Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts. - Richard Feynman
--- In [email protected], "salyavin808" <fintlewoodlewix@...> wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <authfriend@> wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], "salyavin808" <fintlewoodlewix@> > > wrote: > > > > > I know exactly what my motives are for correcting your > > misunderstandings of astrology (not for "defending" it > > as a valid system; as I've said, I'm highly dubious of > > it). I find your brand of arrogant ignorance disgraceful, > > because it gets in the way of determining what's really > > going on. It's actually *anti-scientific*. > > So you don't believe it either? You just like arguing, admit > it. > > And you seem to have decided Jungs ideas are the *real* > astrology? You should tell the all the other astrologers > they are still measuring planetary positions and birth > dates. > > And of course I'm anti-scientific for thinking about it > but I notice you still can't point me in the direction of > a study that shows a measurable signal, any positive hit > would be a starting point. That's how science works. > > And of course, you aren't going to explain what astrology > *really* is because I wouldn't understand, or do you just > accept that the term "a-causal" must be right because it > obviates the need for testing? Because you are wrong if > you think it would. > > I suspect you just don't want to get into discussing Jung > too deeply. Especially regarding how it affects astrology > readings, but you've decided I'm not worth talking to due > to my disgraceful arrogance. Which is handy for you. > > I read synchronicity yonks ago. It's one of those things > you either believe or you don't and for every hit there is > a miss, I've told you what I think of it. It really doesn't > change how we might find out the validity of birth chart > predictions. > > I actually don't care how you find my "brand" of thinking, > until you, or anyone, comes up with some evidence to the > contrary I will continue to think that astrology is a baseless > belief system. S/N first. >
