Is this made up?

Post Reply New Topic

Correct. I'm stating that astrology and climate are based on time of year. The astrological signs could be correlational to the effects of climate rather than a causal relationship that primitive culture may have incorrectly deduced.

Or did they? The seasons vary as does the position/orientation of the earth with respect to the sun. Maybe the only mistake they made was thinking that the movement of the stars affected people when it is really the movement of the earth.

Okay here's an arguement against the star sign compatitibily myth.

I am virgo-I fancied the pants of a girl that was a taurus but she did not fancy me that much back. Taurus and Virgo star signs are compatible.

A girl with the star sign picses fancied me but I did not fancy her back at all. Virgo and pisces are compatible.

Just using some past examples thats all.

Okay here's an arguement against the star sign compatitibily myth.

I am virgo-I fancied the pants of a girl that was a taurus but she did not fancy me that much back. Taurus and Virgo star signs are compatible.

A girl with the star sign picses fancied me but I did not fancy her back at all. Virgo and pisces are compatible.

Just using some past examples thats all.

In the last 10K years (the Holocene Era), the constellations may not have changed much in season or configuration. Considering that recorded history does not go back much more than half that, then anything before ~3500 BCE is pretty much up for speculation and interpretation.

Anyone with a good eye, and the ability to keep track of the seasons and phases of the moon will note the cyclical passing of time, and the correlation between the seasons and stellar events. That the constellations have not changed perceptibly since people started recording their positions, it is fair to assume that the stars are indeed "fixed" in place.

Not to mention the human tendency to see images in the most unlikely places, like water stains, tortillas, and a coincidental arrangement of stars.

But those planets (from a word meaning "Wanderer"), meteors, and comets kept intruding on the stately stellar march. Some planets would seem to move forward against the backdrop of stars, stop, move backward, stop, and then move forward again to continue on their way. Comets were huge apparitions, appearing like a sword's slash across the night sky, and sometimes during the day, too! And every now and then, a star would seem to fall from the sky.

Ignorant of science, our ancient ancestors attributed human- or animal-like behavior and intent to these naturally-occuring events. What does it mean when that red planet wanders back and forth in the house of the Scorpion? What could be assumed when the two slowest planets met in the house of the Virgin? What do the phases of the moon mean? And why is there an Evening Star and a Morning Star, but never both at the same time?

And so astrology was born out of ignorance, superstition, and humanity's penchant for explaining things in the most common and un-scientific terms.

Now we know that all those lights in the sky are nothing more than inanimate pieces of matter - solid, liquid, and gas - and that they are only obeying the laws of physics, without the need to assume the existance of gods.

We agree on this. You seem to be arguing that astrology is of no use because there is no science behind it. I am arguing that astrology (or anything else) can be useful if it provides accurate results - even if we don't fully understand the science behind it.

My favorite bit on astrology is the Forer effect. Really, aside from explaining that, I have no use for astrology. They usually just tell you things you want to believe, or that would be true of anyone. Next time you get a fortune cookie, or a horoscope, think about all the people you know, and how much that would apply to them. Think of how many people would WANT that to be true of them.

aspie virgo, together with an aries, here
i'm very much a "virgo", as he's very much an "aries"; we love each other to death, regardless of little things we do that unintentionally bug the other.
as far as being compatible vs. incompatible goes, i judge that solely based on specific-person-interacting-with-another-specific-person, not based upon which moon or constellation the persons were born under.

Astrology is one of the sole surviving methods of predicting the future, like geomancy, necromancy, plubnomancy, etc. The difference between astrology and astronomy is that astronomy grew out of astrology. It was important for kings, pharohs, etc., to know what the future held, so actual observations of the stars and planets were taken to support astrological observations. Only the astronomical observations could be defined in terms of truth much more easily than astrological ones.

In reality, the stars and planets that make of the constellations make up a 3-dimensional space of dozens or even hundreds of light years on the planetary radius of our own solar system. Original astrology didn't have 'planets' out past Saturn, because until the outer planets weren't discovered until the telescope was invented. How did they influence us without being known before? Why don't stars outside the 'accepted' constallations not influence us in some way?

In fact, my sign (Scorpio) was based on Pluto. Until 1930, what was my planet? (I'm too lazy to look it up). Pluto was demoted last year to a dwarf planet, so am I now being influenced differently? And what of the 'new' planetoids, like (whatever they finally called the 'Xena' planetoid) and others in the Oort clouds and Kuyper Belt? Weren't they influencing us before they were discovered?

Finally, look up the 'definition' of what your star sign says about you. As you read it, you'll go 'yeah, that's me'. Now do something different; break all the qualities into individual words, and
look at each in detail. Do all of them describe you? This sort of 'placebo' effect will ordinarily have you agreeing with the ones that 'describe' you, and ignoring the ones that don't.
(I did this procedure with AS 'definition' to make sure I wasn't on another wild goose chase...

Interesting procedure.. I'll apply it on the rat; (hxxp://chinese.astrology[dot]com/rat.aspx)

Quick wits? Yes
Hold on to items of value? Yes, money and people I like.
Clever? Of course..
Disarming to boot? Yes
Possessed of excellent taste? Oui
Charm? Yep
Sharp? Yep
Funny demeanor? Yes
Likes to know who is on its side and will treat its most loyal friends with an extra measure of protection and generosity? Yes
Own agendas (motivated by own interests)? Yes
Greedy? Hell Yeah!
Persuasion? Yes
Generous to close ones? Yes, others not so much.
Verbal jousting is a great pleasure? Yes
Enjoy being on the outside looking in? Yes
Ever-curious? Yes
Welcomes challenges? Yes
Knows how to keep yourself entertained? Yes
A valuable lesson for Rats is to learn to consider others above themselves, at least sometimes? Maby
If they can develop their sense of self and realize it leaves room for others in their life as well, Rats could find true happiness. True

20/20

Chinese astrology pwns.. I could do the same procedure with another sign to try and prove something but that would take a long time and I definitly don't relate to Rooster crap or Horse s**t
As of european astrology I relate strongly to the scorpion; sadistic and self-destructiv.. .lols.

Last edited by Aspie007 on 11 Jan 2009, 11:48 am, edited 4 times in total.

freya on a different subject isn't that a pic of Ada Wong of Resident Evil 4 you have up there

And yes you can't decide which people are right for you based on star signs.

O RLY?

Of course not but it might give hints, most people would agree they get along better with some people more than others.. wouldn't it be great if we could understand why?

Until then human intuition always prevails!