How Are Horoscopes Still a Thing?
Science Age of Humans. Future of Space Exploration. Human Behavior. Our Planet. Earth Optimism Summit. Ingenuity Ingenuity Festival. The Innovative Spirit. Travel Taiwan. American South. Travel With Us. Featured: Bankruptcy Strands Thousands of Vactationers. At the Smithsonian Visit.
New Research. Curators' Corner. Ask Smithsonian. Photos Submit to Our Contest. Photo of the Day. Video Ingenuity Awards. Smithsonian Channel. Video Contest. Games Daily Sudoku. Universal Crossword. In astrology, personalized horoscopes are printed by birth date and make vague predictions — generally about the love life, success, and health of people under the same horoscope sign.
There is no mechanism to explain how it could work, no force that can back it up, and, furthermore, no rational reason to split up the entire human population into 12 groups symbolized by randomly assigned constellations. A constellation is a group of stars that forms an imaginary outline that seems to look like something. Most constellations represent an animal, an object, or a mythological hero. Twelve ancient constellations were assigned to the zodiac, with each representing a particular sign.
These constellations were first described in Babylon, some 3, years ago. The Babylonian star catalogs entered Greek astronomy in the 4th century BC, circulating across different cultures. There is no indication of why everyone born at the same time of year would be under the same influence. However, despite several trials and experiments, astrology has never demonstrated its effectiveness scientifically and was refuted through various methods more on that a bit later.
Other astrologers propose conventional causal agents such as electromagnetism and gravity. But the gravitational effect of constellations is completely negligible compared to even that of the moon, let alone the Earth — and the perceived magnetic field of other planets and constellations is far smaller than those produced by modern household appliances. Critically evaluating a hypothesis, testing it against a conflicting theory and adjusting the theory based on existing evidence is essential in science — and astrology fails on all three accounts.
Basically, magic. Regardless of the general disbelief of scientists regarding astrology, there have been quite a few attempts to assess its effectiveness. But the few existing ones are quite convincing. Carlson was very careful in designing the study, making sure that it fit both the requirements of the scientific and the astrologic communities. He involved 28 astrologers from Europe and the US who were held in high esteem by their peers. He also made sure that the study was a double-blind — during the study, neither the participants nor the researchers know which participants belong in which group.
According to astrology, the subject should have had very similar traits, but this was not the case. A different study , from different authors, with an even larger sample size came up with similar results. There are several studies and reviews of studies and, as mentioned above, they all indicate the same thing: astrology is all smoke and mirrors.
Why is that? In an Indian court ruled that astrology is science.
Since then the government has financially supported doctorate programs in Indian universities on astrology. Reblogged this on The Logical Place. Thanks, Niels Bohr. I have also dabbled in horoscope writing. At times there were wire problems and not all of our syndicated stuff would arrive, then whoever was least busy in the office would type a bucket of drivel to be used for the horoscopes. And naturally, GitHub comes through.
With a side-serving of diced Deepities. Sure thing. As soon as the NYT reimburses me the penny of my paper cost spent on the astrology bit. As I recall, all or virtually all of the participants agreed their respective descriptions. It was then revealed that the sheet for each sign contained exactly the same personality traits.
Remember that most Universities now teach that Science, reason, logic et. I believe Nancy Reagan was into astrology. She would advise Ronnie on when to schedule meetings and other things relating to decisions he made as president, and he would listen to her advice. Glad the country made it through his terms. Or did we. Effects are still being felt. We never know what us going on behind the curtains. If I remember correctly, it has some astrology in it too.
After all, it is all one big scam, right? Does it? I thought most astrological predictions were couched in such vague terms they would fit anything. Just like all fortune telling. Historically of course, though, astrology fulfilled a very noble function as the motivation for all serious astronomy. But eventually astronomy and astrology diverged. I was going to say the same, horoscopes are personal and so varies — or at least their personal interpretation varies.
The direct analogy to religion is personal intercessory prayers that also could be about anything. Yet such prayers were falsified against a null hypothesis in a meta-analysis, just 20 years after a similar statistical test on horoscopes was performed. It seems to me that when people describe religious claims as non-specific and putatively untestable they are thinking of such things as the magic agencies behind the intercessory prayer magic. So if star patterns that are man made projections of star light from various distances can be rejected as influencing us — too weak remaining gravitational interactions — why is it so curious that man made projections of anthropomorphic agencies can be rejected as influencing us?
As opposed to NOT actual scientists? Are there any NYT articles written by not actual reporters? People deprived of dreaming go mad. The madman is the man who has lost everything except his reason. Honestly, the worst part for me is the moralistic attitude adopted by such believers. For the same reasons that the psychic Randi exposed as a fraud social engineering of the attendees and radio earpiece continued to make money from willing believers.
Astrology makes all sorts of claims, as we know. I am still reading the Wikipedia article as a start to understand how it could grow alongside astronomy, and how it stalled out — possibly in the state we know it today.
- january 24 pisces astrology.
- Does Astrology Need to Be True? A Thirty-Year Update;
- birthday 23 december horoscope 2019.
- Debunking Astrology – The Planets Just Aren’t That Into You.
- horoscope december 17 gemini or gemini?
Likewise for alchemy and chemistry. Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email. Sign me up! Copyright notice for material posted in this website. Why Evolution Is True. Clifford, The Ethics of Belief If a newspaper has an astrology column, write it off.
Call it a sign of the times. Share this: Tweet. Like this: Like Loading This entry was written by whyevolutionistrue and posted on March 15, at am and filed under woo. Bookmark the permalink. Follow any comments here with the RSS feed for this post.
A professional astrologer realizes astrology isn’t real – Under the Greenwood Tree
Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed. Posted March 15, at am Permalink. Posted March 15, at pm Permalink. Posted March 22, at am Permalink. Posted March 16, at am Permalink. Posted March 16, at pm Permalink. David Harper. Posted March 17, at pm Permalink. A C Harper. Keith Douglas. Posted March 18, at am Permalink. Robert Elessar. Posted March 20, at pm Permalink.
About This Article
Posted March 18, at pm Permalink. Jon Gallant. Mark Sturtevant. Steve Pollard. Devils Advocate. Daniel Sharp. Jim Danielson.