Bitcoin Forum

Aries - because they like enthusiastically starting lots of different new things & jumping in feet first
Taurus - like to conserve their assets & cash, may not be early adopters but will prob stick with it if once in
Gemini - very adaptable & mentally quick, will get the concept fast & be chatting about it on the forums & to convince all & sundry
Cancer - protective of their assets with good intuition, may sidle up to it but perhaps be slow to actually put too much in as yet
Leo - Shiny gold 1,000 BTC Casascius coins will do very nicely thanks, can you wear them as bling too btw
Virgo - cautious & worry about this new fangled monies, but will study it in great detail right down to TA first if peeps they trust recommend it
Libra - undecided, can see it's enormous potential easily but also how it could go TU at a moments notice, like to open exchanges though
Scorpio - love it, anonymous monies that can be moved around secretly - what's not to like about that for hit men, insider traders & TSR dealers plus you can even pay (or charge) for sex with it ftw
Sagittarius - instant adapters to new risky concepts - it's right up their street, did someone say Bitcoinica @ 10:1
Capricorn - no way man, I'm sticking with traditional banking & investment thanks, a rare one may get interested but only if he can be the manipulator
Aquarius - it's from the future dood, the new age's cash - Satoshi is probably one
Pisces - if they're not in just to buy wacky backy on TSR then that's a good sign as they're most intuitive with new ventures & trends

later will post stats for elements F, E, A, W & cardinal, mutable, fixed
if there's more than just a few votes then I'll do one with the Eastern lunar year animal signs too

edit: by likes most/least I realy mean is interested in BTC enough to be here

the early birds, no surprises there & they say that the young souls are nearer the beginning of the 12 signs with the wise one's of many lifetimes experience re-playing this game having levelled up to more towards the end:

https://i.imgur.com/Y3XEYh.png

the a bit later birds, no big surprise here as there is not one of the 3 earth signs that has showed up as yet then, Taurus - Virgo - Capricorn - yes I'm looking at you burros

https://i.imgur.com/HOGRx.png

though I was surprised that the multi tasking Geminis haven't found time to show up as yet

Are we looking for potential mates now ? 

Im straight, the odds on here for me to meet someone is very very very small..

yey! first earth sign, welcome you Bull you, yes BTC does = Money/assets/commodities/exchange medium, security etc, but better

https://i.imgur.com/VHeoU.png

as for the rest, yes - all's going according to plan

Aquarius FTW

Strange though, no other Air signs, being the technical nature of cryptocurrency and all that.

expect that the Libras are too busy running the exchanges & the Geminis are too busy trying to hax in to them atm

the early afternoon birds

https://i.imgur.com/Pp1zQ.png

the dodn't get out of bed until 4pm birds

https://i.imgur.com/RlzAW.png


edit: & yey a Virgo has finally taken the plunge, always a cause for celebration, ruled as it is by the planet of nature & abundance Venus & we're getting an increasing shoal of Pisces action too I see

https://i.imgur.com/gHGJq.png

ah, The Manipulator I note has honoured us with a visit at last

https://i.imgur.com/FWrvk.png

welcome Caps Sir, you old goat you

that then just leaves the sign of the twins & the sign of balancing the 2 scales, the duality signs, both in air - interesting 10101010

looks like Libra's will be the last ones to buy in, when bitcoin takes over the world  ;)

yep, too much sitting on the fence I expect

*shorts Libras*

https://i.imgur.com/VtWvm.png

tomorrow I'm going to pitch BTC to my Libra friend in rl as an experiment & I think that I'd better bring my taser along for extra prodding if needed

so Sagittarius wins it, really a draw with Aquarius & Leo (who would have won if I hadn't have voted) so Leo, Sagittarius & Aquarius are winning it atm & Libra are the BTC party poopers

will add the elemental & C,M,F stats manyana...

Astrology is insanity, and this is not the right forum for it.

Please move this superstitious nonsense to "Off-Topic".

 :'(

though if you statistically analysed my predictions against the results you would have a significant variation from just random probability, OK so I have to study up on those tricky Geminis a bit more, but still the rest are interestingly synchronistic at the very least, no? or fun, like - just for fun, you know?? fun??? :P

36 votes, 14 replies (OK mostly mine), over 220 views & 1 grumpy old pedantic git  ::)

you're not a Gemini trolling are you btw?

 :-*

so just check out ^ the Aquarius part of OP & votes ^ then pse to try & let your doors of perception creep open a crack, drop a tab or something if you can't do it naturally so long as you can cope with losing ur ego grip for a while, otherwise stay put in ur cave & stfu pse

Connecting points together and calling them signs sounds like speculation to me.

Gemini Hot Twins in the house  :D

https://i.imgur.com/xsKTZ.png

& Aquarius rules  ;D  the age of Horus

https://i.imgur.com/e36Z5.png

predicting an incoming shoal of psychicly linked Pisceses

interesting the Pisces seem to arrive to vote in shoals

Earth signs atm: 1 + 1 + 2 = 4 (which I'd like to think fairly predicable & predicted results from my OP)

Water signs atm: 3 + 3 + 5 = 11
Air signs atm: 2 = 2 =7 = 11

Fire signs atm: 3 = 4 = 5 = 12

Cardinal signs: 10
Fixed signs: 15
Mutable signs: 13

I'd say then that it's tending atm to fairly stable interest in BTC by those who will stick with it & get it more established in the main stream, though with plenty of peeps who will initiate new adaptions & developments for it too, looks good to me

https://i.imgur.com/sqMgN.png

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JeXR0Jp_q6o

I've got a poll for you. 'Stupidest poll on bitcointalk.org'
 

 You won!

sure post your poll & let the peeps vote, a poll gathers feedback from many on the forum so tends to lessen the input from those with closed minds, humourless & trolls & don't forget to let peeps include voting for ur poll too - good luck with that

Sure Astrology is bunk, but not necessary to move it, unless we are going to move all the threads about elliot waves, and whatever else people are on about these days  ;)

If someone made a poll of what type of car everyone who follows the speculation thread may drive if they have one, would that also be bunk or off-topic, perhaps some may find those stats of interest in demographing the BTC active forum speculative community, I'm even tempted to make one myself but am losing interest thu the recent few nae sayers who've dragged themselves out of their lairs to have a winge about something 50 peeps here have found to be fun enough to at least play around with, whilst  they are still grumping about whatever doesn't fit in to their narrow view of reality that everyone else must of course subscribe to & to never joke about & anyway I have other thing to do atm, in other realities ...

If it got that bad, or there were lots of threads like it, then sure some lines would have to be drawn as to what exactly is relevant to speculating, but since it hasn't happened yet there's no need to make a big deal out of it.  

or better yet delete it.

what? an approximately even spread on the poll? big surprise :o

even spread?

1 with 9 votes,

another with just 1,

out of 12

that are synchronistic to OP predictions

sure

https://i.imgur.com/Ip9yo.png

in your dreams

https://i.imgur.com/8aLJI.png

https://i.imgur.com/YmsbQ.png

♫ This is the dawning of the age of aquarius ♫ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PP6-MOphBIA)


scorpio myself tho  :o

Astrology is just as rigorously scientific as any technical analysis.

My hypothesis was that Aquarius would dominate this poll, and so far that hypothesis is supported by evidence.

right, for all you skeptards, astrology is kinda like, cosmic elliott waves ffs  >:(

FTFY

Western Astrology is based on a translation of Vedic Astrology that was accurate at the time it was translated.  However, they simplified it by ignoring precession (earth's wobble on it's axis).  In present day, western astrology is off by almost one whole sign.  It's hard to make accurate predictions about how celestial bodies will effect us when all of their supposed positions are wrong.  Vedic Astrology, OTOH, is accurate about positions and can be tremendously useful.  When my girlfriend gets fussy, I check out her chart.  It doesn't tell me exact details, but it lets me know the types of energy she is dealing with and when it will pass.  It is often blindingly obvious where the behavior comes from once I look at the chart.  It's also useful when I feel off and want to know why.

Am I just inventing patterns where they don't exist?  Perhaps.  But, astrology is a tool that has eased my mind and helped me decide how to move forward several times.  Life is always better after I check some charts and see what the hell is going on.  Besides, I do believe that EM radiation from the sun bounces off each planet differently before it returns to us.  It seems plausible to me that we are effected by how all those frequencies interact as they are seen from here on Earth.

I have never explored using it for trading, as to me that seems cheap.  I have too much respect for the usefulness of it to abuse it for monetary gain.

+ many 1's for defending astrology in a general sort of way...

Like any other "science", it is just a method (or algorithm or set of rules) for computing machines (human brains) to take raw data and transform it into information (data with meaning).

I find that even with the whole lack of account for precession in Western Astrology, I can still use the signs as they are and the archetypes that they attempt to explain to apply meaning to human behavior that would otherwise be completely random noise, and to divide behaviors into categories based on the archetypes so as to better organize the data in order to manipulate it into information (i.e., in order to better make sense of my environment).

The main general argument from the layman I tend to hear against astrology in any form, is something like:  "Yeah right, how can those stars and planets BILLIONS of light-years away possibly be affecting WHAT I'M DOING?"
This general argument is usually easily countered by invoking the big-bang:  Usually the layman will have some faith in the whole "Big Bang" theory.  So you say something like, "OK, well if at one point everything was just a single thing, that blew up to form the Universe, then isn't everything in the Universe really just part of everything else?  That is, Everything was at least at one point in time, Connected..."
If I were the layman, I would counter-argue with extrapolation on the phrase "in time", and dicker as to whether the Big Bang happened in time or not  ;D
I am not the layman though.

"LOL 1 HAZ 9 AND 1 HAZ 1 UR WRONG"

please use statistical analysis and show me that given the sample size, this is not an 'approximately' even spread, since i did in fact use that word.

please learn about confirmation bias, and about the psychological success of cold reading.

then learn some astronomy, and you'll find that the constellation in which the sun rises on the birthdays bounded by the astrological symbols have shifted in the 2000 or so years such that the calibration is now completely off (ironically, by almost 1/12, such that the signs ought to be shifted roughly one over).

then explain to me, even if it does somehow 'predict' personality archetypes, how correlation = (or even implies) causation; i.e. you have to find a mechanism through which the time of year you're born permanently and decidedly limits/predicts your personality.

...then get your head out of your ass and stop believing in star signs. really.

+21397123791273

Please listen to this wise man :)

[emphasis mine]

btw, thanks for defining 'confirmation bias' for me.

I agree... Even just studying the archetypes is useful as they are just descriptions of various personality types.  But, (and this is a weakness of astrology that needs to be understood by anyone who takes it seriously) it is very easy to accept the wrong archetype and live as if it is your natural state.  For example, I'm a scorpio sun sign by western astrology, but a libra by Vedic (positionally-accurate) astrology.  I happen to also have a strong Mars influence in my chart, so scoprio was plausible to me until I discovered the truth about Western astrology's origins.  However, I never really believed in western astrology, just looked at it with idle curiousity.  It just didn't seem accurate.

Also, with Vedic astrology, you don't just look at the sun sign.  The sun sign is indicative of the outer personality you show those who know you, the moon sign is indicative of internal emotional personality, and the ascendant sign (the sign rising on the horizon at birth) is indicative of the personality you show those who you consider "strangers".  Those are just key indicators and a real reading looks at all the grahas(sanskrit for "heavenly body") as well as Rahu/Ketu (the eclipse points), both at birth, and their current positions.

I see unexplained behavior.
I seek new information.
That new information explains the behavior.

Sounds more like the scientific method than confirmation bias to me.

um as it's you who seems to have got his knickers in a twist about this then why don't you do the statistical analysis to show that this isn't an approximately even spread & don't forget to take in to account on a scale of 1 to 12 adjusted for positive,neutral & negative expectations stated by my predictions for each sign, hard maybe to do exactly but even a dodo could probably spot that Libra/Virgo/Capricorn are rated low whilst Sagittarius/Aquarius are rated high, use an independent third parties to do a blind comparisons or program a bot to do it for you & you will see that your probability stats are pwned - average or not & perhaps ur narrow view on reality too if you were honest with ur scientific testing (& yes this can happen every x thousand/million times you run a test but we're talking here about my one time predictions & your one time calling me out on them)

Please look up the definition of "illusory correlation". Might explain a lot more than those stars =)

Definition:

An illusory correlation is the perception of a relationship between two variables when only a minor or absolutely no relationship actually exists. For example, people sometimes assume that because two events occurred together at one point in the past, that one event must be the cause of the other. These illusory correlations can occur both in scientific investigations and in real-world situations.

Stereotypes are a good example of illusory correlations. Research has shown that people tend to assume that certain groups and traits occur together, and frequently overestimate the strength of the association between the two variables. For example, let's suppose that a man holds a mistaken belief that all people from small towns are extremely kind. When the individual meets a very kind person, his immediate assumption might be that the person is from a small town, despite the fact that kindness is not related to city population.

You are wrong because sometimes people are wrong.  Got ya.  It sure explains a lot.

wrong. science involves explaining behavior through models.

1. unexplained behavior
2. form hypothesis about correlation/causation between two variables
3. verify if causation holds given the evidence

there is no model here besides 'stars affect personality types'. this hypothesis needs to be tested. furthermore, unless a mechanism can demonstrate causation, it is a correlation at best (think ice cream sales and drownings).

your bias is assuming the model, and therefore focusing on the predictions of astrology that 'fit' your common sense (and most likely disregarding far more than you realize)

Just for the record, I don't "believe in" star signs / astrology any more than I "believe in" technical analysis or I "believe in" the majestic power of the authority of a central bank.  But I have to work with what works best personally for me.

As I stated earlier, I understand Western astrology is broken, but for some reason it still works for me.  Confirmation bias, maybe, but at some base level, isn't all science just confirmation bias to keep people from going insane?  I.e. the need to turn data into information via any method available -- usually the "path of least resistance", and Astrology, broken or not, just happens to be that path for some people.  Like religion, as long as it is not forcibly pushed on anyone (i.e. as long as it does not get in the way of anyone else's freedom to practice whatever "science" they like / works best for them), there's nothing inherently wrong with practicing it.

also pse to note that I never advocated a 'belief' in astrology, I'm just interested in looking at the sychronisity of such archetypes say in how they may coincide with human psychological behaviour in a measured situation & also if you haven't got it yet in having some fun ffs

https://i.imgur.com/YqF6U.png

(60 votes divided by 12 options gives 5 as a statistic norm average or whatever that may be called) & a graded distribution above & below 5 would be expected, any predicting of that which was specific to the 12 signs much less so imo

https://i.imgur.com/CFthe.png

I've given up reading this post for today - seems like it's mutated in to some sort of it's sience-nazi created Frankestien & anyway prefer to concentrate on getting drunk atm

https://i.imgur.com/RfO5m.png

tipsy update

https://i.imgur.com/7xmL4.png

The problem here is we have not had the sufficient technology for creating a model large enough to verify affect on humans at such a large scale.  I think in time such a model could be constructed.  It would be arrogant and closed-minded to say that this is impossible.

all i hear is 'no, YOU prove god DOESN'T exist!"

you're the one making the claim, i expect you to prove that the data demonstrates more than random chance. i sincerely don't have the vested interest to take the time to prove you wrong.

read about 'burden of proof', perhaps?

plus, this is not scientific because users can easily lie on polls (not saying they did, just tending to controls). furthermore, it's not even single blind as users can read the thread before they vote. in other words, your poll cannot conclusively demonstrate anything.

What it means is that people see something in the stars, then something happens, and then attribute the thing that happened to the stars, even though there was no such relationship. That other post explained it really well. You can't test the hypothesis if the stars influence personality, events and other things like that.

it's more specific than that. please don't belittle centuries of psychological findings.

plus, if you really want to go there, 'you're kind because the sun rose "in" a constellation as viewed from mesopotamia 2000 years ago' doesn't really sound very plausible to me.

Good for you!  For some people, it does.

this is more level-headed. i appreciate that. and it would indeed be arrogant and closed-minded to refuse to do science.

let me remind you of the other component of the scientific method, however -- occam's razor -- which, roughly speaking, implies that the simpler theory is 'more likely' to be true. it is actually an application of the mathematical theorem called "Bayes' theorem".

given this, what reason do we have to believe that the arbitrary position of the earth relative to the sun affects personality traits? perhaps you might point to the predictive power of horoscopes, but we have a much simpler theory: the effects of confirmation bias, et cetera.

for instance, i could hypothesize that ice cream vendors cause drownings -- that they spend their money to lobby against safety regulations, et cetera. almost a conspiracy theory. but perhaps i don't have the resources to do an experiment demonstrating such a causal relationship? it is likely it is only correlation, that both things increase when it is warm out, and that i am falling victim to the tireless pattern-recognition software in my brain. limited in my ability to experiment, the rational belief to hold is the simpler one: one of non-causation.

that's occam's razor for you.

unfortunately, reality is not a popularity contest

1.  Unexplained Behavior: Girlfriend is bitchy.
2.  Hypothesis: Perhaps she is dealing with some energy she is having a hard time with, which is making her bitchy.
3.  Verify causation: 3 planets that have conflicting energies are currently all in the same sign, which happens to be associated with the mind, and which is also highly crowded in her birthchart, I can compare to my birthchart and how I feel to understand the differences.

From this, I choose to approach her with more sympathy and understanding.  As a result of my change in action, she has more energy to deal with the conflict within her and gets over her bitchiness quickly.  This is a real example of how astrology has improved my life.

Perhaps I'm just a dick and she's responding to me showing the tiniest bit of sympathy, but I'm sure you can see why I prefer the other explanation.

My means may be invalid, but I don't care because I get the results I'm looking for.

Also, to all those who keep mentioning astrology being 2000 years out of sync, learn to read.  I already addressed that in my first post in this thread.  I am referring to Vedic Astrology, which is accurate in present day because it accounts for precession.

Which reality, the REAL one??   ;D

Don't you think sympathy and understanding would almost always help, regardless of what the cause of her bitchyness was? Or to take an even more extreme example, what do you think would happen if you left her alone for a while? Because of the fact she is already Bitchy, it will most likely only improve from there, since more extreme situations (even bitchier) are more unlikely than her returning to normal. This is called Regression to the Mean.

But how do I have understanding without an explanation?  If I ask her for one, I get some superficial BS like "someone looked at me the wrong way".

Yes, she would get better if left alone, but sometimes I need her to return to normal quicker.  I have tried both ways.  Understanding the energy she's dealing with helps the process along tremendously.  Being able to make her feel like I understand what she is going through is tremendously helpful, and I am unable to do that without astrology.

Science is great, until you involve people and emotions.

Yes, in your eyes you might be being nice to her because of those negative energies she is dealing with, but in her eyes you might just be being nice. It doesn't really matter why you act the way you do, but if you trying to be nice because of those energies, she can benefit from you being nice just because you're nice (Which is of course a good thing!) and get back to normal quicker. It doesn't really matter what caused it, but in my opinion it's just so far fetched to seek a reason in the stars, when there's a bazillion other things that could have caused her behavior. Humans are complex creatures after all!

But that's just it.  I'm not in control of her behavior, or much else that effects it.  I can control my behavior, but I'm not going to go out of my way unless I have a reason.  Astrology provides that reason.  Trying to be nice because she's bitchy just gets me in trouble because it is forced.  Also, I don't go running to astrology every time we have an argument, only when she's excessively bitchy and I have no clue why.  Sometimes it is my fault.

BTW, I don't really look at stars except occasionally the birth star, which is another personality indicator like the sun/moon/ascendant signs.  The grahas I look at are Sun, Moon, Rahu, Ketu, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn.  Are you saying the sun doesn't effect people?  What about the moon?  Look at hospital records for full moons compared to normal nights, there are way more accidents.

this thread is fun.

i don't follow astrology much at all but i can say this: if you think you live in this world detached and unaffected by everything else you live in illusion.

+1

I don't believe in astrology but I still find it interesting and fun to read at times. This is a refreshing thread, something totally different. I'm Leo btw. My Chinese zodiac is the Ox, also known as the Bull. Is it a coincidence that I'm also a Bitcoin bull? :)

Can you please give me a source? I'd be interested to read it. I've done a few quick google searches, but I'm finding things pointing out there are no such correlations. Thanks!

Here's a scientific article, which found no such correlation: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15166467

More self poisonings during full moon:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Retrieve&list_uids=7448570&dopt=Abstract

Increase in female calls, decrease in male calls during new moon at crisis-call center:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14664724?dopt=AbstractPlus

Aggravated assault more common near full moon:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/641019?dopt=Abstract

I couldn't find one directly about hospital admissions.  In my case, that was taken from anecdotal evidence from several nurses.  The effect may be limited to those who believe in it ;).  But, the reality is, people believe in it.  That would explain it being found in limited areas, but not seen overall.  I wish I could find a study that took place in rural India, or another place where astrology is highly regarded.

Scorpio, Aquarius and Leo all tied for the lead -- These are all "fixed" signs.

http://atheistetiquette.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/minchin_storm.jpg
Link (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HhGuXCuDb1U&hd=1)

Thanks for the link, interesting video.

There are lot of charlatans.  That is for sure.  However, science and faith don't have to be contradictory.

^ this

https://i.imgur.com/24LOx.png

Cardinal: Aries, Cancer, Libra, Capricorn: 4 + 8 + 3 + 2 = 17 ~ get shit kick started & going - innovative - ice breakers - launching new concepts - also good for start ups, promotion - marketing etc

Fixed:  Taurus, Leo, Scorpio, Aquarius: 6 + 9 + 9 + 10 = 34 ~ establish shit on a solid foundation for the long term, reliable - reputation - consistency - stick with what works - good for gaining legitimacy & market share

Mutable: Gemini, Virgo, Sagittarius, Pisces: 4 + 2 + 8 + 5 = 19 ~ change that shit by inventing apps & shit for that shit & new shit & shit, R & D, development & innovation - good for inspiration & problem solving, new directions, changing any outdated concepts, brilliance (modesty)

pse excuse any typos

https://i.imgur.com/udLVo.png

nearly 3 bottles of wine, the Jessi alarms have just started Moooing highs taken out, no idea what they are but as the builders are here at dawn, better to get a little shut eye.. lol Jessi alarm Mhooos just kicked in again ftw  - must resist looking at BTC-ica balance - sleeps
zzz
the talking mac says - It's 5 o'clock

žzźżzzzz

Faith is the denial that everything is meaningless.  I don't accept his definition.

What are you basing the denial on?

Choice.

I try to base my views on what's happening around me. That way, when something happens, I won't be surprised.

I LITERALLY lol'd at the bolded part :D
Isn't the air supposed to be fuel for the fire?  Often times, it's the other way around though -- thanks for making me laugh!

Are you saying everything is meaningless, and that this should be obvious from my surroundings?

What I say is that I haven't seen any observation that makes it reasonable to believe in astrology, water memory, the tooth fairy, or christianity.

Good for you.  So why are you telling me I'm wrong when I say I have?  Are you saying you've seen everything I have and you observed it differently?  Or is it possible I've had different experiences?

I know which star sign I hate, and it's the star next to the ask ticker on Bitcoinica >:(

A very benefic sign if you ask me.

except for people who have stops at 7.2

You said the things you thought were true were based on faith. This is different from observation. A discussion about the correct or incorrect interpretation of observation is a wholly different one than the one we're having.

Interpretation of the signs is personal.  What is benefic for some is malefic for others.

Quote please.  I don't believe I said that.

KNOWLEDGE IS MERELY OPINION!

SCIENCE JUST FALLS IN A HOLE WHEN IT TRIES TO EXPLAIN THE NATURE OF THE SOUL!

IM SAGITARIAN! (not really, scorpion)

Upon review, it seems you didn't actually say this. I merely got the impression from you arguing that faith has a place alongside science, that you were holding beliefs merely by faith. I didn't realize you were arguing hypothetically.

Way to make assumptions... see, even you can be blinded by faith in your beliefs.  To believe otherwise is folly.

I'm not arguing hypothetically... you can't hold beliefs without faith.  Science can help you hone those beliefs to approximate truth.  But, IMHO, you have an faith in science that rivals the faith of religious extremists.  Science is performed by human beings, who are fallible.

The words in my previous post were written with a touch of sarcasm in the back of my head. Indeed, you did not say it literally, but the words you spoke clearly meant you either held some beliefs out of faith, or were arguing just for the sake of arguing. The latter seemed unlikely to me. I had hoped you would have understood this from my message.

Allow me to quote Tim Minchin once more here, since you're basically stating Storm's part of the conversation here:

Thanks... I watched the video..... You're just lumping me in with other people who have faith (a very large and diverse group) and repeating the thoughts of others.

Minchin is an artist, and as such has used hyperbole.  The fact that you treat it as gospel is revealing.

I do hold beliefs out of faith... my point is so do you.  There are no beliefs that don't require faith.

Definition of faith: Complete trust or confidence in someone or something.
So either, you have faith, or you don't have complete confidence in anything.

Do you have faith, or is it possible that the sun isn't the center of the solar system?  You can only choose one by the dictionary definition of faith.

are you kidding me??

correlation does not imply causation

do you understand what that means?

If you tell me I have a faith that rivals the faith of religious extremists, then you insult my deeply. I then don't feel the need to respond with a detailed reply, especially not when the core of my message was stated much more eloquently by someone with better verbal skills than me.

Edit: To give a reply with content: I do not have complete confidence in anything.

Yes, I understand what that means.  However, lack of evidence does not disprove causation.  Do you understand what that means?

How the hell is one supposed to prove that the moon contributed to a person's decision to kill themselves?  The best you can do is show correlation, and that has been demonstrated.  I will accept that causation in this case not falsifiable, but that doesn't make it inherently false.  It does mean you need a different tool from science to be able to make a decision.  Either way you decide, your decision is based on faith, so unless you decide to not decide, you are going on faith.

Emphasis added.

So it's possible that the sun isn't the center of the solar system is your answer.

This rigidity against admitting your anti-faith crusade is folly is why I made the comment about religious extremists.  Like you, they refuse to change their mind when what they thought they knew (the definition of faith) is contradicted by new evidence (me looking it up in the dictionary for you).

Why are you so anti-faith?  I seriously would like to know.  Did some religious nut jobs scare you or something?  Just because there are crazy people who make extraordinary claims doesn't mean all people who make extraordinary claims are crazy.

I believe there's a teapot circling the Earth, halfway between the Earth and the moon. It's slightly smaller than what we can see with the best current telescopes.
There is a lack of evidence to the contrary: You have no proof it's not there, therefore you can't call my belief retarded.

Easy, keep a very large amount of people in a space where they can't see the moon, and thus don't know if it's full moon or not. Drug them into a coma for a random amount of time between 1 and 30 days, so they don't remember if it's full moon or not. Then let them live in that place where they can't see the moon. If they then suicide more often during full moons, that would be strong evidence for a causation.

If something is not falsifiable, it doesn't make it true either. The teapot I mentioned up there is not falsifiable. That doesn't mean you should respect my belief in the teapot.

If something really cannot be decided by science at the moment, the correct stance is to be agnostic about it: Admitting that you don't know if it's true or false. Deciding based on a whim or a feeling will not get you anywhere.

Usually though, some things that can't be decided by science, can still be given a probability by science. The teapot? Unlikely: Add all the different possibilities of methods by which a teapot could get there. The total possibility is still very, very small. Therefore, I belief, with high certainty, that there is no teapot there.

Ok, you are entitled to believe what you want.  I will only complain if your beliefs cause me harm.
Can you design a study that doesn't involve huge lapses in ethics?
Sure, it doesn't make it true.  I may not be required by your beliefs to respect your belief, but I am required to by mine.
I agree with you there.  However, sometimes a decision has to be made.  At that point, I turn to research and meditation.  I do this because my experience tells me this usually produces the best solution to my current dilemma.
I agree it's unlikely, but I'm not about to bash you for suggesting it might be possible.  That is my point.

Aquarius, FTW!   :D ;D ;)

I think all views should be subject to bashing.  If the holder of the view deserves to hold it, he/she will continue holding after the bashing.

From Liber Al Vel Legis:
AL 2.59: "Beware therefore! Love all, lest perchance is a King concealed! Say you so? Fool! If he be a King, thou canst not hurt him.
AL 2.60: Therefore strike hard & low, and to hell with them, master!"

1: "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it does not go away."

2: "That which can be destroyed by the truth should be."

3: It is true that the center of the Sun is not the exact center of the solar system, only very nearly so!

Why should we believe this? Well, it is effected by the gravity of the orbiting Earth, Jupiter, comets, planets, planetesimals, and Russel's teapot and other objects therein contained.

Yet the center of the sun is nearly the center due to the immense mass of the sun compared to the rest.

Updating the heliocentric model of reality on this new knowledge I could, and did in fact discard my (slightly) wrong,
imprecise heliocentric worldview in favor of a similar-but-better, more accurate model of the solar system.

The map is not the terrain, perfect in every detail. But a map of reality should look like reality, rather than it's alternatives.

Now, what would the world look like if astrology was true?

Having faith means you stop asking.
It means you accept things without thinking about it.
It means you never find out how to make something better.
It means arbitrary habits such as raindancing or avoiding black cats are followed, because people believe it to be effective.
It means poor people are scammed out of their money by quackery.
It means people don't question themselves, don't ask themselves if there is a better way. "Religion is required for morals"? Not quite.
The people with a little faith open the doors for the people with a lot of faith.
This means children don't get a proper education, never learning the beauty of evolving species.
It means equal rights are gone, with human beings being suppressed (homosexuals, other races, women).
It means large amounts of money go into creating huge buildings in which faith is perpetuated.
Having faith means people with a different faith are the enemy.
It means fighting, wars, and death.
Having faith means never going from hiding from Zeus' lightning bolt, to finding out how it works, to harnessing electricity.
It means never emerging from our simple caves, never finding the beauty behind the scenes, the magnificence of emergence, the possibilities of intelligence, and the wonders humankind is capable of.

You speak to me of faith, yet all I see is what is wrong in this world. Let go of faith, and let us start on the rest of the future.

Your statements about your model of the solar system leaves out a lot of details. So does the average person's understanding of what I consider real astrology.  As I have said, there are many charlatans, and I don't attempt to abuse it for predictive purposes.  I use astrology to better understand my current situation.  I believe that if the astrology I believe in were true, the world would look exactly as it does.  As far as I'm concerned, I'm merely looking at the current position of the heavenly bodies near me in space and filtering that through my initial impressions from my strongest early memory: birth.  By learning to feel the energies within your body, one can even learn to recognize their motions without looking up the chart.  However, personally I'm not that finely tuned yet and often turn to calculations to help me decipher the energies I'm being exposed to.

I reject your definition of faith.

I have not stopped asking.
I do not accept things without thought.
I always look for a better way.
I don't think any of my habits are arbitrary.  I don't perform sacrifices or dance to evoke a favor from any deity.
It is unfortunate that this happens, but many poor people are helped by people of faith as well.
You already mentioned not looking for a better way.... I don't agree religion is required for morals.
Mental instability and a lack of community lead to people of excessive faith.  They go their to escape a feeling of isolation, not because they admire those of sane faith.
Poor education does happen, but again many people of faith provide great opportunities for children
Please tell me when equal rights truly existed.... I'm not sure we've ever been closer
Most churches I know are community built.... Televangelists are not the greatest examples of faithful people
My faith hold tolerance above most other ideals
Again, this is mental instability, not faith
Again, you assume I stopped asking questions... I disagree

BTW, attempting to rip people's faith from them also leads to the isolation that breads radicalism.

You are only focusing on the loud minority who are mentally unstable.  Was Gandhi a fool for believing he could get the British to leave without violence?  It sure took a lot of faith.  Let me be about my beliefs and maybe we can work together on the future.  If you aren't interested in the topic of this thread, please just leave it be.  I don't come into threads and tell people their discussion is pointless only to spew idealism for 3 pages.  You are only creating more divisiveness, delaying your dreams of a glorious future.  The only way we can move forward is to be tolerant and accepting.  We don't all have to agree about philosophy to work together.

NO! No it would not! Everything discovered in the sciences since Aristotle would be a lie.

The laws of nature are laws, not whims.  Astrology cannot work some of the time, it has to work it had to work all of the time, for all of the people.


Heavenly bodies are VERY FAR AWAY. A lightyear is ten trillion kilometers.

Their influence is strictly limited to light and gravity.

An apple in a nearby tree will influence you to a much stronger degree than the faraway lumps of rock, or unimaginably distant lumps of mostly hydrogen.

Aha! Make horoscopes based on apples, not stars! (It works equally well, no better, no worse.)


Those energies are commonly called emotions. Emotions are created in the brain.

Emotions are not, could not be, in any way influenced by the stars.  (Even if one believes they are.)


That is the emotion of confusion. You cannot go on believing wrong things and expect your brain not to be confused about it.

How exactly do you know this?

@elux

Please read my previous posts.... You are obviously using a different definition of astrology than I am.  As I've said before, the grahas I consider are all within our solar system.  Emotions are absolutely influenced by the the sun, and other planets, even if it's too subtle for the untrained nervous system to identify.  Astrology is mostly useful for me regarding interpersonal relationships.  It allows me to understand what influences we are all experiencing which helps me to relate to the emotions of others.

I'm guessing elux is either Aquarius or Pisces or right on the cusp between.  Possibly Libra or Virgo.

Good question! On reading my own comment, I realize I have made my self look quite silly.
I have many times found myself awestruck by the beauty of a starry night, or the discoveries of astronomy.

So in this sense, emotions can be influenced by stars. ;)

That said, there are (at low temperatures) four forces in nature, precisely accountable for everything that has happened since the beginning of time.

The electromagnetic force. (Makes object solid, light, radiation.)
The strong nuclear force. (Keeps the nuclei of atoms from imploding or blowing apart.)
The weak nuclear force.  (Breaks down heavy, unstable atoms through radioactive decay.)
Gravity. (Keeps shit together, mostly.)

The strength of interactions generally decrease with distance to zero long, long, very much earlier indeed before we get to astronomical distances.

There is no measurable effect. If astrology worked as proposed it would be measurable.

Excepting side effects that would literally destroy the Universe.

So close to zero that we can't even see the the stars that are millions of light years away.... oh wait.

Besides, I'm not talking light years.... once again I'm only looking within our solar system.

You'd be wrong, as could be expected with probability 2/3. You've now exhausted 4/12 options.
You'll have have equal probabilities of getting it right by random chance in two more tries.

https://i.imgur.com/WZET7.png       https://i.imgur.com/XtyoD.png      

https://i.imgur.com/7m9TG.png

https://i.imgur.com/UsnHV.png      

Leos like to win, actually they insist upon it

... edited to add a few hours later:

https://i.imgur.com/RDP24.png

Why aren't you lot confused to hell by any of the obvious, fatal, non-recoverable problems with astrology? :)


So... Does astrology only work during the night? When you're looking?

How do the stars, err, planets know what you've been doing throughout the day?

How do you know in advance which excuses to make for why the dragon in your garage can not be seen?

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/The_Dragon_in_My_Garage


But wait...

Why these planets, not others! There are likely billions of planets in the Milky Way alone! (Not to mention stars in the Universe.)

What about the ones you didn't count, does astrology disregard objects on the southern hemisphere, only visible from Australia,
where astrology wasn't invented, and if so does astrology work in the Middle East, India, the US, but not Australia? Why?

PS: Generally we can only see "close" stars that are some several hundred lightyears distant. (Still hugely impressive in my opinion. Astronomy is fun!)   :D

You're self contradictory.

First you say I can't be right because it's too far, then when I counter that argument, you ask me why I ignore the distant objects.

I'm pretty sure there aren't any grahas that can only be seen from one hemisphere.

Slow down and attempt a cohesive argument instead of assuming you completely understand what I'm talking about.  I would agree that much of what gets passed off as astrology is BS.  You have either not read my previous posts or you have not paid attention when you did.  I'm tired of repeating myself.

"lack of evidence does not disprove causation"

a causative relationship is a positive claim. a positive claim requires positive evidence. so yes, the positive claim that there is a mechanism by which the phase of the moon (or any astrology) directly affects people's actions and dispositions, there being no evidence for such a claim, should not be assumed by a rational person.

there is currently a lack of evidence for a causative relationship between ice cream sales and drownings. if someone believed in such a relationship, you would call them a conspiracy theorist.

EM and gravitational force are the mechanisms.

In that case can we mimic the effects of star charts using artificial lighting and centrifuges? Are astronauts more susceptible to the influence of the planets than earthbound people?

Possibly... if you're accurate enough.... but I don't think we have the equipment or knowledge to do this yet.

No clue... I'd be willing to go to space to run some experiments.

Do you know the magnitudes of the energies you are talking about, have you compared this to thermal noise? Does the presence of Jupiter's great red spot affect the readings?

*edit=confusing wording

No, please enlighten me.  I know I can feel the sun on my skin on a clear day.  I know I can see the oceans follow the moon.  I believe I've read that other planets can alter the tides as well, but I don't have a source at the ready.  What causes Jupiter's great red spot?  If the red spot alter's Jupiter's electromagnetic field, or changes it's mass distribution significantly, than maybe, but I doubt it's worth worrying about 99.99999% of the time.

hmm, what organ is used to sense the EM radiation and gravity. The skin? Are burn victims less susceptible to the influence? What if you get a skin transplant? Does this effectively change your sign?

There are many good questions one could ask about astrology. Once we are all bitcoin millionaires we can start sending people up into space, etc to find answers to these questions.

Oh, I didn't realize the sun was involved. I thought it was only stars and planets. I will get back to you with some numbers.

You do know light is EM radiation, right?  Maybe you're just trolling.  I've stated the details of my beliefs several times already in this thread.  If you want to continue to tag team me, please at least spare me from repeating myself.

https://i.imgur.com/XkAmQ.png       https://i.imgur.com/6VYrU.png

& my previous post (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=58810.msg694623#msg694623) above was updated a while back with elementally coloured bars, congrats Leos, you sunny ones, you  :)  Casascius will be pleased

https://i.imgur.com/wyXAZ.png

Was this a guess at me? If so you would probably like to know that I am a Pisces.

Conclusion: Any effect the gravitational pull of the moon may be having on a person could be equaled by moving 11 meters away from the earth, that is the same as going up about 3 floors.

The tides occur because of the huge distance between the near and far side of the earth (relative to the moon). Most peoples brains have a diameter much smaller than the diameter of the earth, which is why you don't get tidal effects in there due to the moon.

And yea, I assumed this stuff must still work for blind people so it had to be more than just eyesight.

Well, two questions arise:

How do these affect the behaviour of people?
Of course there are phenomena we know exist but don't know the exact causes of, so let's go for the more important one:
Do you have any evidence that predictions made by astrology are correct in a statistically significant sense?

I hate repeating myself.  I don't use astrology for predictive purposes.  Again, if you wish to continue tag teaming me please read my posts.

I read your posts. You do seem to claim there's an effect that can be understood, which implies predictive power. Or do you mean you just look at what happened and pick an explanation that makes you feel better about it?

I suspect that's the whole point of emotions.  I surmise that most, if not all, "scientific laws" are just explanations that were agreed upon consensus because they make the vastest majority of people "feel good (or comfortable, placated, whatever emotional descriptor makes you... feel good... )

"wrong" or "incorrect" in this context really just means "abnormal" or "not the consensus paradigm".

There is an aspect of subjectivity to science. I would just say that scientific laws are widely perceived as "more plausible explanations than the alternatives".