Some yank paying out "DOWN-UNDERERS" for living in the dark ages

[COSMOPARADISE]

I was shocked to see this article about how an American journo spat the dummy about the way an ABC journalist described the planetary allignment earlier this month and the way the writer generalised our open minded culture. What a wanker!!! Putting all us Aussies in the same box and slandering our nation. Thinks he's BENNY ELIAS i reckon!! Wouldnt know what all the fuss is about anyway being a Soccer Goalkeeper myself... worrying about an egg shaped ball game between two states!!! FORD vs HOLDEN gets priority over all...just look out for that GIZ...he'll be on top soon and stay there for a while.
http://cs.astronomy.com/asycs/blogs/daves-universe/archive/2011/05/12/media-shame-of-the-month-australian-broadcasting-corporation.aspx?utm_source=Silverp opMailing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ASY_NEWS_NonSub_110520 _final&utm_content=

[Omaroo]

I think that most here agree with him wholeheartedly, and I certainly do. In fact I'll say that I applaud him....

"Open minded". LOL! I know there are fairies down at the bottom of my garden. Don't criticise me over my deeply-help belief, as that would obviously make you "close-minded".

The ABC need to have a long hard look at themselves and this "journalist". Astrology is considered mere "entertainment" by the majority who follow it for their own reason. I "read my stars" for a good laugh once in a while like anyone else. For a news journo to write such an article, on behalf of our nationally-owned news outlet the ABC that presents it as news, is beyond me. Astrologers are akin to failed alchemists who just kept going, and that practise died out many centuries ago. Why hasn't this?

We've already been discussing it here: http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/showthread.php?t=75565

[supernova1965]

I am with you Chris it was a dreadful excuse for journalism

[astroron]

Nick, you have come in on the wrong side here :( the people on this site are on the side of the writer of that article:)
Read the thread highlighted by Chris.
Cheers :thumbsup:

[adman]

I can't say that my reading of that article gave the impression of any generalisations about Australians. He was unimpressed with the standard of journalism showed by the writer of the article, and also by the judgement of the ABC.

[Astroman]

I am with Adam, I cannot see any generalisation either... But the articles are interesting...

[overlord]

I really like astrology!

Certain males are the only ones who criticize it, and they haven't ever studied it in their life. They are guessing that it's wrong cos somebody who never studied it told them.

A woman would never criticize it as she is intimately connected to the universe as a member of the league of creation and birth.

The author is right! It IS astrologers who predict alignments. They didn't need NASA to do this lol.

Gee sorry to put a damper on proceedings but we are not all materialists here. :(

[renormalised]

You don't have to be materialistic to see what a load of trash astrology is. Neither is it exclusively males who criticise it. We don't guess anything wrong...we look at the evidence as it presents itself and then base our conclusions upon that. The human mind has a great capacity to fool itself, that's why we have to be careful in believing in anything at face value.

[Satchmo]

I can see that from your list of equipment ;)



I read Dave Eichers blog and it smells of a 'beat up' to me. His use of the words `Down Under' with capital letters was demeaning ( I wonder whether he has ever been privelaged to see an outback Australian sky ? ) . I saw the ABC report on TV that essentially used the same transcript and I thought the tone it was delivered was in fun- the astrologers and a final comment from Fred Watson. After all the `alignment ' has no scientific significance so why not be playful about the whole thing - I thought the segment was really well done .

[overlord]

Well to be fair on you I guess you are talking about the stuff in the newspapers.

Well, astrologers DO actually look at evidence. And I am talking about professional astrologers. Every alignment has very different alleged properties, which would not be the case if evidence was not being collected.
Professional astrologers know when stock market crashes are going to happen and the current economic downturn was no surprise. There is another mighty crash coming by the end of this year and you can bump the thread then if you still think astrology is rubbish, by then. See i am like the guy in Back to the Future with that book and he can predict in advance all the sporting events. Biff is his name. Except I don't need time travel.

The simplest proof for astrology is that the planets are huge floating spheres rather close to us. They are the nearest big things to us to suggest that they have no impact is laughable.

There are also lots of different types of astrologies. For example, there is weather astrology. These people, including myself study very long term weather cycles over thousands of years. Albumasar said there was a thousand year cycle of empires and if you look at empires lasting 800-1000 years you see there is something to it. The stars can help us plot these cycles. The planet changes over a millenia with regards to various alignment cycles are like a 'cosmic clock'. They are legitimate even if they are not causal. Thus astrology does not even have to be causal for it to be accurate. IT might just be a very accurate clock which relates to earth temperature cycles. WE know there is a 1000 years cycle of changes from weather reconstructions. The cycles are there, and astrology is used to predict them thanks to an accurate cosmic clockwork.

What about the moon. Does the moon and sun cause tides, or is that 'rubbish'. Does the moon affect our moods. Science always says that it does. That isn't rubbish either. Now I think that the planets affect changes on the sun. The proof is that the sun is always changing and I don't see anything else around which could be doing it. You are also forgetting that all the greatest scientists have always been astrologers, from Carl Jung to Kepler. It is an intrinsic part of astronomy and always will be, and to suggest otherwise is an insult. I hope I don't get banned for this but anyone who criticizes the whole of astrology based on what they read in newspapers is :P

So basically it's highly narrow minded to say astrology is 'trash'. Only someone who hates it strongly enough not to bother investigating it would say such a thing, as everyone who has ever investigated it in depth has found the opposite. I could go on and on and on. I will always defend astrology. If you would like evidence of an experiment regarding electrical changes with regards to alignments I would refer you here. This was in the journal of electrical engineering in the 1950s. I'll go now.

http://www.enterprisemission.com/jnelson1.html

[Omaroo]

Oh! I see! It's a comedy thread! :thumbsup:




Hmmm...... oh dear.

[OICURMT]

:lol: I busted a gut laughing... :rofl:

[Satchmo]

Phew...glad to see you guys are current with your research :)

[renormalised]

Trying to justify astrology by abusing science in using it to somehow "prove" that the mere alignment of any astronomical object will affect/effect a change in human behaviour is not only a classic case of pseudoscience and a distinct lack understanding of anything to do with science (or the nature of reality), but is also a classic case of what I wrote in my last post. The human mind's gullibility and propensity for being able to fool itself. It has nothing to do with hate, or emotions, or some "us vs them" mentality. Just a reasonably thorough look at the facts as they present themselves and an understanding of the physics involved will tell you that astrology is a waste of time. Quoting history and saying that "hey, astronomers and astrologers were one and the same at one time" doesn't cut the mustard either. Witch doctors were the family doctors at one stage, but once our understanding and knowledge of medicine, human nature and diseases increased over time, we left all that nonsense of "vapours and demons" behind. Only the illiterate and uneducated would fall for that garbage, or the weak minded and easily led.

Your whole argument has the ring of someone who really doesn't understand science at all, even if you pretend to do so. It has no legs to stand on and even less actual evidence to support its claims.

[Omaroo]

Printed during the last planetary alignment... which of course was also predicted, even back then.

[renormalised]

It's a three ring circus, Chris. Abbot and Costello meets The Three Stooges:):P

[ballaratdragons]

Now, to get back to the original topic of the thread "yanks paying out "DOWN-UNDERERS" for living in the dark ages.

Yes I agree, the ABC reporter should be sent to a witch doctor and have her entrails read!

I bet she is a Sagittarian :P

[renormalised]

It's Jupiter's fault....it rules in Sagittarius, even though it's in Pisces at present and was nowhere near Sagittarius when they first started compiling astrological tables:P

[ballaratdragons]

Sooooo . . .

in reality it is the Ophiucuns fault!

Oh, that's right. They left Ophiucus out coz there aren't 13 months in a year :D

[renormalised]

That's only by convention:D

In any case, 13 is supposed to be unlucky. Can you imagine what someone's (horror)scope would be if they were born at the time of year Ophiucus was supposedly "prominent"!!!:):P

Ophiucus (21/12-20/13)

Ten black cats will cross your path today
and a major thunderstorm will park itself over the top of your house
Flight 13 from N.Y. will crash in your backyard and leave a 66.6m wide crater
Your bank will default on your credit and the FBI will investigate you for insider trading
Your citizenship will also be revoked
Have a nice day.....loser!!!!!.

:):P

[TrevorW]

Yes I agree, the ABC reporter should be sent to a witch doctor and have her entrails read!

I bet she is a Sagittarian :P[/QUOTE]

Now thems fighting words, what's wrong with Sagittarians :poke::P

[Octane]

They're... Sagittarians...

H

[TrevorW]

Jealousy is a curse

I quote

"According to astologers Sagittarian men are some of the smartest,wittiest, good looking, athletic and all round charmers you are likely to meet"

now how could they be wrong :question:

[OICURMT]

Now now Trevor... are you CERTAIN you are a Sagittarius?

You better double check
(http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/showpost.php?p=677382&postcount=40)

[Kal]

I've come to accept that journalism nowdays is merely a product of capitalism that caters directly to a market, in the case of the original article, the millions(?) of astrologers that Australia has. You open up a newspaper, it has an astrology section, you open almost any womens mag, it has an astrology section. The same thing is happening to mainstream media as well, with FOX being a perfect example of biased media catering to a specific market - the right wing.

[overlord]

LOL. Someone on this thread said I don't understand science. Funny that, since not only AM I a scientist with degree from the University of Melbourne, but I have also undertaken extensive research in the history and philosophy of science, so I am aware of certain of the ins and outs. I am also in my eleventh full time year of university and am wrapping up a Phd, which is actually my third university degree.

But that's right, most people are sycophants and suck-ups to the people on television who grow beards (yes they do), in order to get research grants since that makes them look like mystical elders. They assume they are right because they see themselves as low in the hierarchy and unqualified to discuss 'sacred physics' which becomes religious for them. Thus Hawking and other nutters who believe in such fraudulent ideas as 'dark matter' are called upon to explain the origins of the universe.... as if they knew, and millions of parrots actually believe them. BELIEF without REASON is not science. Science has always been about asking questions and analysis. Nothing these cosmologists do is in anyway falsifiable, and is therfore highly theoretical and unscientific. On the other hand, astrology developed empirically.

P.S.

I forgot to say that it's hard to understand that article without knowledge of this. Many of the Ptolemaic aspects were improved by Johannes Kepler, an excellent scientist who developed orbital laws, and noticed that certain aspects could be bisected with resultant weather changes on earth.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astrological_aspect

We currently experienced some very hard aspects which shut down solar activity with the result of primary agriculturist commodities tripping in value in the late 2000s.

[TrevorW]

your calendars wrong :P

Sagittarius, the ninth zodiac sign, is the most independent of all. Those, who are born between November 22 and December 21, are Sagittarius. Sagittarians are brave, who can go to any extent to meet their goals. They are very strong and always wear a positive attitude towards life. This is the reason that most of the Sagittarians are successful in life. They are great initiator and pathfinder. They know how to live a happy and contented life and they do the needful for it. You must notice them laughing very often.

[overlord]

Here ya go guys! The planets pull the sun around!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Solar_system_barycenter.svg

This is NOT pseudoscience. It is a very real effect!

[dugnsuz]

+1 Andrew:thumbsup:

Indifferent to both sides in this debate - can't get worked up as an 'astronomer' at a fluff piece of journalism, and can see the journo's point for tie-ing the alignment and astrology together to create said 'Fluff' (shame she dragged poor old Fred Watson along with it though!)...don't care - move on.

What I did find irksome, and which ties in with the OPs original point, was a member of the US 'media' berating another country's media for poor quality journalism! A case of physician heal thyself I think!!

Andrew's 'Fox' example is a frightening illustration of this.

[renormalised]

Just because you have a degree or two, and are working towards a PhD doesn't mean you understand what science is about. You've obviously abandoned all of your critical faculties to pursue a hobby horse which from what I can tell you've held even before your academic career. So, you're trying to "use" science in order to prove your preconceived notions. That's not how science works, despite what your delusions about it might tell you. As so far as Hawking et.al. are concerned, their ideas wouldn't have been accepted as workable theories if they weren't able to be falsified. The simple fact that they are theories means they've passed various tests of falsifiability and have been accepted...so how can they be "unscientific". If you actually knew anything about how science works, as you claim to, you would know that a hypothesis is what the preliminary step in the falsification of any scientific idea is. That's where it maybe unscientific or not....a theory is an accepted premise, no matter how controversial it is. It is also a tested premise and so has been falsified to the best of the ability of science at the time. However, what is unscientific is the nonsense you're trying to peddle in these posts. I don't need to list the number of studies which have been carried out on this subject to be able to say, in all confidence, that what you're trying to justify is nothing more than snake oil. I've encountered a few people such as yourself in my time that try and use science to prove wholly unsupported and discredited nonsense, thinking that because they've managed to get through university and obtained a degree or two, that somehow makes them qualified to rewrite science in their own image, so to speak. I suggest that if you want to go write science fiction, then go do so. Leave the real science up to those that actually know what they're doing and have taken the time to understand what it's on about.

[renormalised]

Well said, Doug. As far as the American media is concerned it's a case of the pot calling the kettle black. The news networks, especially in the US, are not about critically informing the public in an unbiased manner. They're nothing more than trash entertainment organisations that cater to the lowest common denominator when it comes to anything intelligent or factual reporting. But, that seems to be what the general populace wants, so they get what they deserve. Rubbish, lies and fantasy.

[JethroB76]

Yes, but did that quote come from a "professional astrologer" or just an amateur..:lol:

BEST. THREAD. EVER

[OICURMT]

Umm.... I don't understand what your point is...:question: No one here would even dispute this fact, as this is one of the primary methods used to detect exoplanets (doppler effect from planetary pull on the primary star).

[renormalised]

He's trying to prove the validity of astrology.

[mithrandir]

What epoch are those dates? At a quick look, they are about 2 days early.

[OICURMT]

Keeping line with another thread (http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/showthread.php?t=75919), it's based on U.S. time... :P

Honestly, don't remember where I got those dates (I used the information back in the early 90's... I may have updated them, but apparently not if you think they are a couple of days out... Time to Google!)


OIC!

[renormalised]

Isn't everything??:):P

[Satchmo]

You did a science degree and studied philosophy of science without coming away with any understanding about scientific method and the birth and growth of astrology as pseudo-science in its historical context. That could only be an indictment of modern universities.

[ngcles]

Hi All,

Without entering the fray on all the peripheral comments on this thread, I agree with Dave Eicher's blog comments wholeheartedly. I don't think it really has anything to do with bashing Australians, but highlighting a badly written story that prima-facie, elevates astrology to a similar level as astronomy as a science. Indeed I made almost the same comments on this ABC story elsewhere.

But to explain, without excusing what we see as the ABC writer's poor item, she probably sought comment from astrologers on the basis that it "balances" the story. Young journalists have been taught for a long, long time that where there might be two angles on a story, that they should put both sides of the story and allow the reader to make up their minds. Rightly or wrongly, this I think is mostly what the writer has attempted here -- with the exception of the "astrologist" clunker

I and most people who are members here will be unhappy that both the beauty and the science here has been obnubilated by the addition of the astrology material because we see it as our duty to promote astronomy as a science and to debunk junk pseudo-science (yes I know that's a tautology).

This is why we (and David Eicher) are (rightly) annoyed by the astrology material in an article that primarily concerns science and specacle. But, the journalist has little or no interest in that as an agenda. She is more interested in "balancing" the story because that is what she was almost certainly taught to do -- particularly when she has little or no real grasp of the branch of knowledge.

Was I happy with how my "8c a day" was spent here? No!


Best,

Les D

[erick]

On the question of "balance". it might be reasonable on a matter that was, say, a dispute between Government and Opposition, to hear equally from both sides, given both sides hold approximately equal support. But in many scientific arguments, the "balance" of views is 10,000 one way and 1 the other way - should those views then get equal time?

[Satchmo]

I'd concur with Les's analysis of the reporter finding two angles to the event.

The report on TV was done in a fun way - with a whimsical tone in Juanita Phillips voice when listing the astrologers claims. Her voice sounded more serious when introducing the AAO Directors comment, which they most appropriately put at the end as the serious 'voice of reason'.

TV News is popular culture- the alignment's aesthetic significance would have been lost on the audience, but the astrology angle made the piece fun. It was a puff piece at the end of the bulletin- and I for one enjoyed it. Dave Eicher needs to lighten up- perhaps he needs to move `down under' himself.

[overlord]

:lol:

You read that in a book written by a materialist and assumed it was true since you were too lazy to investigate it for yourself. I am not interested in discussing matters with people who merely parrot other people's opinions as if they were some kind of holy scripture. We must be open minded, not dogmatic. If you think you are able to judge me, maybe I should judge you too. So.... I recommend an appointment for you in the Vatican as a paragon of the sacred never-to-be-questioned dogma.

Well, I WILL question everything since I am a true scientist and not a blind sheeple follower.

As for stuff in newspapers, even that is true as well even if it is not made by any quantifiable means, and just 'channeled' out of the ether thanks to the phenomenon of synchronicity discovered in recent times by Carl Jung, and believed in by every great mind who has ever walked the earth. Thank you!

[overlord]

:(

I don't LIKE when people heap stuff on my astrology. It makes me shake with fury cos i have investigated this VERY in depth and am talked down by people who only have a passing interest. How DARE you. I am flouncing from this forum for one week in protest. But I will leave you with the notion of how synchronicity works:

Synchronicity makes even the things we read in newspapers, VERY relevant to our lives:



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synchronicity

As for the moving sun idea... that is for the more quantifiable form of astrology... The earth orbits, not the sun, but the center of mass... the sun shifts away from the center of the solar system when planets line up so weather on earth becomes more extreme. It's not pseudoscience at all! It's NEW SCIENCE! GOODBYE!
:atom::bashcomp::sadeyes:

[multiweb]

Another Astrology vs. Astronomy thread. Yay! :sunny:
My daughter started year7 and she's quite excited about all the new stuff, maths, tech, science they're starting to learn in high-school. Last night she came around my laptop while I was doing some plate solving and asked me what's the difference between astrology and astronomy. I din't want to influence her so I sent her to the wikipedia pages for a bit of reading.

She came back 10min later and said: "You know astrology?... I think it's BS" :lol:

[CraigS]

Adios !
I'm surprised this didn't happen sooner !

Cheers

[renormalised]

Once more, all I hear is unsubstantiated nonsense. Actually, I have no interest at all in your astrology, let alone a passing interest. Why?? Because for the last 400 years science has shown that astrology is nothing more than the deluded fantasies of fools who want to persist in believing in fairies under the toadstools or in some outside influence which magically has something to do personally with them and their banal lives, or has some influence over the world at large. I DARE to question your logic and your understanding, even your education, simply because I have actually spent the time (and a good deal of money) getting a scientific education as well as a broad understanding of many fields (let alone science). Plus, I have the practical experience to back myself up, which is more than I can say for yourself since you've apparently spent the last 11 years with your head in God knows what books at university. Oh, and as for not having read about it all, I'm sorry to disappoint you but I have a great interest in many things "paranormal" and I am not as "narrow minded" as you have thought. Far less so than you could even realise, actually. However, I don't go off into cloud cuckoo land with it. Nor do I make unsubstantiated claims based on little or no evidence, circumstance and coincidence or wishful thinking. If you were the scientist that you claim to be, neither would you. Since you have, through your posts here recently, shown that this is not the case, then what you say has little or no relevance to any discussion of scientific theory whatsoever. It's nothing more than psycho-babble and misguided ramblings. Please, keep your thoughts to yourself.

[Satchmo]

We are not setting a good example for world peace here :)

[overlord]

LOL How am I a troll for responding to an astrology thread trashing astrology? .... with astrology? And you respond with what.... ASTROLOGY IS WRONG. AGREE OR YOU ARE A TROLL. I KNOW COS I NEVER READ ANYTHING REGARDING IT AND COS SOMEONE SAID SO AND COS 'EVERYONE KNOWS'. umm no thanks. That is NOT convincing. That is not scientific.

U have NOT responded to my point that the sun is not in the center of the solar system when the planet line up because you can't and keep your religious belief system in tact. I would LOVE you to respond to that but you would rather insult. lol. this is science? Um, no. If you want to participate in scientific discussion then I would like to see some science.

Where? EXACTLY do I read that astrology has been disproven? How was it disproven? When did it happen? Am I hitting my head against a brick wall? Let me remind you that this thread is about ASTROLOGY, LOL.

:shrug: :help: What, i'm supposed to AGREE? with some unsubstantiated insult? LOL! From someone with no education in astrology? Like that's gonna happen, LOL! There are books written every year by professors in academic institutions on the effect of planetary bodies in modifying the sun and this is .... superstition? Ah excuse me but I don't like reading that rubbish! Thank you!

Oh, the sun moves out of the center of the solar system cos it's being superstitious?! UMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM

[TrevorW]

Does that mean the stuff they say about Sagittarians isn't true and I've been deluding myself all this time

not happy Jan

[renormalised]

I thought you were going to "flounce off" for a week...can't even keep to your own word!!!.

You can cry foul as much as you like, it still doesn't change the fact that astrology, in all its varied forms, is nothing more than pseudoscientific nonsense dressed up in a facade of spurious authority, which despite your protestations to the contrary, it has even less than nothing of. You talk about religious belief systems...it's funny how it is you that is showing all the symptoms of a religious belief and a clear case of messianic fervour for your misguided world paradigm. If you are so fervently sure of the veracity of what you believe in, you supply the proof. Where are the peer reviewed articles and the empirical studies done by credible institutions and leading scientists in the field...and I don't mean Nexus Magazine or one of these American "institutes" that deal in this sort of rubbish. Also quoting Carl Jung or anyone like Ptolemy or Aristotle isn't going to help your cause either.

It's quite apparent from your ramblings here that you actually don't understand a thing about science or the scientific method. If you did, you wouldn't be waffling on like you are doing. You'd be too embarrassed to do so because the more you open your mouth and spout this rubbish, the sillier you look. You're digging your own academic grave here, although I suspect it's one you've been digging for quite some time.

[erick]

Actually, the thread was about journalistic professionalism and whether Australians like being lectured to by a US journalist.

The validity of astrology arose subsequently.

Re: "the sun shifts away from the center of the solar system when planets line up so weather on earth becomes more extreme", here is a bit of science - from my reading, the Solar System barycenter spends most of its time within the main structure of the Sun. In the extremely rare circumstance of all the planets aligned in a line away from the Sun, the barycentre would be approximately 500,000 km above the Sun's "surface", the maximum possible distance from the centre of the Sun. Given the Sun's approximate diameter is 1,400,000 km, this would not be particularly significant. Given the difference between perihelion and aphelion for the Earth is some 5,000,000 km, having the barycenter move to one tenth of this distance above the surface of the Sun every few thousand years (guess - when the planets fully "align") is clearly not significant for the Earth's weather, nor anything else of importance on Earth, for that matter.

By the way, Chucky, I thought you were taking a break from IIS? Please feel free to do so.

[overlord]

Yes but you see that is an assumption on your part. World events might dictate otherwise. However I fully understand why people are saying astrology is not scientific. It's because there are many variables and we can't exactly replicate the world in a test tube to prove any of this. Fine, but does that really mean it's a pseudoscience? Does it really mean we are Verbotten?!

I also took it upon myself to make blog post regarding this debacle:

http://nibiru-info.blogspot.com/2011/05/views-on-veracity-of-astrology.html

Thank you.

[renormalised]

Chucky, Charles, Chucky, Chucky...if it wasn't for the fact that you take this nonsense so seriously this whole conversation would be hilarious!!!!:):P

Quite frankly, you should keep to your conspiracy theories website and not stray too far from there...dealing with reality is a little too much. It's quite obvious from your musings there that you have a tenuous grip on what science is about. If you actually have any understanding at all. The same goes for the rest of your motley crew.

[CraigS]

Oh brother … !!


:whistle:
Cheers

[erick]

Oh well, I'll take my leave of this thread. Good luck all :hi:

EDIT: sorry, back again! :P Just read Chucky's Blog - I must "get a life" - and I quote from his "Observing the Canals on Mars!" entry:- "I strongly suspect that NASA cameras, (and cameras in general), are not sensitive to the light frequency required to see the canals, or required to piece images together. We see with our minds, our eyes are an instrument. There appear to be shadows of the canals evident on the Hubble photographs, but as always, they simply do not show up very well on photographs at all! Several 'canals' look like strings of craters." Seems to me that Chucky achieved what Percival Lowell achieved - they both saw canals in their minds.

[astroron]

Yes but you see that is an assumption on your part. World events might dictate otherwise. However I fully understand why people are saying astrology is not scientific. It's because there are many variables and we can't exactly replicate the world in a test tube to prove any of this. Fine, but does that really mean it's a pseudoscience? Does it really mean we are Verbotten?!

YES,
If your ramblings where not so pathetic,:sadeyes: they would be funny:screwy:
Cheers:thumbsup:

[renormalised]

Smart move...preserve your sanity whilst you can:):P

[blink138]

Chucky, Charles, Chucky, Chucky...if it wasn't for the fact that you take this nonsense so seriously this whole conversation would be hilarious!!!!:):P

you forgot "chuckster" or "The chuckster"
for that shall be his name!
pat

[renormalised]

Many names...one face.

[TrevorW]

Chucky I'm on your side as long as you can confirm what they say about Sagittarians is true :thanx::thumbsup: then I can stick it too all those nay sayers

so rude ain't they

[renormalised]

Nay, nay ,nay:):P

[mithrandir]

"The Chucklester"? Aren't all of us - with one exception - laughing?

[Satchmo]

From your blog : "Furthermore, Mercury is generally too close to the horizon at sunrise, (and sunset) to be seen in a suburban environment. Only Venus, with a smallish Jupiter, (mistaken for Mercury until my telescope told me otherwise), on the far side of the solar system, were visible."

Actually Mercury was well placed forming a close triangle with Jupiter and Venus and easily seen from Sydney Observatory in the center of the city.

Looks like you'd better go consult your astrology charts again - or speak to an amateur astronomer.
How can I put it - don't give up your day job...:confused2:

[COSMOPARADISE]

bit of a can of worms it seems.

[AG Hybrid]

+10

^^^This.

Ive been monitoring this thread from work today every now and then. I was wondering how long it would take for someone to mention this, if at all.

For such a large group of intelligent people, you guys let yourselves get sucker punched. lol :rofl:

Word from the wiser. Don't feed the trolls. :rolleyes:

[TheDecepticon]

LOL!:lol::lol:

Great thread!:P:P:):thumbsup:

[TrevorW]

I'm still waiting for an answer, Chuckie

[OICURMT]

Thank goodness I don't read the newspaper... it's the internet for me :thumbsup:

[OICURMT]

Come on man.. you said you were leaving...

[Kal]

What a fascinating thread (from a psychological point of view), some people will believe what they want to believe I guess, no matter how irrational.

I honestly didn't think that there would be any astrologers on IIS :screwy:

[stephenb]

Well Chucky's also involved in this forum: http://www.conspiracyparadise.com/forum/ ...enough said...

[AG Hybrid]

Ok this is just /thread.

[overlord]

Phew, it's rather late and i'm not used to posting here at this time.

Hello. I must admit I have never paid much attention to the horoscope astrologers. I have no idea what this Saggitarius thing is about. I feel however that horoscope astrological ideas can't help but work due to the unyielding phenomenon of synchronicity, however one chooses to work them out. I concentrate more on the weather and financial side of astrology, as it relates and pertains to climate cycles. I can quantify that with various economic and sunspot/earthquake charts, etc. Whether the stars work as a clock for earth cycles, or a causative link is really irrelevant so far as prediction is concerned. However I believe there is a causative aspect thanks to the reality of the electric universe model.

I earnestly recommend a deep reading of Eric Lerner's 90s work: 'The Big Bang never happened.' I believe cosmic electricity is responsible for many of the phenomena for which non-existent 'dark matter' is blamed. There is a fudge-factor for electric universe in conventional cosmology known as 'dark energy'. This is essentially similar to what electric universe theorists postulate is occurring, however by alternate means.

To be fair to the horoscope astrologers, I personally undertook to test my personal horoscope using this website.

http://alabe.com/freechart/

To my surprise, it was about 90% correct. I sent it to an ex, and she said it was about 70-80% for her. I sent it to another ex, who according to my friends is most probably the most beautiful woman in Australia, similar to Lara Bingle but more impressive. For her it was about 90%. The mechanism? I have no idea, suffice to say that cosmic electricity may shape our minds at an early age. I don't see why not since it shapes the sun as well, so why not our minds? We are merely a carbon manifestation of the outer layer of the Sun, so these things actually affect us tremendously.

To respond to another user who said that the distance increase or decrease to earth was insignificant... how about the tidal forces inside the actual Sun? If gravity can pull the sun into a new place it can surely change internal structures inside the Sun and cause it to behave errantly, as is currently the case, in which we are entering a new maunder minimum.

[Omaroo]

:lol:

[dugnsuz]

clickety clack clickety clack clickety clack...

The keyboard sounds of many astronomer's frantically responding to the above!!

[adman]

Oh man! I always miss all the fun. Can someone please PM me whenever there is a hissy fit. It's just so darn entertaining.

[Octane]

lol... astrology... and *l*ctr*c *n*v*rs* in the one post.

Carl and Craig and Steven and Bojan are going to blow a blood vessel in their heads.

H

[astroron]

:lol::lol::lol:
Good one H :thumbsup:

[renormalised]

I honestly have never read so much pure nonsense and self delusional dribbling in all my life. You call yourself a "scientist' (and I'd use that term very advisedly) and then you have the temerity to waffle on about "testing" a "personal horoscope theory" by using yourself and array of "ex's" who were somehow qualified to make any sort of comment...one of them some sort of hot stuff!!!???:screwy::rofl: Only for the fact this is a family site, I have a few very good words which I could use to describe that little bit of incredulous prose.

Then you go onto rambling on about EU and Eric Lerner!!!!:):P

You and "Electroboy" would make a great couple. You'd get along like a house on fire!!!:):P Geez, I'd even be really happy for you if you both got engaged!!!:lol::rofl:

Really, you should write a science fiction novel about your theories. It's about the only place where your ideas belong.

[dugnsuz]

To plagiarize another recent thread..."Pics or it never happened."

[renormalised]

This is more like a three ringed circus...I've got some popcorn here if you want to join in and watch the clown pull another rabbit out of his hat:):P

[dugnsuz]

This thread is a damn shame if this chap has even the slightest 'REAL' interest in astronomy - I reckon we've sent him packing! Is that a good thing - we have all sorts of beliefs and make comments here on IIS usually constrained/censored by the TOS, but we turn mob-like on this guy! Sad...

Let him have his views misguided, mis-aligned or whatever - this would not run to 5 pages if Christianity was under the microscope.

You guys are having fun like my ginger tom plays with a mouse - cruel, but horribly fun to watch!!!:P

[barx1963]

Well this has been more fun that 2 cats in a sack!!:P
It always amazes me how the fringe dwellers manage to totally misunderstand science. They have ideas that are not accepted, usually because there is not a shred of credible evidence, and then resort to claiming that science is a dogmatic belief system.
Yet within science there are thousands of hardworking professionals who know that if they could disprove an accepted theory they would be made for life. Suppose I was a physicist, and I figured out a way to disprove Relativity. And by disprove i do not mean simply allege it is false, produce hard evidence. I would be the most famous scientist of all time. And yet according to the fringe dwellers, all these thousands of scientists say "no we'll just accept orthodoxy". It just defies logic.
All scientific theories become accepted because the best scientists have spent time and effort trying to disprove them and failed.
Wake up Chucky, you are obviously an intelligent person, don't waste your talents you have on this pseudo nonsense. It is sad to see someone being sucked in by the nonsense peddlers!

Malcolm

[overlord]

My goodness it is getting so late. I don't know why I'm posting at this time.

Anyway, to the allegation that Electric universe is wrong. Um is that because it is fully experimentally verifiable, unlike almost every single instance of theoretical cosmology? My bro is a physicist with honors degree and he saw first hand the derision with which other physicists treated astrophysicists. He witnessed a presentation in which they (astrophysicists), attempted to join three points together and claim it verified a law.... only problem was the over-massive error bar. Astrophysics is a complete joke in the physics fraternity but you guys only get the media-spin from .... astrophysicists, so you are unaware of this. Essentially, you are being taken for a ride.

Basically, modern cosmology is a total fraud and I am not afraid to say so. That's why ideas regarding the big bang are changed so often... there is no verifiability. Now they envisage a system where the properties of the universe changed after the big bang and we evolved into an inflating system which is covered by inflation theory. I have developed an alternate cosmology and I know precisely what happened thanks to experimental verification and observation rather than theoretical delusions of amateurs like the so-called genius Stephen Hawking who can't cure himself yet claims to be able to know the mind of God. Um, excuse me but who on earth does he think he is? His delusional thinking on black holes is most hilarious to read about, almost as hilarious about reading what journalists and other so-called thinkers think about him.

ALL my exes are hot as I am very selective with women. At the time I had this girl, 2009-2010, I had a catwalk model from Bermuda begging me to let me be her boyfriend over a period of a year. I really don't give a damn if you don't believe me as I don't play games. I tell the truth as I see it and am not afraid to do so.

Anyway, I developed all my theories into a cogniscent form. I was stunned to notice astrological influences upon temperature variations, in particular regarding the effects of Jupiter and Saturn. I will not go into details as that is reserved for my book. I needed a new cosmology which took this into consideration. I was shocked that electric universe filled this requirement. I then undertook research into solar formation and found that deficient in the extreme in explaining observed behavior in the cosmic landscape. I developed my own theories of solar formation based upon empirically verified sonar-luminesence and other forms of plasma formation in a laboratory environment. What i have discovered is an integrated theory of reality which will be published in three works. My theories will change the world. U can all feel free to tear them to shreds when they are released but I fear you shall be unable to as they are all empirically verifiable. Basically I am the next Michael Faraday and am not afraid of pride at this stage, although it causes people self-harm.

[dugnsuz]

Grrrr - now you're getting me annoyed for the wrong reasons!

I go against the flow to stand up for your right to state your case and you come over as as some nutty professor who's up past his bedtime because he's exhausted by dating large numbers of supermodels - dude you're on your own!!

[multiweb]

The bermuda triangle...
Where all the top model girlfriends disappear... :abduct:

[dugnsuz]

Don't dis a playa Marc!!!

[renormalised]

You're a seriously deluded, raving lunatic. That's all I'm going to say about that.

[dugnsuz]

:lol::lol::lol:

[Octane]

I sometimes wish IceInSpace had a Comedy Goldmine sub-forum.

This thread would be a sticky.

H

[renormalised]

Funny it can be, H, but this guy is seriously spare. A few roos missing in the top paddock doesn't even come close to describing this pathology.

[Octane]

I wish him all the best in life. His musings aren't my cup of tea. :)

I'm just waiting for Photoshop to finish saving a file so I can post it in the terrestrial forum. :whistle:

H

[renormalised]

I hope he gets help, he seriously needs it.

[overlord]

Sorry old chap! No i'm single at the moment, unfortunately.

[ballaratdragons]

You yourself are proof that Astrology doesn't work.
Didn't your stars warn you that your so many Ex's would become your 'Ex's'?

Hmmmm . . . your stars weren't right were they? Or is that the 10% that was wrong?

[overlord]

What, now you're a psychologist offering internet diagnosis... and you were talking about pseudosceince earlier? Don't make me laugh, I am an expert in psychology.

Galaxies are purely electrical and can be replicated in the laboratory:

http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2006/arch06/060602plasma-galaxy.htm
http://www.holoscience.com/synopsis.php?page=5

They are two millimeters wide when formed and have very short lives as they are very small. The larger something is, the longer it lasts, thanks to spacetime bending and other forces.

Ball lightnings which have been produced have... sunspots on them. There is nothing surprising here. IT is all under the law of the Egyptians... As above... so below. What is reflected on the larger scale, is replicatable on the smaller scale.

Actually the main problem with mainstream cosmology is an overemphasis on relativity theory which is overextended beyond its application and used to precisely explain absolutely everything, even though it is admittedly incompatible with other laws. How unfortunate that they fail to see the universe as a larger version of a very small system. Thus the laws of quantum mechanics, in many cases would be more appropriate. I am not writing this for the shills around here who dislike independent thinking, rather, for the open minded people who are willing to consider more than one idea as a possibility. These people are true pioneers but they are disrupted by the magnetic field of conformity which is a force for conservatism in the universe, and which expresses itself through shills and other various people in their every day opinions and interactions. These people seek to 'defend the dogma' as if their life were at stake. The only reason they do this... (and they are blithely unaware of it), is that the magnetic field has selected them as an agent of conformity. I on the other hand have been selected by the universe as an agent of change. Make of that what you will, you must admit it seems to be the truth. I mean no harm, I merely express my opinion and if you dislike it than that is not my problem. I only speak the truth as a scientist and naturalist. I have devoted my life to studying nature in all its manifestations as a generalist and a specialist. In this way I have become more specialized than the narrow specialist. Oh wow, so I'm not normal therefore I must be insane? Wow They should have locked Newton up. He wasn't normal. Is this up for debate? I really don't think he was. Sorry but 'normal' people tend to be very BORING as well. BORING PEOPLE tend not be interesting. BORING people with NO INDEPENDENT IDEAS tend not to be very interesTED.

[ballaratdragons]

WOW!

An Astrologer, 2 Degrees, heading for a PHD, AND now an expert in Psychology, AND more specialized than the narrow specialist 'Naturalist'.

Anything else to go on the Resume?

[Octane]

Chick magnet. :P

H

[Jeffkop]

After all this informative reading I think Im beginning to see why all the cosmic cassonaovas Ex's are in Texas ... :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol: :lol::lol::lol::lol:

Like how much of this could you really endure without going dangerously close to having what I can only describe as a belly laughing induced hernia ... they HAD TO leave !!!. They didnt want to of course ... they were living with grasshopper but it was for their own good.

Anyway its 7.37am and the magnetic fields and the universe are dragging my unwilling body away to work now. I just hope I can remember some of cassies tripe word for word because I cant tell jokes as funny as some of that ... Keep it coming Chucky, your hot stuff !!!! :rofl::rofl:

[erick]

Yes, repels, obviously. :D

Woops, sorry, I've been sucked back in :sadeyes: My goodness, this guy has drawing power! It's a worry. He'll probably be an MP one day! :rolleyes:

As pointed out a page or two back, he's playing with us - please don't burst a blood vessel anyone. Just enjoy the show. :P

[iceman]

Time to end this thread.