Avgvsto
Vannak
There has been no scientific proposal for how planets and stars effect the human body or brain. Your pillow puts more gravitational force on your body than any star does. The other forces don't act on such a long range.
This is pretty inconsequential. Under my understanding of physics the pillow would have a hard time existing if the sun had been created a couple million miles closer to the earth. It's not s much we're supposed to be directly fluctuated by the stars gravitational pulls but everything is supposed to be relatively proper according to physics and if a star moves so does a relative physical assortment of gravitational pulls. Astrology is like trying to look at the universe as a puzzle and trying to fit our planet in as the missing puzzle piece.
Vannak
Further, there's a 13th constellation not many know about.
and if you actually use an astronomical program to see where the sun rose on your birthday, you'd find you weren't born in the constellation that your normal astronomical sign would suggest.
I've heard about this, I'm not to sure about any of it. I'm not at all well read in this subject yet.
Vannak
So far I haven't heard one way in which astrology COULD be true. The only "proof" people seem to have walks the line of confirmation bias every single time.
I don't think it calls itself true anyway. It's much like science, it's theoretic. As I said, I'm not to well read on the subject but as I'm pretty sure it was an ancient science that was dismissed, it probably underwent the same sorts process that modern science does and hardly calls itself infallible. Further, when someone is describing themselves on a pretty personal and at times derogatory level I tend to believe them.
I don't understand what you're trying to say with your first comment. Fluffing your pillow will do more to change the assortment of forces on your head than any arrangement of stars. I really have no idea what you mean by "relatively proper". I'm a physics graduate student (whose work deals mostly with astronomy) and I've literally never heard the term before, used in this way. Its also important to note that even when the stars aren't in the sky, you're still being effected by them. They don't "Move", and astrology only makes sense if you think stars "go somewhere" during the day.
The 13th constellation is called Ophiuchus. Currently the sun rises in Ophiuchus around december/january. When the Zodiac was created, this would have been a late November / early December constellation.
On your last comment. Let me be perfectly clear.
There is no such thing as ancient science. Science, to the layman, is a set of knowledge we got by tinkering with ideas new and old. This is completely wrong. Science is a process, and a process which was not formalized until a specific time, usually credited somewhere around the 18th century or so.
This isn't to say knowledge was impossible before science, but knowledge about things that are outside the range of human experience was. That is, anything that took longer than a life time (such as Tectonic shift), was too small to see (germ theory of disease) or was too far away to see (astronomy), were all outside the realm of knowledge to people back then. To understand something you can't see directly requires science, and ancient knowledge is no exception, and no alternative.
Here's why. Science is about figuring out what is not true, and formulating theories based on what remains. Other forms of knowledge were based on validating ideas. The issue with validating an idea is that with out trying to falsify it, you run into a lot of murky issues. For instance, if you give someone their horoscope, say, Scorpio, and they agree it resembles them, have you supported astrology? The answer is no, because we've only tried to get a confirmation. In science you HAVE to try to prove your hypothesis wrong. The inability to do so is what validates ideas in science. To try and prove astrology wrong you might try to give people the wrong Zodiac descriptions, and see if they agree when they shouldn't. Maybe Mr Scorpio from before kind of likes his Scorpio reading, but really feels as though Gemini matches him or her best. Simply getting the fastest "yes" you can out of an experiment does not make science.
Saying astrology went through this process that every scientific idea has to is, simply, wrong. Astrologers tend to hide from this level of critique by waving their hands and alluding to mysterious forces and saying like "that's mischief. Mischief in mischief out" as though trying to disprove astrology will make the universe mad at you and mess up your results. Its absurd on every level.
200
100
250
