Astrology fucking debunked after 50 year study...

[MKSheppard]

http://www.washtimes.com/world/20030817 ... -9384r.htm

Comprehensive study of 'time twins' debunks astrology

By Robert Matthews
Published August 18, 2003

LONDON — Scientists have once and for all debunked astrology's central claim — that our human characteristics are molded by the influence of the sun, moon and planets at the time of our birth — in the most thorough scientific study ever conducted on the subject.

For several decades, researchers tracked more than 2,000 people — most of them born within minutes of each other. According to astrology, the subjects should have had very similar traits.

The babies were originally recruited as part of a medical study begun in London in 1958 into how the circumstances of birth can affect future health. More than 2,000 babies born in early March that year were registered, and their development was monitored at regular intervals.

Researchers looked at more than 100 different characteristics, including occupation, anxiety levels, marital status, aggressiveness, sociability, IQ levels and ability in art, sports, mathematics and reading — all of which astrologers claim can be gauged from birth charts.

The scientists failed to find any evidence of similarities between the "time twins," however. They reported in the current issue of the Journal of Consciousness Studies: "The test conditions could hardly have been more conducive to success ... but the results are uniformly negative."

Analysis of the research was carried out by Geoffrey Dean, a scientist and former astrologer based in Perth, Australia, and Ivan Kelly, a psychologist at the University of Saskatchewan, Canada.

Mr. Dean said the results undermined the claims of astrologers, who typically work with birth data far less precise than that used in the study. "They sometimes argue that times of birth just a minute apart can make all the difference by altering what they call the 'house cusps,' " he said. "But in their work, they are happy to take whatever time they can get from a client."

The findings caused alarm and anger in astrological circles yesterday. Roy Gillett, the president of the Astrological Association of Great Britain, said the study's findings should be treated "with extreme caution" and accused Mr. Dean of seeking to "discredit astrology."

Frank McGillion, a consultant to the Southampton-based Research Group for the Critical Study of Astrology, said of the newly published work: "It is simplistic and highly selective and does not cover all of the research." He added that he would lodge a complaint with the editors of the journal.

Astrologers have for centuries claimed to be able to extract deep insights into the personality and destiny of people using nothing more than the details of the time and place of birth.

Astrology has been growing in popularity. Surveys suggest that a majority of people in Britain believe in it, compared with only 13 percent 50 years ago. The Association of Professional Astrologers claims that 80 percent of Britons read star columns, and psychological studies have found that 60 percent regularly read their horoscopes.

Despite the skepticism of scientists, astrology has grown to be a huge worldwide business, spawning thousands of telephone lines, Internet sites and horoscope columns in newspapers and magazines.

It seems that no sector of society is immune to its attraction. A recent survey found that a third of science students subscribed to some aspects of astrology, while some supposedly hard-headed businessmen now support a thriving market in "financial astrology" — paying for predictions of trends such as the rise and fall of the stock market.

[Faram]

paying for predictions of trends such as the rise and fall of the stock market.

I can do that.

Yes the stockmarket will rise or fall tomorrow.

Look it up I am 100% correct

[Stravo]

Fuck that shit, telling a girl I believed in astrology got me laid once. Until they debunk that pretending you beleive in Astroloigy gets you pussy from dumb women I will be a true believer.

[Vendetta]

Nothing like modern folklore for withering under the scrutiny of empirical testing, eh?

[Joe]

As if astrologists have ever even bothered with evidence for their crackpot garbage to try and prove it in the first place...no debunking should even be necessary. But, that's how it goes in our irrational society.

[Peregrin Toker]

My opinion on the subject is clear: If an astrologer or psychic makes a prediction which turns out to be true, it's always a coincidence.

[kojikun]

I can do that.

Yes the stockmarket will rise or fall tomorrow.

Look it up I am 100% correct

I'm gonna laugh when the market makes 0% change

[Gil Hamilton]

And yet everyone who strongly believes in astrology will continue to believe in astrology, regardless of this test. It, unfortunately, only preaches to the choir.

I once considered getting into astrology. Not because I believe the planets and the stars and their positions have any meaning that exclusively applies to individuals, but rather because it would get me paid and laid for life. There are astrologers that are payed six figure incomes by companies (six figures!) for their services and there are an endless supply of bimbos in the world who will gladly jump into bed if a smooth player like myself convinces them that the planets approve. In the end, the only thing rising when the stars are right is my bank account and my wang as the airheads line up to give it a pre-ordained sucking... yeah, baby!

*ahem*

But then I decided to do something with my life.

[Lagmonster]

Fuck that shit, telling a girl I believed in astrology got me laid once. Until they debunk that pretending you beleive in Astroloigy gets you pussy from dumb women I will be a true believer.

You're reading text from a guy who used to sit in half-decayed houses with hippies searching for spooks. They believed in ghosts. They believed in astrology. They believed in 'free love'.

I'm with Stravo on THIS point. When you're young, EVERYONE looks good, and ALL sex feels good.

[Slowhand]

I have never believed in astrology and I've always felt that people who really do are weak and impressionable. I may be quilty of reading the daily horoscope in the paper, but that hardly makes me a believer.

With that said, one year ago I met a woman you was born the day before me. We share a disproportionately high number of likes and dislikes. What I mean to say is that it's really a little strange just how much we have in common.

This does not alter my stance on astrology, but it has reawakened a few thoughts on reincarnation and shared past lives.

No, not really.

[Montcalm]

They wasted fifty years to prove that astrology is bullshit.

[Keevan_Colton]

Hm, this morning....though I am to fix that later

As for the Astology stuff....it doesnt take a genius, just two braincells to rub together....unfortunately that is often a lacking thing in so many people.....

[Jawawithagun]

if they got someone to finance this research the years weren't wasted ... at least for them

[Andrew J.]

It took the THAT long!

[EmperorChrostas the Cruel]

At the risk of hijacking this thread, I want to get a few things straight.

First, the nit picker dictionarionists. If I say that humans have ten fingers, are you going to gleefully state that uncle Bob only has 8, from working in the lumber mill? Then count coup to yourself, about how much smarter you are than the fool who said humans have ten fingers? (Not ALL assholes, but with the exeption of the disfigured ones, I AM right.) Missing the obvious that MOST humans DO have ten fingers, and those that claim otherwise are the real fools.

Now, to the "pretty women on average are dumber" theory.
Stupid is, as stupid does. Most beautiful women, (Most, MOST! MOST! FUCKING DAMMIT!) do not have to work as hard intelectualy as their ugly counter parts. Brains takes work, as well as good genetics.
Why use your average ability, when you have an exeptional talent for manipulating men?
You use what you have, and if a woman has beauty, most will use it. It is easier than mental gymnastics, this manipulation of men. It is also very rewarding, on an instinctive level, to be desired.
Ugly, or even average women, don't have the OPTION of being stupid, and not being poor.They MUST work harder to succeed.
Sometimes they substitute being a slut for being hot, a bird in the hand whatnot.
Hotties use the power of the male libido to get what they want. The smart ones know this abilty will fade with time, and plan. (Grasshopper and ant)

As to what's hot, and what's not, this is like food. Tastes vary.

One of the hallmarks of the Pamela Anderson school of beauty, is helplessness, or ineptitude, real, or fake. This makes the man want to go over to her and "help her out." This will detroy the woman if she does this too much, or past her prime.
In the wild kingdom, many animals that eat meat are fierce fighters.
Signals of submissiveness, and weakness, mean the male will get to fuck, not fight, and are thus more desirable.(as opposed to potentialy dangerous)
Ditzy girls "need" help, and this makes them more atractive.
To MOST! (see above)
This is legacy architecture at it's best.
Competant women might get your respect, but it won't tickle your hormones in and of itself. Low maintenence women are the best, but they don't kick your testoserone into overdrive.
The lightening bolt of passion is seldom rational, but not the only way to fall in love.
Love at first sight, or the gradual build up over years are very different pathes.

Sexuality is OLD, like predating land animals.
There is great folly is ascribing PC ideas, to sex, something anchient, and primative.

The idea it is a completely rational process is arrogant in the extreme, and tempuscentric. The idea we are now smarter, and thus can know even the unknowable.


The big picture, is that beauty, and brains, are both in short supply. The likelyhood of having BOTH is doubly unlikely, yet still possible.
The odds then favor, that if you see a hottie, she is average, or less, in the brains department, just by the odds. She will most likely be not at her best, in the brain training/skills dept. (went to college, got an Mrs. degree!)
The odds favour when seeing a normal or unnatractive woman, it is more likely she has better brains. She definatly has a better chance of more brain training. (Studied harder, with less distractions from men, and can't depend on a man to support you.)

Attitude, and study habits, change your IQ. Stupid is, as stupid does. By acting, and practicing being dumb, they get dumber! Or the opposite!
Like Darwin's theory, losing a needed trait is disaster, but losing unneeded or redundant part goes almost unnoticed.
Eyes to a cave fish, and brains in a hottie, are both not needed.

[Durandal]

Any field of study which asserts that events are noticeably affected by stellar bodies thousands to millions of light years away debunks itself.

[Crazy Goji]

They wasted fifty years to prove that astrology is bullshit.

Really. We could have just told them that.

[General Trelane (Retired)]

The best 'horrorscope' I ever read was in a ca. 1986 Getaway (farce on the U of Alberta SU paper Gateway), which had the following (among others):

Tarus: Virgo owes you money; time to collect.

Virgo: Avoid Tarus.

Laughed my ass off!

As for 50 years for this study, that wasn't wasted because for it to mean anything, they'd have to follow the subjects through the majority of their lives just to be sure they covered everything. But I agree that it won't persuade those who believe in Astrology (and are gullible enough to not only mould their lives on it but part with money).

[NapoleonGH]

that is CLASSIC

[haas mark]

[ahem] Talk to an astrologist (such as myself), and the greater part of the time, you'll find that the ones that are non scammers also realize that things happen and astrology isn't the defining factor.

~ver

[Macross]

I dont take astrology seriously... I do read horoscopes from time to time, but for entertainment purposes only. But one year, on my birthday, I decided to read "If today is your birthday" column in the horoscopes, and its description of me was 100% accurate. But then again, the comments were rather general in nature and could probably be applied to anybody at one time in their life.

But then again, Im a Tarus, that means we are full of bull.

[Lagmonster]

Astrology is crap. All astrology. Mysticism, hell, in general, is crap.

I've seen too many things in my life that claim to be mystical in nature, and it's all turned out to be crap. This is experience talking, folks. I haven't met one person who claimed to be able to experience predictive or mystical or scary phenomena that I couldn't write up to a simple explanation, or at worst, common coincidence. Even the 'non-scammers' (or in other words, the terminally deluded).

[Peregrin Toker]

I haven't met one person who claimed to be able to experience predictive or mystical or scary phenomena that I couldn't write up to a simple explanation, or at worst, common coincidence.

That's probably the best explanation of astrology I've seen yet.

[Durandal]

[ahem] Talk to an astrologist (such as myself), and the greater part of the time, you'll find that the ones that are non scammers also realize that things happen and astrology isn't the defining factor.

In other words, you arbitrarily choose which events are determined by the stars and which ones aren't. What happens when your predictions are flat-out wrong? Does that event become one of the latter category?

[Chardok]

[ahem] Talk to an astrologist (such as myself), and the greater part of the time, you'll find that the ones that are non scammers also realize that things happen and astrology isn't the defining factor.

~ver

Astrology isn't a factor at all. perhaps the gravitational field fluctuations caused by various celestial bodies aligning has a physiological effect which makes us subconciously more susceptible to making certain choices which affect our future?
(That was my Trekkie explanation! You like that? Of course....I neglected to mention the temporal anomaly...)