK eh! ;-]

I used Orillia as location, as these 'personas' - the products of your own will and creativity - issued forth from the mysterious depths your psyche into the outer world via the motherboard of your computer, so to speak. And that 'mother' was in Orillia at the time, right?    BUt it's easy to change the birthplace -- just click 'edit data for ...' at the top of the chart if you like. THe changes effect the Ascendant and house cusps, but not the planetary positions.

So, here's the first astrological glimpse of Chongo
It's a clickable chart, easy to get the interpretations. And a sneak peek too (those are LONG reports!)

"Sun in Sagittarius: Sagittarius is associated with idealism, and it is very likely to want to reform things. The fire sign is more concerned with principles and general patterns than it is about details of putting the idea into practice.

Sagittarius has a very freedom-loving side. It needs room to move and the freedom to express itself. It is usually very likable but not entirely reliable in keeping agreements or being consistent. Sagittarius is happy to encounter new experiences and is not especially tradition-bound. It sees itself as being part of the whole, but does not want to be hemmed in by it.

Sagittarius is often attracted to the sciences, philosophy, religion or any other discipline that reveals the interconnectedness of all things. It is interested in understanding overall patterns of how the world works. Sagittarius enjoys everything which it finds consciousness-enlarging and liberating from the restraints of everyday life.   

You are a fun-loving person who enjoys games. You are very spirited and energetic and need to spend a lot of time outdoors to release all your energy. Because of your strong need to feel free, you may find it difficult to put up with restrictions that adults want to impose on you.

You want freedom to be friends with anyone, and you won't let others dictate to you about this.

You are very curious and want to know the answer to every question that comes to mind. As you grow older, you will become interested in finding out how the universe works in the broadest terms.

You are cheerful and positive, and other people will enjoy having you around."


ANd here's the chart for Shane


"Sun in Aquarius: Meaning of Aquarius

Aquarius enjoys social interactions, values friendships and respects what a group effort can do.

Aquarius can also be radical, innovative and highly individualistic. But most of the radical ideas Aquarius has might hold social consequences. It desires to create a more perfect society. The ideals of the French Revolution are Aquarian for example: liberty, equality and fraternity.

Being an air sign, Aquarius has a detached and fair-minded view of things. It genuinely concerns itself for the good of all, not merely its own good. It is an idealistic sign, with a strong commitment to what it believes. It is unusually free of restraints imposed by the past and tradition.   

You like new things and new ideas and are bored by old ways of thinking and acting. You are an individualist and a free spirit, but at the same time you need to work and share your life with other people.

However, even though you are attracted to new ideas, you don't readily change your thinking once you have made up your mind.

Because of your fondness for new ideas, you enjoy studying science, technology and other subjects that enable people to control the world in some way. As you get older, you may be attracted to more offbeat studies, such as astrology and the occult.

When you are with a group of friends, you think about the group as a whole rather than just about yourself. This can cause problems for you if your needs conflict with the needs of the rest of the group. You will stand up for anyone who is not being treated fairly."


Well, I dunno them as well as you do, of course, but at first glance? Truthfully, I'm not very impressed. No mention of cigars? Or dope, or even beer?   Oh well, so much for the 'legitimacy' of astrology!   But then again, any sane person with more than 2 brain cells to rub together already knows that, right?   

;-)

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: *daylia*
Date: 22 Apr 06 - 08:03 AM

PS   the computer thinks that Shane and Chongo are human beings under the age of six, LH, so the interpretations given are for a child, not an adult.   And it cannot generate a 'personal portrait' for them either -- too young and not-fully-formed, I suppose.

Hey, maybe that's why there's no mention of sex drugs and rock'n roll!

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 22 Apr 06 - 09:48 PM

Well, I find that most astrological charts tend to focus more on the positives...and that might be because people don't really want to pay their astrologer to hear that they are jerks, idiots, losers, or fools! ;-)

Shane is a spectacular example of human devolution. Like water, he seeks the easiest path down with unerring accuracy.

Chongo has his rough spots, but he's a darned good shamus. Matter of fact, you have to have rough spots to be good in that trade.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: GUEST,Guest
Date: 22 Apr 06 - 09:51 PM

I can be a sucker for beleifs , i accept that.
Its maybe because im a londoner.!