On May 9, 2009, at 9:43 PM, Jim Devine wrote:
Shane Mage wrote:
That's why a statistical test of the sort I outlined ("Take fifty
matched
pairs--one a lottery winner, one a victim of a fatal automobile
accident.
Give birthday/time/place and event day/time place for each to 200
professional astrologers [sample size=10,000]. Tell them to
identify which
was which in each case. Test the percentage of correct
identifications for
statistical significance") is the only way in which a complex
model--like
one that claims for the "stars" (the electromagnetic balance of
the solar
system) a degree of influence over the course of an individual
life--can be
"confirmed" or "disconfirmed."
raghu writes:
This is all well but please get back to us when you have actually
done
such a study and have something to report. When you make such
extraordinary claims, the burden of proof is on you.
Until then, I am sorry, but astrology does not even merit being in
any
grey area. It is pseudo-science and belongs alongside creationism and
alchemy.
What an amalgam!--and none of them is a "pseudo-science."
--creationism is an anti-science, pure obscurantism.
--alchemy is an obsolete science whose experimental discoveries and
methodological techniques have been assimilated into the modern
branches of physical science, chemistry and physics.
--astrology is an ancient traditional practice claiming to be a
science; whose putative status as a science cannot, from a scientific
viewpoint, either be justified by anecdotal evidence or dismissed a
priori out of mere distaste for its conceptual premise (that the
changing electromagnetic balance of the solar system has some
influence upon the terrestrial biosphere) or revulsion at the
vulgarized mishmash which the media offers as "astrology."
that's right. I'd like to see an actual astrological prediction that
is so specific that it can actually be tested. I doubt that any
real-world astrologer would be as specific as in the experiment that
Shane proposes.
But the experiment (which is not at all impractical, just very
expensive) does not ask for any specific "prediction." It merely asks
for a probabilistic choice--which horoscope is more likely to
correlate with which event. If astrological methodology has any
validity then astrologers applying that methodology will make the
right choice significantly more often than the wrong one. If it
doesn't, then they won't.
I'd bet if they were forced to make a very specific
kind of prediction (death vs. lottery winning), the astrologers would
be wrong as often as right (just like a flipped coin lands on heads
half the time).
Any experimenter will make that bet--its called a null hypothesis.
Shane Mage
This cosmos did none of gods or men make, but it
always was and is and shall be: an everlasting fire,
kindling in measures and going out in measures."
Herakleitos of Ephesos
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
