Oddly enough I know of him and like what he does although there is always a hidden agenda. He is a self publicist and he is a failed magician who's efforts to bend spoons are even worse than Uri Gellers.

Nevertheless much of what he says is spot on...the trouble is that like all sceptics he states the blatantly obvious.

If James Randi were to come on here now I'd wipe the floor with him and then take him to the cleaners. That may seem surprising but I've done it many time before with his colleagues so why not the man himself.

I would give Randi 3 test.

1) Jamie, if you don't believe in the paranormal then why have you spent your entire life researching it when I know its complete tripe.

Would I be correct in saying its a nice little earner?


2) You have a bad habit of mixing up Astrology with the Paranormal. Could you tell us what happened when your society CSICOP tried to investigate Astrology.

Were they not found to have manipulatefd, lied and cheated the statistics, James? Isn't it an utter disgrace that Nobel Prize winning scientists purposely falsified thier stats, James? Aren't you just a tad ashamed of these...so-called..objective scientists. Objective my ass! :D


3) The Great Billy Chyldyshe (aka Daz Madrigal) has £1 MILLION PRIZE FOR ANYONE WHO CAN DISPROVE ASTROLOGY ONCE AND FOR ALL?

Make my day, Punk?

Where do you get this stuff... ?
You are quite full of yourself arent you ?

Where do you get this stuff... ?
You are quite full of yourself arent you ?

The other side of the universe, in a parallel dimension. Using a star gate to cross to that reality.

Billy:

Oddly enough I know of him and like what he does although there is always a hidden agenda.

Randi is quite up front about his "agenda". Take a look:

www.randi.org

He is a self publicist and he is a failed magician who's efforts to bend spoons are even worse than Uri Gellers.

Actually, he was a very successful magician, and he bends spoons at least as well as Geller, who has been caught cheating many times.

If James Randi were to come on here now I'd wipe the floor with him and then take him to the cleaners.

And if wishes were horses, beggars would ride.

I would give Randi 3 test.

Why don't you take Randi's challenge instead, and take his million dollars for yourself? Do you claim to have paranormal powers? Or can you prove that astrology works? Either one would get you $1 million if you can demonstrate it under controlled conditions.

Do you have a public profile sufficient to apply for the challenge?

1) Jamie, if you don't believe in the paranormal then why have you spent your entire life researching it when I know its complete tripe.

Would I be correct in saying its a nice little earner?

Randi hasn't spent his entire life on that. He was a professional magician. Also, Randi is entitled to earn a living, just like you.

2) You have a bad habit of mixing up Astrology with the Paranormal. Could you tell us what happened when your society CSICOP tried to investigate Astrology.

Check for yourself:

www.csicop.org

Were they not found to have manipulatefd, lied and cheated the statistics, James?

No.

Isn't it an utter disgrace that Nobel Prize winning scientists purposely falsified thier stats, James? Aren't you just a tad ashamed of these...so-called..objective scientists. Objective my ass! :D

These claims are libellous. Please post your evidence.

3) The Great Billy Chyldyshe (aka Daz Madrigal) has £1 MILLION PRIZE FOR ANYONE WHO CAN DISPROVE ASTROLOGY ONCE AND FOR ALL?

Sure you do.

Make my day, Punk?

Why don't you just prove it true and claim Randi's million?

I'm wondering why the trolling OP doesn't actually go to the JREF forum and post his nonsense there. James Randi isn't a member of Sciforums (that we know of), therefore, creating a thread to challenge Randi here is obvious trolling.

Moreover, even those who dislike James Randi can't exactly call him a "failed magician" since his career as a magician is a matter of public record and one that was very successful by even the worst standards. Indeed, there are many public records of Randi appearing on stage and television performing tricks which he freely admits to being tricks in which hosts and the audience were unable to catch him up.

Clearly Billy whomever is a fraud and a liar, otherwise he is deluded. In another thread he was called out on his lies/delusions and has yet to provide evidence for his positive claim of objective truth with regard to astrology.

Rather than continue to show intellectual cowardice, this troll should be required to establish his evidence or leave our board. We've enough trolls as it is. All the kooks and woo-woos want to come to the "science board" and get their 15 minutes of google fame when the big search engine lights up the marquee of their screenname.

But the extent of intellectual cowardice isn't limited to Billy's refusal to show the evidence of his paranormal nonsense (astrology). He also demonstrates it by attacking an individual that doesn't participate in our board. Such a strawman is constructed simply to berate and deride James Randi in a place where Billy won't have to worry about "wiping the floor" or taking Randi "to the cleaners" and whatever other cliche metaphors he can think of.

The reality is, that should Billy dare set a cyber-foot on the doorstep of JREF, it is he that would have his ass handed to him.

If you aren't a coward, Billy, go there and post: http://forums.randi.org/

Is this locked?

Spyder said something about bringing threads together.

I'll just check.

<< James Randi isn't a member of Sciforums (that we know of) >>

Someone mentioned Randi and then James R. posting, which I admit seemed odd because I doubt he can be bothered.

The point is...ignoring the tripe above about being a 'troll'..as a forum host I know the difference between trolling and just being someone with a different opnion...so the poster above is deluded to say the least.

Er..the point is that I had some correspondence with both the Skeptical Enquirer and the Skeptic (english version). It was full of stuff about ghost hunters and people who take photos of frisbees or of Venus and then fob them off to a gullible public.

I think my point to the editor was a very valid one. In short...why waste time with this rubbish. Surely anyone who takes it seriously enough to research and write about is as odd as the UFO hunters. And indeed it is true. Members of the Sceptic - or Skeptic as they insist < yawn > - are indeed every bit as eccentric and as odd as the people who belive in tripe such as crop circles.

The Editor..Steve Donelly, Prof of Elect.Engineering at Salford Uni had the good grace to accept that Astrology was indeed a different kettle of fish altogether. Ask him?

He also had the good grace to concede that scientists had completely failed to refute the Gauquelin data and had much to be ashamed about for falsifying results. It was and remains a despicable blot on science. To deliberately distort results has no place in moral society let alone Science!

So quite the reverse...there ARE some decent blokes out there and I have no probs with James Randi at all. I think he's barking up the wrong tree re. astrology and he tends to concentrate on the vast lower end of the market. Its akin to writing off a tabloid as a piece of junk when with a little effort he could have bought a broadsheet.

I simply think that he's found himself a profitable niche and thats fine. Nothing more, nothing less. Essentialy though these people..even quite clever people like Patrick Moore are pleasant enough but are just as odd as the people they criticise. Thats why they have interesting beards and hair styles..its like going back and watching the Open Univ programmes circa 1972 :)))

<< If you aren't a coward, Billy, go there and post: http://forums.randi.org/ >>

lol it'd be akin to Jesse Jackson addressing the KKK.

Why bother?

The point is...ignoring the tripe above about being a 'troll'..as a forum host I know the difference between trolling and just being someone with a different opnion...so the poster above is deluded to say the least.

Your opinion has been trumped, with facts. Which forum do you host? Allow us to come over and tear you a new one in front of your members. And, we'll demonstrate what trolling is and isn't so that you may revise your definition.

Er..the point is that I had some correspondence with both the Skeptical Enquirer and the Skeptic (english version). It was full of stuff about ghost hunters and people who take photos of frisbees or of Venus and then fob them off to a gullible public.

You mean, like those who fob off astrology to the gullible public?

I think my point to the editor was a very valid one. In short...why waste time with this rubbish. Surely anyone who takes it seriously enough to research and write about is as odd as the UFO hunters. And indeed it is true. Members of the Sceptic - or Skeptic as they insist < yawn > - are indeed every bit as eccentric and as odd as the people who belive in tripe such as crop circles.

And astrology.

The Editor..Steve Donelly, Prof of Elect.Engineering at Salford Uni had the good grace to accept that Astrology was indeed a different kettle of fish altogether. Ask him?

Why? His opinion of astrology doesn't make it any more valid than yours.

He also had the good grace to concede that scientists had completely failed to refute the Gauquelin data and had much to be ashamed about for falsifying results. It was and remains a despicable blot on science. To deliberately distort results has no place in moral society let alone Science!

What do you know of science? So far, you've not demonstrated even the slightest bit of knowledge. How can you even comment on such a thing?

So quite the reverse...there ARE some decent blokes out there and I have no probs with James Randi at all. I think he's barking up the wrong tree re. astrology and he tends to concentrate on the vast lower end of the market. Its akin to writing off a tabloid as a piece of junk when with a little effort he could have bought a broadsheet.

Didn't know there was a 'lower end' to the market of astrology? Most likely, you think Randi is 'barking up the wrong tree' because you know all to well he would shred your claims to pieces, kinda like we did. :D

I simply think that he's found himself a profitable niche and thats fine. Nothing more, nothing less.

Isn't that what you've done?

3) The Great Billy Chyldyshe (aka Daz Madrigal) has £1 MILLION PRIZE FOR ANYONE WHO CAN DISPROVE ASTROLOGY ONCE AND FOR ALL?


Sure I can do just that. I want proof that you have 1 million dollars in an escrow account and I want a legally binding contract (compatible with the U.S. and your geography) so I can sue you when you back out once I disprove astrology.

Its not in dollars. I'm Anglais, Old bean.

The way to shut up sceptics is to turn the tables and ask them 'why they spend so much time trying to disprove something they think don't exists?

For some reason they just can't choke out an answer no matter how long theyre given. A bit like Q and Oli. Theyre confuzzled.

The way to shut up sceptics is to turn the tables and ask them 'why they spend so much time trying to disprove something they think don't exists?
Because some one comes along and say he can prove it?
Then fails to offer any evidence whatsoever.
We're still waiting...

For some reason they just can't choke out an answer no matter how long theyre given. A bit like Q and Oli. Theyre confuzzled.
:roflmao:

Its not in dollars. I'm Anglais, Old bean.

What's the conversion for 1 mil Anglais in USD?


The way to shut up sceptics is to turn the tables and ask them 'why they spend so much time trying to disprove something they think don't exists?

For some reason they just can't choke out an answer no matter how long theyre given. A bit like Q and Oli. Theyre confuzzled.


In my case its to win your money ;). I suspect that the act of disproving popular fantasies is a way for a skeptic to promote truth and exposes liars for what they are.

An easy way to sell books is the more likely explanation.

For some reason they just can't choke out an answer no matter how long theyre given. A bit like Q and Oli. Theyre confuzzled.

Allow me to be the first to shake you by the neck. :D

You need as many smilies as you can get because as with most scientists you almost totally absent of any wit whatsoever. Even less so than Olllie.

Whats sad is that even the Editor of Randi's rag..accepted most of the points on this thread and went as far as to say that science had failed to answer many of the points put to it.

Talking to you is like being insulted by an 6 yr old..in fact my 6 yr is a lot more inventive than you are.

He could describe you talents perfectly. Your only talent, Pal is being able to play blow football with your back against the table.

Now that IS funny. And it doesnt need a grinning loon after every sentence to make me howl with laughter.

Give us something to disprove then.. but you wont, since you know fullwell that we actually will.

Astrology is the TRIPE here.

Talking to you is like being insulted by an 6 yr old..in fact my 6 yr is a lot more inventive than you are.

Does your 6-year old lie as much as you do as well?

Well he ALWAYS has to win..so I let him - but he's the exception.

Does your 6-year old lie as much as you do as well?

Its interesting...you are in a large clique of people attacking just one.

Would you like to try a one to one..anything could be arranged?

Its interesting...you are in a large clique of people attacking just one.

Would you like to try a one to one..anything could be arranged?

I'm game, let me know what specifically you have in mind to demonstrate that astrology works.

Its interesting...you are in a large clique of people attacking just one.

Would you like to try a one to one..anything could be arranged?



I'm game, let me know what specifically you have in mind to demonstrate that astrology works.




Well? Were you just lying again or what?

Its interesting...you are in a large clique of people attacking just one.

Perhaps the problem is that you take astrology personally, and believe people are attacking you personally. No, you are here making claims that astrology works, all by yourself.

Of course, there are a number of people attacking THAT IDEA, not you personally.

So, if you simply detach yourself personally from astrology, you'll have no problem.

I'm game, let me know what specifically you have in mind to demonstrate that astrology works.

Okay...I want you to write an analysis of one member on the Astrology thread. As you know, its all rubbish so its very easily done.

When you've done that, I'll write an analysis using astrology and we shall allow the member who posted the chart to choose which is the most accurate.

Is that acceptable to you or are you going to duck out yet again?

Okay...I want you to write an analysis of one member on the Astrology thread. As you know, its all rubbish so its very easily done.
When you've done that, I'll write an analysis using astrology and we shall allow the member who posted the chart to choose which is the most accurate.
Is that acceptable to you or are you going to duck out yet again?

How does comparing one spurious analysis against another prove that astrology works?
Crunchy doesn't claim that his analyses are scientific - but you do, therefore what's the point of getting Crunchy to do one?

Okay...I want you to write an analysis of one member on the Astrology thread. As you know, its all rubbish so its very easily done.

When you've done that, I'll write an analysis using astrology and we shall allow the member who posted the chart to choose which is the most accurate.

Is that acceptable to you or are you going to duck out yet again?

I don't get it, how does pitting two subjective interpretations against each other prove one of them is actually objective? Don't get me wrong, I am all participating in a proof and it is very unclear how the exercise above would prove anything.

...are you going to duck out yet again?

Again? When did I duck out in the first place?

Of course you have ducked out. According to you, anyone can provide a chart analysis. They're ten a penny.

If thats the case then lay down the money where the big talk is. Provide a reading - cold or otherwise - for a more neutral member.

Of course you have ducked out. According to you, anyone can provide a chart analysis. They're ten a penny.

Can you show me the quote where I explicitly said anybody could provide a chart analysis?


If thats the case then lay down the money where the big talk is. Provide a reading - cold or otherwise - for a more neutral member.

I am willing to lay down money in a bet. Name your price, I am sure I can match it. The problem is you haven't proposed anything to show that Astrology OBJECTIVELY works.

Can you show me the quote where I explicitly said anybody could provide a chart analysis?



I am willing to lay down money in a bet. Name your price, I am sure I can match it.

lol you're very literal. No need for money - just match it by doing a..whats it called now..oh yes 'cold reading'!

Now since I've asked the sceptics to provide these cold reading the claims of how easy cold readings are have..well gone cold.

In fact I'm having trouble finding any sceptic willing to take me one. They've run for the hills.

This is common behaviour. Sceptics are very happy attacking people...and are quite vicious and utterly arrogant in doing so.

When on the defence they soon crumble like the little bully boys they really are. They don't like dissent. They are the Sceptic Taliban...mere fundamentalists.

Neutral observers should take note! I'm here in the boxing ring and ready for action - but where are the sceptics?

:shrug:


Cold reading yesterday - Cold feet today :cool:

Neutral observers should take note! I'm here in the boxing ring and ready for action - but where are the sceptics?


Ignoring your ridiculous claims.
YOU made the claim, YOU provide the E V I D E N C E !!

If you are not prepared to do that, just shut up and leave.

In fact I'm having trouble finding any sceptic willing to take me one. They've run for the hills.

Neutral observers should take note! I'm here in the boxing ring and ready for action - but where are the sceptics?

Come now, Billy, you've been at this stage before. Surely, you've made these claims on other sites and have provided nothing? This is the stage in which everyone is ignoring you and you claim your victory.

What a guy! :D

Like all pseudoscience and paranormal nutjobs, Billy's course of action is to shift the burden of proof. Instead of backing up his own wild claims with evidence or data, he's now demanding that those critical of him provide evidence.... what bollocks.

Why should anyone in this thread be required to demonstrate cold reading? Its been done before by skilled and honest skeptics that have documented the technique before thousands of people at a time. This is a bit like the creationist wackjob coming to the science board with claims that his god created the universe in a few days and requiring those skeptical of his superstitions to demonstrate that DNA can actually replicate.

Shifting the burden of proof. Moving the goal posts. blah, blah, blah. Typical pseudoscience tactics that do nothing to support the claimant's position.

Billy has yet to provide valid evidence, so instead he wants to shift his responsibilities. It won't work, mate. You made the claim. So unless you have evidence to back it up, you're either a liar or deluded.

Let me state it once more. You're either a liar or deluded.

But provide real evidence to support your claim and I'm willing to revise that statement.

lol you're very literal.

When you claim I say something that I did not, you bet.


No need for money - just match it by doing a..whats it called now..oh yes 'cold reading'!

What does me performing a 'cold reading' have to do with you demonstrating that Astrology objectively works?


Now since I've asked the sceptics to provide these cold reading the claims of how easy cold readings are have..well gone cold.

How does this apply to me in particular? Did I claim that cold readings were easy? Can you show me where?


In fact I'm having trouble finding any sceptic willing to take me one. They've run for the hills.

I am right here... hellooooooooooooo. So far you have yet to propose something that would demonstrate Astrology objectively works.


This is common behaviour. Sceptics are very happy attacking people...and are quite vicious and utterly arrogant in doing so.

When on the defence they soon crumble like the little bully boys they really are. They don't like dissent. They are the Sceptic Taliban...mere fundamentalists.


It's even more common for fantastic claimers to divert attention away from the fact that they have failed to prove their claims.


Neutral observers should take note! I'm here in the boxing ring and ready for action - but where are the sceptics?

:shrug:

Cold reading yesterday - Cold feet today :cool:


Neutral observers should take note of the claim and ask the question... where's the proof?

All I'm doing is throwing the ball back to you. If astrology is easy and can be made up from thin air then prove it to us?

Oh and spare us the weak excuses, the weasel words, the pitiful attempts at not joining in this..

..scientific experiment.

The scientific experiment has been done. I cited it. The demonstrations you require by shifting the burden of proof back on the skeptic have already been done by other elsewhere. There is no need for anyone in this thread to replicate those efforts. I can, however, cite them if you wish.

The only claim that needs evidence is the one that you can perform "astrology." Barring the satisfaction of this claim by providing evidence, you are a liar or deluded (or a bit of both).

If astrology is easy and can be made up from thin air then prove it to us?



Ok here...I'll make up one..

Billy's horoscope: Today, you will make an ass of yourself by engaging in a battle of wits, clearly un-armed.

All I'm doing is throwing the ball back to you.

Which doesn't make any sense, because you're the one whose issued the claim.


If astrology is easy and can be made up from thin air then prove it to us?

When did I claim this? Can you point out the quote explicitly?


Oh and spare us the weak excuses, the weasel words, the pitiful attempts at not joining in this..
..scientific experiment.

What experiment?

Your being very coy.

Surely if Astrology is mere guesswork then anyone can do it - comprende?

Your being very coy.

Surely if Astrology is mere guesswork then anyone can do it - comprende?

It doesn't matter. YOU are the one saying it works, yet you refuse to tell anyone how it works.

And, that is because you don't know.

So, you are a liar.

Case closed.

Surely if Astrology is mere guesswork then anyone can do it - comprende?
And this is the basis of your only argument for astrology. Not only is it ad ignorantiam, but its fallitic in other ways.

Just because you can write some BS that sounds beleivable doesnt mean everyone can. Your argument is akin to saying: "Tolkiens works were real because he describes them with such realism. If they were not real, than everyone could write the things so well. Since you can't write as well as Tolkien, his works must be real."

-Andrew

andbna's horoscope:

"Today you will say something profound.....and you will give all your money to Mac." :)

And this is the basis of your only argument for astrology. Not only is it ad ignorantiam, but its fallitic in other ways.

Just because you can write some BS that sounds beleivable doesnt mean everyone can. Your argument is akin to saying: "Tolkiens works were real because he describes them with such realism. If they were not real, than everyone could write the things so well. Since you can't write as well as Tolkien, his works must be real."

-Andrew

Lol thanks for comparing me to one of the widely read authors in the world..I'm flattered. Even moreso when the BBC voted it as the best book every written.

Yeah I agree...barmy.

Your post doesn't make sense..guesswork is something that can be done by anybody.

On the other hand if we could all sell books with the alacrity of Tolkien and JK Rowling then surely we'd ALL by busy writing them.

It doesn't matter. YOU are the one saying it works, yet you refuse to tell anyone how it works.

And, that is because you don't know.

So, you are a liar.

Case closed.

I was addressing CC..

Not you, Old Bean.

Regardless of who you were addressing, you're still either a liar or deluded.

Lol thanks for comparing me to one of the widely read authors in the world..I'm flattered. Even moreso when the BBC voted it as the best book every written.

Yeah I agree...barmy.

Your post doesn't make sense..guesswork is something that can be done by anybody.

On the other hand if we could all sell books with the alacrity of Tolkien and JK Rowling then surely we'd ALL by busy writing them.
Guesswork can be done by anybody, convincing somebody that your guesswork is the real deal; that takes talent. Similarily, anybody can make up a fantasy world, but writing it in such away that it appeals to the masses; that takes talent.

-Andrew

Your being very coy.

Surely if Astrology is mere guesswork then anyone can do it - comprende?

It's rather irrelevant as Q poined out and as it takes hard work and practice to make guesswork attractive as andbna pointed out.

Either way, your continual persistence of trying to divert focus away from having to prove your claim shows that you have no intention (and likely no capability) of doing so.

Billy, you are a LIAR.

To be fair, he could also be deluded.

Guesswork can be done by anybody, convincing somebody that your guesswork is the real deal; that takes talent. Similarily, anybody can make up a fantasy world, but writing it in such away that it appeals to the masses; that takes talent.

-Andrew

You're descending into complete twaddle...'writing for the masses'...so individuals on here are the 'masses'..I have never read so many pitiful excuses..anywhere but here you would be laughed off the place.

As for..Crunchy Cat well she's obviously turning into a hysteric...I'd give her a wide berth, her screaming can be heard from here.

The mods here are utterly biased and prejudiced. They may as well join the Klu Klux Klan. They're a joke.

What am I asking for?

I DID two short interpretations based on the very basics of astrology.

The critique was...its pure quesswork.

Guess away?

What on earth can possibly be your explanation..yet another get out clause?

It's rather irrelevant as Q poined out and as it takes hard work and practice to make guesswork attractive as andbna pointed out.

Either way, your continual persistence of trying to divert focus away from having to prove your claim shows that you have no intention (and likely no capability) of doing so.

Billy, you are a LIAR.





Take a chill pill, dear...your becoming an embarrasment to one and all.

http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g288/farmfriend/smilies/s_beatdeadhorse.gif

Well I tried but yes its like flogging a dead horse...and the dead horse

1) the myth of cold reading.

2) the myth that astrology is merely guesswork.

We have proven that it is neither.

The sceptics have neither guts nor backbone.

The paranormal nutjobs are liars or deluded since they've yet to support their wild claims with any sort of real evidence.

To be fair, he could also be deluded.

This is true and I must admit it more satisfying to use the word 'Liar' :)

Take a chill pill, dear...your becoming an embarrasment to one and all.

Better a subjective embarrassment in the eyes of Billy than an objective *LIAR to the world.


* Allthough the word 'Liar' is being used, I recognize that you might simply be deluded.

Guesswork can be done by anybody, convincing somebody that your guesswork is the real deal; that takes talent. Similarily, anybody can make up a fantasy world, but writing it in such away that it appeals to the masses; that takes talent.

-Andrew

Its a quite bizarre and totally fallacious analogy.

There is no great writing skill or talent in saying something like 'you are a perfectionist who pays a great deal of attention to detail but has the negative trait of being stubbon/a control freak/indecive etetera etcera..in fact if i wished I could even write down the keywords without the sentences at all. Hardly a novelists ability.

..where is the talent in that? If you're saying its a talent then by all definition you are attributing it to Astrology surely!

If I'm wrong then please explain in what respect I have misunderstood you, Andrew.

http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g288/farmfriend/smilies/s_beatdeadhorse.gif

violence is not an answer. Calm thyself and be at one with the outer world. Let peace flow through the wisdom you have been gifted to have.

Err thank you, Oh Mistress ov thee Nighte.

:-/

Yeh okay..your male try and be a bit more obviously male....insult people randomly and shout at them that they are 'all idiots!' LOL.

Yeh okay..your male try and be a bit more obviously male....insult people randomly and shout at them that they are 'all idiots!' LOL.

That is wrong.

2) the myth that astrology is merely guesswork.

We have proven that it is neither.

Really? Where? :shrug:

Have you been writing with invisible ink?

You're descending into complete twaddle...'writing for the masses'...so individuals on here are the 'masses'..I have never read so many pitiful excuses..anywhere but here you would be laughed off the place.


First: I dont understand why you put quotes around "writing for the masses" since I never wrote that phrase.
Second: I don't see how you derived that I stated "individuals here are the 'masses' " or what relevance it has to the argument.
Conclusion: You have dyslexia or another form of impaired reading ability, or did not take the care to read my post and understand it.

Next, if a reasoned argument via analogy, is "twaddle" and "pitifull excuses" then there is no point in carrying this debate since you cannot understand it.

Its a quite bizarre and totally fallacious analogy.

There is no great writing skill or talent in saying something like 'you are a perfectionist who pays a great deal of attention to detail but has the negative trait of being stubbon/a control freak/indecive etetera etcera..in fact if i wished I could even write down the keywords without the sentences at all. Hardly a novelists ability.

..where is the talent in that? If you're saying its a talent then by all definition you are attributing it to Astrology surely!

If I'm wrong then please explain in what respect I have misunderstood you, Andrew.


I admit I have difficulty understanding your main body paragraph, do you mean to say that Tolkien has no tallent as an author? If so, then all I can say is that you fallsified your own argument with a previouse post of yours: Lol thanks for comparing me to one of the widely read authors in the world..I'm flattered. Even moreso when the BBC voted it as the best book every written.

Furthurmore, I also fail to see any logic behind your final conclusion, perhaps due to my incomprehension of the previouse paragraph. However, it is clear you do not understand my argument, so I will restate it very explicitly and specificly:

This argument addresses the claim that if astrology is fake, than the supposed astrological readings should be creatable by anyone, with the same quality of one who calls themself an astrologer.

Thus the analogy is that:
If we replace 'astrologer' with 'author.'
if we replace 'astrological reading' with novel.'
and if we replace 'astrology' with 'high-fantasy writtings'

then what we derive is the argument: "If high-fantasy writtings are false, then novels should be creatable by anyone, with the same quality as those of one who calls themself an author."

Or more specificaly the analogy I used: "If The Lord of the Rings is false(did not actualy happen.) then novels of equal quality to Tolkiens, should be creatable by anyone."

Anyone can see the glaring fallacy in the above analogy, which points out the fallacy of the initial claim in debate, and thus prooves the claim to be false.

Ultimatly, this means Billy, that your challenge for other people to provide astrological readings, and subsequent failure of anyone to do so, does not proove that astrology is incorrect.

I hope I have made myself clear.
-Andrew

<< You have dyslexia or another form of impaired reading ability >>

Can you add those onto a long list of other ailments I've been allocated with..I dont recall being quite so pompous but then I refuse to descend to your low level of abuse.

<< I hope I have made myself clear >>

Er..no you havent. Its twaddle.

And yet, you still haven't cleared your tarnished name. You're still either a liar or deluded, as evidenced by your extraordinary claims that haven't even the most mediocre evidence. Moreover, you're an intellectual coward as evidenced by your continued avoidance of the challenge to produce evidence and your attempt to shift the burden of proof to your critics.

A lying/deluded coward.

<< You have dyslexia or another form of impaired reading ability >>

Can you add those onto a long list of other ailments I've been allocated with..I dont recall being quite so pompous but then I refuse to descend to your low level of abuse.
Actualy, I revise my position, it is clearly option 2 : You dont take the time to read and understand posts, since you completely ignored that option and assumed I was attacking you.

<< I hope I have made myself clear >>

Er..no you havent. Its twaddle.
If you cannot understand my post, either you are being ignorant, or I have lost touch with what a person can reasonable be expected to understand. If that is so, then I would expect SkinWalker, Q, or anyone else, to point out to me that my argument is unclear.
However, I doubt it is the latter, and thus I will tell you that: ignoring my argument does not invalidate it. Ie: You can stick your fingers in your ears and scream, but that won't change the conclusion.

-Andrew

If you cannot understand my post, either you are being ignorant, or I have lost touch with what a person can reasonable be expected to understand. If that is so, then I would expect SkinWalker, Q, or anyone else, to point out to me that my argument is unclear.


-Andrew

By all means.

I've suggested that Randi isn't such a bad chap, he uncovers frauds and mediums but they carry on anyway. One wonder why he bothers.

But he does!

Why?

He must earn a fair amount of money telling us the blatently obvious. His website is laughable...mediums use skullduggery! lol thanks Jamie..we were totally convinced by ectoplasm and oddballs presenting shows on minor tv channels. The trailer trash like them...why take away their candy bars?

Its akin to George Bush trying to ban 'the Simpsons'..or exclaiming 'Say no to drugs!'..people like watching Jerry Springer..who am I to take it away from them. They're happy..we take what we need out of life.

...we take what we need out of life.

Too bad some have to resort to lying and deceit to take what they need, eh Billy?

Well yes..Stryder would shut down a thread by having the last word but I'm not intereted in petty egotism..I know moderators only too well. And I gained plaudits by allowing freedom and a little thing called Free Speech.

One member at least is left bereft by the cowardice of the sceptics. Time and time again I gave them every cahnce to speak..but instead they squeaked..like mice.

<< This argument addresses the claim that if astrology is fake, than the supposed astrological readings should be creatable by anyone, with the same quality of one who calls themself an astrologer.

Thus the analogy is that:
If we replace 'astrologer' with 'author.'
if we replace 'astrological reading' with novel.'
and if we replace 'astrology' with 'high-fantasy writtings'

then what we derive is the argument: "If high-fantasy writtings are false, then novels should be creatable by anyone, with the same quality as those of one who calls themself an author."

Or more specificaly the analogy I used: "If The Lord of the Rings is false(did not actualy happen.) then novels of equal quality to Tolkiens, should be creatable by anyone." >>

Well the answer to that is in what way is a description of someone as being 'stubborn and control freak' beyond all the abilities of but a chosen few such as me.

Dont get me wrong..I'm highly flattered to be placed on the same plinth as Tolkien, Poe, Asimov, Arthur C.Clarke...to be fair I'd settle for a comparison with the writers of Dr. Who or Star Trek..but as I say its a very silly post and now everyone - but you - can see that with their own eyes.

There is no great talent in calling someone 'a control freak'..try it...and then write Lord of the Rings. :D

Well yes..Stryder would shut down a thread by having the last word but I'm not intereted in petty egotism..I know moderators only too well. And I gained plaudits by allowing freedom and a little thing called Free Speech.
I thought you said you don't cold read, I mean I've given you no astrological dates and you already claim to know my archetype through stereotyping. Well I can definitely point out that you are wrong, especially in regards to egotism.

It was stated previously in the thread that if it should hit the magic number of pages (20) it would be closed down [It's even stated in the Rule section for this subforum], I actually waited for the full 400 post count before doing so, it could of been shut circa 20 posts sooner.

As for Freedom of Speech, that is constantly a topic brought up and constantly a topic shot down. Such liberties are only available in the free world(Which there isn't much of nowadays), live with it.


One member at least is left bereft by the cowardice of the sceptics. Time and time again I gave them every cahnce to speak..but instead they squeaked..like mice.

I think it's more along the line that time and time again you prattled a bunch of nonsense in an attempt to get people to flame you just to adopt attacking from an Ivory tower. You proved absolutely nothing other than you like the sound of your own comments.

I mean one post I put forwards to you that Astrology only centres itself around one solar system with the known planets, however it lacks other planetary bodies that exist to the edge of our solarsystem or the fact that all the other stars out there have planets surround them with their own solar systems. To suggest that there is any Scientific method where *Just* the planets within our solar system could cast not just weight in regards to shaping a persons direction but their mood and stereotyped personality is ludicrous which is why Astrology is in the real of a Pseudo-science. (Since it is false)

On topic do you think Randi would see any differently in regards to your current behaviour?

Well the answer to that is in what way is a description of someone as being 'stubborn and control freak' beyond all the abilities of but a chosen few such as me.

Dont get me wrong..I'm highly flattered to be placed on the same plinth as Tolkien, Poe, Asimov, Arthur C.Clarke...to be fair I'd settle for a comparison with the writers of Dr. Who or Star Trek..but as I say its a very silly post and now everyone - but you - can see that with their own eyes.

There is no great talent in calling someone 'a control freak'..try it...and then write Lord of the Rings.
Your first scentance (which was a question, correct?): calling someone 'stubborn and a control freak' does not take great talent. If this is all astrology does, then here allow me, a non-astrologer, to refute your claims of astrology being right:
Billy, you are stubborn and a control freak.
OMG! An astrological prediction made by a someone not using star-charts!

Now seriously: it doesnt take a talent to formulate a scentance, I never stated that, your are using a strawman argument.

Next, whether my post is 'silly' or not does not negate the argument presented. If you beleive it does, you had better back up your claim. No-one else has expressed the opinion that my post is 'silly', you have thus made an unfounded assertion. Back it up, or it's worthless.

As for your final scentance, I believe my first paragraph covered that; strawman.

To conclude: I am still awaiting a valid, non-fallitic, refutation of my argument, which refutes your claim that astrology is prooven true if a layman(ie non-astrologer) cannot make a convincing 'astroloical reading'.
In case you are wondering where you expressly made this claim, see post number 24 of this thread (http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=1488198&postcount=24).

-Andrew

And this is the basis of your only argument for astrology. Not only is it ad ignorantiam, but its fallitic in other ways.

Just because you can write some BS that sounds beleivable doesnt mean everyone can.

-Andrew

Actually its done with some frequency although seemingly its beyond the ken of the posters here. Certainly James Randi has used a generalised chart reading with some effectiveness and he uses transparent kiddology that can be easily taken apart. Of course the public are easily fooled..whether it by politicians or tv adverts. Its all a scam.

I'll go into more detail at another time - err not midnight! - but its fairly mediocre and mundane fare. It takes no great 'talent' to use certain buzzwords and buzz phrases 'such as "you are quite creative" and you have a 'good sense of humour'...we're all creative to a certain extent and who on earth goes around saying they have no sense of humour.

Well possibly some of the people on here. :)

All I can add is that it bears no resemblance to the chart reading I've come across although we all share generalised traits - its one of the reasons why it makes sense to use those of people who are more than ordinary.

Actually its done with some frequency although seemingly its beyond the ken of the posters here. Certainly James Randi has used a generalised chart reading with some effectiveness and he uses transparent kiddology that can be easily taken apart. Of course the public are easily fooled..whether it by politicians or tv adverts. Its all a scam.

I'll go into more detail at another time - err not midnight! - but its fairly mediocre and mundane fare. It takes no great 'talent' to use certain buzzwords and buzz phrases 'such as "you are quite creative" and you have a 'good sense of humour'...we're all creative to a certain extent and who on earth goes around saying they have no sense of humour.

Well possibly some of the people on here.

All I can add is that it bears no resemblance to the chart reading I've come across although we all share generalised traits - its one of the reasons why it makes sense to use those of people who are more than ordinary.

Then your post completely supports the fact that astrology is BS.
Unless what you mean to say is tha your astrological predictions are not so obviously general and vague, in which case, the above argument is a strawman diversion. You sure like those don't you?

-Andrew

Billy:

I'm still waiting for you to provide evidence about astrology - especially those double-blind tests you claim exist.

Are you ignoring what you find inconvenient?

On the contrary.

I'm inconvenienced by what I find ignorant, James.

Still waiting.

James R. is James Randi?

Actually its done with some frequency although seemingly its beyond the ken of the posters here. Certainly James Randi has used a generalised chart reading with some effectiveness and he uses transparent kiddology that can be easily taken apart. Of course the public are easily fooled..whether it by politicians or tv adverts. Its all a scam.


Billy, tell me, did you actually admit astrology to be a scam ??

On the subject of "Cold Reading" - might I lead you to a well-known (in UK, at least) psycho-illusionist - Derren Brown.
He's someone who, by dint of his training as a psychologist and a magician, happily #@!%s with peoples' heads.... and admits it's all trickery, slight of hand and psychology.

In something like 4 cities around the world he took 10 subjects in each city.
He claimed with just a drawn outline of the peoples' hand and a personal object he could give them a reading that he hoped would be fairly accurate.

He took the 10 hands and objects in each city and then, about an hour later, handed each of them their "reading".

There was 1 person who said that the reading was nothing like him at all - but the rest seemed to think it was anywhere from 80% to 95% accurate - including some of the details. They were all gobsmacked / stunned / amazed.

Until he told them to swap sheets with someone else.


They were all the same.


Cold reading works - in as much as it is a scam.

Billy, tell me, did you actually admit astrology to be a scam ??

No, if you re-read it the suggestion is that when you're offered something too good to be true or plays on human psychology i.e tv adverts, offers from banks etc then its generally a scam.

I'd put mediums, clairvoyants in this category and indeed some astrologers although I'd suggest they fall into a different category. Obviously skeptics will disagree here but astrologers rarely plant people, tape record clients and so on. In fact the Assoc of Prof. Astrologers has very stringent rules..I can't list them all now but rest assured I could give a whole host of differences.

James Randi is someone who I have some respect for. The Editor of the Skeptic by baffling coincidence actually worked at the Uni in Salford as me whe I was student. In actuality we agreed about astrology on many points...certainly he could see that 'in general' astrologers came from a different angle. More laidback, less evangelist about 'the other side' and playing on the fears of clients. There are exceptions of course but generally this is so. Possibly Randi is of the same opinion.

Of course Randi has done a service in revealing the widespread trickery used by mediums. He would know...thats his job title. Magician.

I suspect though that most of us were well aware that some trickery was used by Clairvoyants or whatever they call themselves. We would hardly be surprised if some friend were planted in the audience prior or during the show. After all its an age old scam used since the days of snake oil salesmen to modern day salesmen or at market stalls. Even the President of the United States to PM Blair scam the public...in fact thats my usual speciality and stock in trade. Most of my posts elsewhere are about revealing the scams used by Politicians...for example, the new PM has already scammed the public by reducing the main tax whilst subtly increasing a minor tax. Now even the media swallow the scam hook, line and sinker because they concentrate on the headline grabber rather than an obscure stealth tax.

When you check you wallet afterwards you find that you are several pounds lighter.

When I subscribed to both the US and UK Skeptic my interest dwindled because astrology featured less and when it did feature it was far less convincing than other subects from crop cirles to whatever was the current fad. I'm chary of using cliches but there is a case of 'throwing the baby out with the bathwater'. Seemingly they were sceptical of everything...in the early days they even ridiculed the use if acupuncture as being 'all in the mind'.

One of James favourite tricks was to give astrologers the chart of a serial killer and then wait for the results from various internet astrologers. Apart from the fact that many of them are computerised reading, thats a trivial point compared to the real flaw here.

No Astrologer would dispute that heredity and environment play major roles in the character. Its one of the reasons why most prefer a one to one meeting, although the internet has changed that to some extent. An anlysis for an Aristocrat would be viewed differently than someone who just arrived as an itinerant worker from Somalia...even in a scenario where they had similar charts.

Now if you are going to hand out the chart of a Serial Killer it is a false premise. The rationale of science is on the astrologers side here because we know that most, if not all, serial killers have some brain damage/dysfunction. Its akin to testing astrology be handing out the data for a person lying in a deep coma with severe brain damage and asking them for an analysis of that persons future.

Its merely a trick, a scam, a deceit performed by Randi on the astrologer yet he repeats this all the time as evidence. Its isn't. James.

My advice - stick to mediums, spoon benders and people with twitching sticks...theyre easily testable. If you can't find water with a dowsing rod then it don't work. Full stop.

James R. is James Randi?

I wish!

I doubt it very much, drago.

No, if you re-read it the suggestion is that when you're offered something too good to be true or plays on human psychology i.e tv adverts, offers from banks etc then its generally a scam.

Astrology fits that category.

I'd put mediums, clairvoyants in this category and indeed some astrologers although I'd suggest they fall into a different category. Obviously skeptics will disagree here but astrologers rarely plant people, tape record clients and so on. In fact the Assoc of Prof. Astrologers has very stringent rules..I can't list them all now but rest assured I could give a whole host of differences.

Sorry, your word is worth nothing based on your past lies.


My advice - stick to mediums, spoon benders and people with twitching sticks...theyre easily testable. If you can't find water with a dowsing rod then it don't work. Full stop.

Then, by your own logic, if astrology can't make predictions, it don't work. Full stop.

Astrology fits that category.



Sorry, your word is worth nothing based on your past lies.



Then, by your own logic, if astrology can't make predictions, it don't work. Full stop.

:bravo: :worship:

Whilst you're on your knees, Enmos, you may care to reconsider the post my analysis being, in the main... 'spot on'.

Followed by another who suggested it was 100% accurate.

Be careful who you pray for? prevaricating subservience is embarrassing.

Whilst you're on your knees, Enmos, you may care to reconsider the post my analysis being, in the main... 'spot on'.

Followed by another who suggested it was 100% accurate.

Be careful who you pray for? prevaricating subservience is embarrassing.

:confused: :crazy:

Astrology fits that category.



Sorry, your word is worth nothing based on your past lies.



Then, by your own logic, if astrology can't make predictions, it don't work. Full stop.

Hardly, Old bean..scientists from Pythagoras to Sir Isaac Newton to Carl Jung were ardent believers in astrology. Get your facts right before talking such arrant nonsense.

Now..one thing I've never been accused of is lying. I don't intend to start now. I can be accused of many things, but I'm 100% honest and decent, you swine!!!

No, although its hardly an exact science ..and thank god it isn't. If everything was so 'easily' predicted then why bother?.

:confused: :crazy:

Is there an emoticon for eff off?

nope :p

Hardly, Old bean..scientists from Pythagoras to Sir Isaac Newton to Carl Jung were ardent believers in astrology. Get your facts right before talking such arrant nonsense.

So, essentially, your argument for astrology is that you believe it because people who lived centuries ago believed it?

By your own logic, you must believe the Earth is flat.

Nonsense, indeed.

Now..one thing I've never been accused of is lying. I don't intend to start now. I can be accused of many things, but I'm 100% honest and decent, you swine!!!

You've been accused of lying many times on this board, alone. You've yet to show that you're not a liar.

No, although its hardly an exact science ..and thank god it isn't. If everything was so 'easily' predicted then why bother?.

FYI - astrology is NOT a science, in any way, shape or form.

But, at least you're starting to be honest, in that you're admitting astrology can't predict anything.

It can't predict the lottery, Q..no matter how many times you ask.

It can't predict the lottery, Q..no matter how many times you ask.

It can't predict anything, no matter how many times you claim it can.

It can't predict the lottery, Q..no matter how many times you ask.

Actually this leads to a very good question, which should have been answered right off the bat:
What can astrology do?
I will be honest and tell you that I will pick apart your response (particularily any vague statements)
However, if you are going to claim 'astrology is real' you had better say what it does.

-Andrew

Its a peculiar question.

One may as well ask Dawkins what 'memes' do? and then I can 'pick that apart' for being a rather vague theory.

It can't predict anything, no matter how many times you claim it can.

You'd have to ask those people who I've 'forecasted' for consistently. Theres not much point in me claiming the plaudits. I'd never use the word 'prediction' personally.

I can use an example from a few weeks ago where I was asked by an American who was about to be thrown out of the country due to work permit issues. To get the work permit she needed a job and it had to be a permanent rather than temporary.

Everything in the chart suggested a positive answer and the forecast suggested a stability that was absent previously. Its a question of experience..you get a feel for it by constant practice so it helps to specialise in certain areas. The results of job interviews came from a mix of astrology and the people who were asking - mainly office workers.

Very occasionally you get a chart thats so complex and has so many variables its best to just answer 'pass' on that question so no, its not an exact science. Whether its an Art of a Science is neither here nor there. I just go off results. If in the main the results are accurate then its good enough for me.

If its not good enough for sceptics or whatever doesnt interest me.

I mean one post I put forwards to you that Astrology only centres itself around one solar system with the known planets, however it lacks other planetary bodies that exist to the edge of our solarsystem or the fact that all the other stars out there have planets surround them with their own solar systems. To suggest that there is any Scientific method where *Just* the planets within our solar system could cast not just weight in regards to shaping a persons direction but their mood and stereotyped personality is ludicrous which is why Astrology is in the realm of a Pseudo-science. (Since it is false)

I wrote that (with some spelling corrections) a few posts back, but no comment from the OP about "What of the other planets, solar systems and the other great features of the known/unknown universe?

I don't believe in fortune telling etc., but Randi is a smug little oik, and if I died and got the chance I'd haunt the B_______

You'd have to ask those people who I've 'forecasted' for consistently. Theres not much point in me claiming the plaudits. I'd never use the word 'prediction' personally.

A forecast IS a prediction.

I can use an example from a few weeks ago where I was asked by an American who was about to be thrown out of the country due to work permit issues. To get the work permit she needed a job and it had to be a permanent rather than temporary.

So what? You stated the obvious. Is that how astrology works?

Everything in the chart suggested a positive answer and the forecast suggested a stability that was absent previously. Its a question of experience..you get a feel for it by constant practice so it helps to specialise in certain areas. The results of job interviews came from a mix of astrology and the people who were asking - mainly office workers.

We're back to cold reading, again. Is that how astrology works?

Very occasionally you get a chart thats so complex and has so many variables its best to just answer 'pass' on that question so no, its not an exact science. Whether its an Art of a Science is neither here nor there. I just go off results. If in the main the results are accurate then its good enough for me.

I repeat, astrology is NOT a science, in any way, shape or form. Please try to remember that.

If its not good enough for sceptics or whatever doesnt interest me.

You're stating the obvious, again.

That MUST be how astrology works. State the bloody obvious. :D

Its a peculiar question.

One may as well ask Dawkins what 'memes' do? and then I can 'pick that apart' for being a rather vague theory.

"Memes" are the cultural part of genes.

Pick away.

A forecast IS a prediction.

I repeat, astrology is NOT a science, in any way, shape or form. Please try to remember that.

You're stating the obvious, again.

That MUST be how astrology works. State the bloody obvious. :D

This same crticisms could be applied to meteorology as well couldnt they? 100% accurate forecasting(predicting) is a little much to ask for a system as complex as weather (or future events).

I wrote that (with some spelling corrections) a few posts back, but no comment from the OP about "What of the other planets, solar systems and the other great features of the known/unknown universe?

The OP?

To be fair its unlikely to conjoin two entirely different perceptions. In some respects its interesting to read.

I'm only aware of sentient life existing on one Solar System - ours!

As for whatever you feel exists on the Outer Limits of the Solar System, well you tell me?

The OP?

To be fair its unlikely to conjoin two entirely different perceptions. In some respects its interesting to read.

I'm only aware of sentient life existing on one Solar System - ours!

As for whatever you feel exists on the Outer Limits of the Solar System, well you tell me?

Well there is the Kuiper Belt Objects (KBOs) and a questionable number of bodies exist. However you've still circumnavigated the point, the fact that there is a whole universe filled with planets that act out their interplanetary ballet that you are or aren't suggesting has any effect on people. I mean if a planet in our solar system is going to make Mrs Jones of No. 10 Clover Cresent have a happy feeling all day, what of planet Gliese 581 d? I mean if it orbits a little closer at it's time of year perhaps Mrs Jones Happy feeling will be short lived.

Just because the planet is further away in another solar system doesn't suggest it's going to have any less effect than our own in regards to Astrology at least.

The Cosmic Ballet isn't of much interest to the viewer stationed several miles from the stage. Ideally you'd view a well lit stage, sittiing comfortably in a balcony seat with a chilled bottle of Chablis rather than from a traffic jam stuck on the outside of town in the debris of rocks laid down by Mr. Kuiper.

... However you've still circumnavigated the point...
There is more than just a single solar system in the universe, why should people listen to astrology that only deals with the interaction of them?

For the same reasons that our Sun is of more importance to us than one on the outer reaches of the Universe.

I know that scientists are keen to propogate the idea that the Universe is teeming with life and that there are lots of 'Parallel Universes' but most of these theories make Astrology seem comparitively plausible in comparison.

For the same reasons that our Sun is of more importance to us than one on the outer reaches of the Universe.

Okay so now you are suggesting Astrology is linked to the radiation emanating from our sun? I mean the suns importance is pretty much it's radiation, without it we'd just be a frozen planetoid devoid of life (unless of course that obstacle is overcome).

I know that scientists are keen to propogate the idea that the Universe is teeming with life and that there are lots of 'Parallel Universes' but most of these theories make Astrology seem comparitively plausible in comparison.

Untrue, for the most part theories into 'Parallel Universe' really surrounded Quantum Mechanics since it gave something for people to visualise while trying to conceive paradoxical wave-functions. The problem is however there are two types of theorist into such things, one is the Scientific kind that are attempting to forwards 'Science' while the other kind is more into the imagination with 'Science Fiction'. You then have those that fall into the middle, that take 'Science Fiction' as fact and incorporate their take on paragraphs of 'Science' to develop 'Pseudoscience'.

Multiworlds and other such theories are just that... 'Theories'. They might one day be found to be of use in actual Mechanics however they are far more useful than Astrology that has only ever added naming convention to Astronomy.

(I would suggest Astrology came first, with it's primitive magical misunderstanding of the universe, then Astronomy the study of the stars themselves with Cosmology soon to follow.)

However it still doesn't suggest that Astrology holds any weight over the Universe and all those that reside in it since it is only based on the outcome of one solar system.

Its a bizarre point that you are making but hey..10/10 for originality. Its not one I've ever come across before.

What you term as the 'Cosmic Ballet' can only be performed in our own Solar system. I'm totally mystified why you feel some other Solar System should be used.

Why?

Should we take more note of the movements of some far off Moon rather than our own?

< Untrue >

Whats untrue?

Surely most scientists feel that there is Extra-terrestial life out there in the Universe?

To use their argument, we are nothing special so therefore if we exist there must by definition be far more advanced life in the Universe?

Surely most scientists feel that there is Extra-terrestial life out there in the Universe?

To use their argument, we are nothing special so therefore if we exist there must by definition be far more advanced life in the Universe?

No, you are jumping to that conclusion. The conclusion is that there is a very high probability that there is other life in the universe. That life could be simple bacteria.

SETI is wasting billions on contacting...bacteria?

Vair odd.

SETI is wasting billions on contacting...bacteria?

Vair odd.

Where you get that notion is beyond me??? :shrug:

SETI is looking for intelligent life.

http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/sah_about.php

Looking in the wrong places presumably.

Looking in the wrong places presumably.

Perhaps you could point them in the right direction using astrology as your guide?

Its a bizarre point that you are making but hey..10/10 for originality. Its not one I've ever come across before.

What you term as the 'Cosmic Ballet' can only be performed in our own Solar system. I'm totally mystified why you feel some other Solar System should be used.

Why?

Should we take more note of the movements of some far off Moon rather than our own?

It's not that strange a point, it's like trying to suggest a humble desktop calculator can compute all the decimal places of pi. The calculator is obviously finite in build and it's actual built to round off to a certain decimal place because of it's finite design (The screen has a fixed amount of numbers it can display). However beyond that rounding there is still infinite numbers to be read in ever greater detail.

Now you could use the calculators output in a mathematical sum but it's accuracy is far depleted in comparison to more accurate outputs which consist of further iterations of decimal place.

In fact comparing the two sum's you will find the disparity grows with each iteration of decimal place. It's somewhat similar to a 'Butterfly Effect', in fact very close to an example that you'll find in the book 'Chaos' by James Gleick. I believe the reference is in regard to research done into predicting weather patterns and how such predictions were greatly altered by the depths of the decimal placing. (Rounding is a no-no in regards to precision.)

What I am suggesting is yes our planets output gravity at a higher level based upon our proximity, however this doesn't mean that we aren't effected by gravity from other planets in other solar systems the effect however is of course very, very, very minimal. However the shear number of 'Minimal' solar systems in the whole universe must account for something?!?

In fact aren't we surrounded by all these Stars in every conceivable direction.

< Untrue >

Whats untrue?

Surely most scientists feel that there is Extra-terrestial life out there in the Universe?

To use their argument, we are nothing special so therefore if we exist there must by definition be far more advanced life in the Universe?

Well on a tangent you can suggest to those people that would like to make an alien deity. (The creationist aspect)

"If the choice was given someone to make the universe and all that reside in it, why would they make some alien species and not themselves?"

I guess what I'm saying here is Humankind for the most part contains a very Egocentric base where most things are centered around us. If the same could be said about any 'aliens', then we would not exist, they would instead.

You could then further this by saying that perhaps you wouldn't want a completely barren universe, that perhaps you'd want neighbours and thus the creation of other species is born.. (End creationalistic snipet)


However you could be a firm believe that the universe was naturally induced and that no being(s) were involved in it's creation, which would make us all one very big accident. Does it rule out life elsewhere in the universe? Well you just can't say... Chaos/Entropy is pretty funny about that.

However there are ways to force events to undermine the need to have predictions, I'm not going to go into details, but I can suggest we aren't alone in the universe (and no I haven't met or spoken to any aliens :rolleyes: ).

It's not that strange a point, it's like trying to suggest a humble desktop calculator can compute all the decimal places of pi. The calculator is obviously finite in build and it's actual built to round off to a certain decimal place because of it's finite design (The screen has a fixed amount of numbers it can display). However beyond that rounding there is still infinite numbers to be read in ever greater detail.

Now you could use the calculators output in a mathematical sum but it's accuracy is far depleted in comparison to more accurate outputs which consist of further iterations of decimal place.

In fact comparing the two sum's you will find the disparity grows with each iteration of decimal place. It's somewhat similar to a 'Butterfly Effect', in fact very close to an example that you'll find in the book 'Chaos' by James Gleick. I believe the reference is in regard to research done into predicting weather patterns and how such predictions were greatly altered by the depths of the decimal placing. (Rounding is a no-no in regards to precision.)

What I am suggesting is yes our planets output gravity at a higher level based upon our proximity, however this doesn't mean that we aren't effected by gravity from other planets in other solar systems the effect however is of course very, very, very minimal.

As I said though..gravity isn't an explanation. Usually its used by those rare men Scientists who believe in astrology or at least study it so its hardly surp[rising that they take great pains to explain it by using what is currently explained by science.

Prof. Percy Seymour is the main culprit here.

As I said though..gravity isn't an explanation. Usually its used by those rare men Scientists who believe in astrology or at least study it so its hardly surp[rising that they take great pains to explain it by using what is currently explained by science.

Prof. Percy Seymour is the main culprit here.

If gravity isnt an explanation, what is ? What other effects could the planets have on us ?

As I said though..gravity isn't an explanation. Usually its used by those rare men Scientists who believe in astrology or at least study it so its hardly surp[rising that they take great pains to explain it by using what is currently explained by science.

Prof. Percy Seymour is the main culprit here.

You can't make that claim considering you have no idea how astrology works.

Yes I do.

It works by tiny little angels moving thee little stars and making intricate patterns in thee sky, Q.

If gravity isnt an explanation, what is ? What other effects could the planets have on us ?

As some lyricist once wrote..we are all made of the same stuff...stardust.

Yes I do.

It works by tiny little angels moving thee little stars and making intricate patterns in thee sky, Q.

Ah, why didnt you say so earlier.. now we understand.. :rolleyes:

As some lyricist once wrote..we are all made of the same stuff...stardust.

And ? That still doesnt explain how the planets would have any influence on us.

What matters is 'does it work'.

Against all odds it does...even posters on here must be feeling that with the sheer weight of evidence that is posted on here every day.

How does it work is open to question...God works in mysterious ways.

Why scatter such jewels as if they were mere packets of soap powder?

Against all odds it does...even posters on here must be feeling that with the sheer weight of evidence that is posted on here every day.
What evidence?
All we've seen is coloured charts with nothing to explain how and why they're made.
As we've said before.

What matters is 'does it work'.

Against all odds it does...even posters on here must be feeling that with the sheer weight of evidence that is posted on here every day.

How does it work is open to question...God works in mysterious ways.

Why scatter such jewels as if they were mere packets of soap powder?

Ok lets put it this way: what are the procedures you follow to come to the predictions ? How do you make the charts ?

Against all odds it does...even posters on here must be feeling that with the sheer weight of evidence that is posted on here every day.


Evidence??? Haven't we asked over and over and over... ad infinitum for just one shred of credible evidence? To which you've make commentary and misdirection to try and avoid dealing with actually providing anything credible at all.

I guess you must think that people that read these threads or your entries are just going to be taken in with evidence being presented at some point in the past because you say so. Well I have news for you and of course those people, You have supplied no credible evidence to substantiate your claims.


How does it work is open to question...God works in mysterious ways.


It's already been stated by posters that you've done readings for that you aren't closer than anyone making sugar-coated remarks in regards to who they are.

In fact I think they had a nice spread in the newspaper recently about dealing with Fake/Imposter Gypsy Lee's that send reading by Phone, SMS or Email. The only difference between you and them is you haven't uttered "Cross my palm with silver" yet!

<< It's already been stated by posters that you've done readings for that you aren't closer than anyone making sugar-coated remarks in regards to who they are. >>

Well firstly I haven't done readings...ust scanned over charts and given a few choice thoughts. Very direct and in both cases both spot on..why dont you try it, Styder? Or are you coming up wuth that old apology that 'its an Art and a great talent'. LOL!

Secondly...on the contrary on both cases I was pretty much accurate.

Ok lets put it this way: what are the procedures you follow to come to the predictions ? How do you make the charts ?

Its simply too complex. I mean you and Stryder are prime dummies so why not go buy 'Astrology for Dummies' and start from there. I'll teach you when you've gleaned some knowledge. :p


http://www.seekerbooks.com/image/skub/9780764552175b.jpg

Well firstly I haven't done readings...ust scanned over charts and given a few choice thoughts. Very direct and in both cases both spot on..why dont you try it, Styder? Or are you coming up wuth that old apology that 'its an Art and a great talent'. LOL!

Why do you think I had that particular book at hand? Do you think I was using it as a paper weight or something to hold my door open with? From study of that and other sources it can be suggested that it's all about how You think a person is, how you manifest an stereotype of their life more than the astrology itself.

We all do it, walking down the street you can fabricate peoples lives and what role they play without ever knowing them. We do this because of observation, we do this because in a society of interaction we need to have some pre-emptive clue about the people we deal with to make sure they are the right people or they aren't out to take us for a ride.

It's not guided by the planets but Darwinism in the form of Natural Selection and our will to Survive.

Astrology is as said time and time again, 'Sugar coating' for a reading you devise in your own mind. No charts on earth are going to prove your personal view of the world and this is why tests involving multiple astrologers produced different readings from each one. Purely because of their personal touch.


Secondly...on the contrary on both cases I was pretty much accurate.

Lets see, for one you suggest that the planets can tell a person all about themselves from just their birthdate/time/location, yet you suggest Astrology doesn't attempt to 'Predict' anything. (technically telling them about themselves without knowing is in fact Prediction)

In regards to Accuracy, 'Pretty much' Accurate, Pretty much leaves accuracy to the chance of being inaccurate. It's not like you've stated:

"Without shadow of a doubt it's 100% accurate and a person could show this to be accurate otherwise I will donate all my worldly possessions to charity. signed: Billy Paintstripper"

(The reason for the charity statement is because stating something of such a nature requires some form of collateral that is valued by the person making the claim that they will not want to lose, otherwise people make claims and lie without any fear of such loses.)


Okay here's a Test for you to do Billy to show your powers. In mathematics there is simple form of Trigonometry.


A+B= C
C-A = B
C-B = A


The assumption is that Result used to identify the component values of the mathematical Sum.

Now I'm not going to tell you my whole life, however you should by now already have decided about what make up my character is (Unless you've felt I'm somehow deceptive, but just remember that's your take and isn't astrological) You should be able to work out my age and star sign just by my interactions with you, since after all you are taking an output and attempting to work the mathematics the other way.

If you are up for the challenge then try it, otherwise you're succumbing to Astrology being a primitive legacy left to us by people that believed in magic.

Its simply too complex. I mean you and Stryder are prime dummies so why not go buy 'Astrology for Dummies' and start from there. I'll teach you when you've gleaned some knowledge. :p

http://www.enmos.eu/9780764552175b.jpg


How convenient.. :rolleyes:

<< We all do it, walking down the street you can fabricate peoples lives and what role they play without ever knowing them. We do this because of observation, we do this because in a society of interaction we need to have some pre-emptive clue about the people we deal with to make sure they are the right people or they aren't out to take us for a ride. >>

I'm sorry but its complete hogwash.

Observation doesn't even come into it. You can do a totally blind chart without any trouble whatsoever. Its not ideal..I mean it helps to know something about the background, creed or colour obviously. For example I wouldn't know what culture Enmos or SAM derived from..they could be poor immigrants, a rich toyboy and a blonde airhead ...as it happens its the other way around and Enmos and you are the airheads.

All I need to "observe" now is whether your blonde.

I suggest you go and buy a 'proper' astrology book and throw yours in the dustbin, Stryder.

<< yet you suggest Astrology doesn't attempt to 'Predict' anything. >>

No I didn't..I suggested that the word forecast was more accurate.

<< yet you suggest Astrology doesn't attempt to 'Predict' anything. >>

No I didn't..I suggested that the word forecast was more accurate.



fore·cast (fôrkst, fr-)
v. fore·cast or fore·cast·ed, fore·cast·ing, fore·casts
v.tr.
1. To estimate or calculate in advance, especially to predict (weather conditions) by analysis of meteorological data. See Synonyms at predict.
2. To serve as an advance indication of; foreshadow: price increases that forecast inflation.
v.intr.
To calculate or estimate something in advance; predict the future.
n.
A prediction, as of coming events or conditions.


http://www.thefreedictionary.com/forecast

as it happens its the other way around and Enmos and you are the airheads.

All I need to "observe" now is whether your blonde.

There's no need to resort to name calling. All I'm trying to put forwards that there is nothing Magic, Mystical or for that matter scientific about Astrology.

I'm going to have to give you an infraction for it though since we are trying to stop that sort of behaviour. I would let it slide but you didn't just fling your mud at me.

I suggest you go and buy a 'proper' astrology book and throw yours in the dustbin, Stryder.

Funnily enough that's where they all seem to belong, I'd rather spend my money on some contemporary fiction, or a nice meal, perhaps even going out at the weekend or better still the money spent on someone else.

I'm sorry but its complete hogwash.

Hogwash, you say?

Observation doesn't even come into it.

True, astrology is pure guesswork.

You can do a totally blind chart without any trouble whatsoever.

Of course, it's guesswork. That's no trouble at all.

Its not ideal..I mean it helps to know something about the background, creed or colour obviously.

Why is that obvious? Considering you haven't offered a shred of evidence or an explanation as to how astrology works, nothing about astrology could possibly be obvious.

And, it completely contradicts what you just said above, "Observation doesn't even come into it." Knowing the backgrounds, creeds and colors of the individual ARE observations, you twit.

For example I wouldn't know what culture Enmos or SAM derived from..they could be poor immigrants, a rich toyboy and a blonde airhead ...as it happens its the other way around and Enmos and you are the airheads.

Why should that make any difference whatsoever? Aren't people influenced by the planets and stars. Having millions of dollars as opposed to looking for your next scrap of food to eat should have absolutely nothing to do with it. Why should it matter if your blond or brunette? Would the horoscope drastically change if I colored my hair striped green and purple?

All I need to "observe" now is whether your blonde.

Isn't that an OBSERVATION?

I suggest you go and buy a 'proper' astrology book and throw yours in the dustbin, Stryder.

For all the errors and contradictions you've bleated, should you be giving advice on a subject you haven't yet grasped yourself?

The answer to that isn't in the stars, pal.

...I'm going to have to give you an infraction for it though since we are trying to stop that sort of behaviour. I would let it slide but you didn't just fling your mud at me...

It's too bad there isn't an infraction for Chronic lying.

Listen to thee words of Rob Calvert and Michael Moorcock.


I just took a ride
in a silver machine
and I'm still feeling mean
I got a silver machine
Do you want to ride
see yourself going by
other side of the sky
Well I got a silver machine
It flies sideways through time
It's an electric line
To your Zodiac sign
It flies out of a dream
It's anti-septically clean
You're gonna know where I've been
In my silver machine


...and THATS how Astrology works!

<< Hogwash, you say? >>

Whats your problem? Can't you read?

Sure...Stryder claimed it was pure observation.

Most of my stuff and many others involves no observation whatsoever. Can it possibly BE any clearer than that or do you want turn yourself, Q, into the human equivalent of the wall with me attempted to engage it in meaningful discussion.

Listen to thee words of Rob Calvert and Michael Moorcock.


I just took a ride
in a silver machine
and I'm still feeling mean
I got a silver machine
Do you want to ride
see yourself going by
other side of the sky
Well I got a silver machine
It flies sideways through time
It's an electric line
To your Zodiac sign
It flies out of a dream
It's anti-septically clean
You're gonna know where I've been
In my silver machine


...and THATS how Astrology works!

Hmm thats interesting.. sideways in time ?
You mean like parallel universes ?

Most of my stuff and many others involves no observation whatsoever. Can it possibly BE any clearer than that or do you want turn yourself, Q, into the human equivalent of the wall with me attempted to engage it in meaningful discussion.

That's where you're confused. Stryder was simply trying to point that out. He did, you didn't get it, and you still don't get it.

If your discussion is SO meaningful, why is everyone having to explain so much to you while you blissfully ignore it?

Err...can you show us the experimental data that provided evidence of 'memes', francois.

Don't hold your breath, guys!

:cool:

Someone is a hypocrite... :rolleyes:

Listen to thee words of Rob Calvert and Michael Moorcock.

It's an electric line
To your Zodiac sign

...and THATS how Astrology works!

THAT'S how astrology works? THAT'S your explanation?

You see, everyone was right, you have no idea what you're talking about and have no idea how astrology works.

In fact, no one does. That's exactly the point you miss, time and again.

Lissen kiddo, if Rob Calvert doesn't know then no-one knows.

Someone is a hypocrite... :rolleyes:

Its my hypocrite memes..I just can't help it...I caught the virus of you lot.:cool: