PDA

View Full Version : Astrology As Science


DinoCrisis
07-04-2013, 04:00 AM
I am a student-fan of Santos Bonacci (among others) who could more precisely be named as an authority on astrotheology.

http://www.universaltruthschool.com/

http://www.schooloftheholyscience.org/contributors/santos-bonacci/

http://www.prometheanreach.com/santosbonacci

Mr. Bonacci repeatedly claims that "astrology is science" or science-based but fails to make a definitive case for that statement.

I am not an astrology expert by any stretch but I am of certain countenance that does say if you are going to arrange yourself as a proponent of astrology proven by science - or that it is a science - then one should have to be detailed as to the those facts.

Any comment is appreciated. :smile:

Regards,

tsmall
07-04-2013, 04:45 AM
I am not an astrology expert by any stretch but I am of certain countenance that does say if you are going to arrange yourself as a proponent of astrology proven by science - or that it is a science - then one should have to be detailed as to the those facts.

Any comment is appreciated. :smile:

Regards,


There are details. You may feel free to go and read them. I suggest starting with the Persians. Otherwise, my question to you is exactly the same I would pose to the "friend" you pointed out earlier. Why ever would you come to an astrology forum and demand that the "proponents" prove themselves?

This has ever been thus, and is why there became over the thousands of years of astrology strictures against judgement. If you want to learn about astrology, go learn. Do not expect to engage "proponents" of the science of astrology in theological straw men about supposed scientific methods until you yourself can understand and explain the logic behind it.

Trolling is against forum rules. And trolls come in all shapes and sizes.

Culpeper
07-04-2013, 09:08 AM
I once took a course in the philosophy of science. The professor said you have to come to the philosophy department to learn what the scientific method really is because it is too controversial for the science department. It went through the scientific method in detail, so I know what it really is.

This was also the only time in academia that I have ever heard astrology discussed in detail. He was trying to define the word pseudo-science. But as he concluded there is no definition of astrology as a pseudo-science that will not also include chemistry and physics. Astrology when carefully examined meets all the requirements of the scientific method. It is not supernatural.

And you sound as if you have the method backward. The science of astrology has been around for along time. We do not have to prove it to you; you have to disprove it us. The burden of proof is on you. That is the way science works: theories are valid until disproven.

DinoCrisis
07-04-2013, 12:39 PM
I once took a course in the philosophy of science. The professor said you have to come to the philosophy department to learn what the scientific method really is because it is too controversial for the science department. It went through the scientific method in detail, so I know what it really is.

Splendid!

This was also the only time in academia that I have ever heard astrology discussed in detail. He was trying to define the word pseudo-science. But as he concluded there is no definition of astrology as a pseudo-science that will not also include chemistry and physics. Astrology when carefully examined meets all the requirements of the scientific method. It is not supernatural.

Mr. Bonacci claims that astrology is science, is scientific, is science-based. Although I find him to be an honourable and credible man, I cannot find a discussion of relevance to this claim. I am a fan of his, did you miss that?

I am quite well aware of the astrotheological underscoring of the Bible so I do maintain an educated but not scholarly understanding of astrology; i.e. the I understand the relationships between Biblical allegory, story origins, the Zodiac, the planets, etc. What I seek is a detailed accounting of astrology using the scientific method to prove Mr. Bonacci's hypothesis-fact.

And you sound as if you have the method backward. The science of astrology has been around for along time. We do not have to prove it to you; you have to disprove it us. The burden of proof is on you. That is the way science works: theories are valid until disproven.

<sigh>

You have taken astrology and moved it from science to theory. Oh well. :sad:

Why so defensive? I only ask that we - you and I and other Members of this forum - enter into a discussion that would enlighten me as to Bonacci-your claim. Is that so much to ask - in an astrology forum?

Perhaps it is.

DinoCrisis
07-04-2013, 12:44 PM
There are details. You may feel free to go and read them. I suggest starting with the Persians. Otherwise, my question to you is exactly the same I would pose to the "friend" you pointed out earlier. Why ever would you come to an astrology forum and demand that the "proponents" prove themselves?

I demanded no such thing and an apology is in order. I requested comment, discussion, free course of idea flow. :surprised:

This has ever been thus, and is why there became over the thousands of years of astrology strictures against judgement. If you want to learn about astrology, go learn.

But not here, yes? <sigh>

Do not expect to engage "proponents" of the science of astrology in theological straw men about supposed scientific methods until you yourself can understand and explain the logic behind it.

Trolling is against forum rules. And trolls come in all shapes and sizes.And responses. :annoyed:

DinoCrisis
07-04-2013, 03:24 PM
Truth is, astrology cannot be considered a science - by modern science standards - since it is not a funded project of modern science. No funding, no study. No study, no results.

Astrology lies outside the dogmatic scientific structure just as astrotheology is dismissed by mainstream religion.

Is this a bad thing? Of course not. Astrology survives on its legs of accuracy, it sits upon a mound of made of the preponderance of evidence that it works. Astrotheology is noting more than simple extensions of the world of the authors and those that understood the relationships between soul, souls ascension, true knowledge and the universe put to paper. Or maybe it was papyrus. :happy:

Mr. Bonacci, in the heat of his passion, misses this point entirely. Why would he want astrology to be accepted by modern science?

I don't.

JUPITERASC
07-04-2013, 04:39 PM
Truth is, astrology cannot be considered a science - by modern science standards - since it is not a funded project of modern science. No funding, no study. No study, no results.

Astrology lies outside the dogmatic scientific structure just as astrotheology is dismissed by mainstream religion.

Is this a bad thing? Of course not. Astrology survives on its legs of accuracy, it sits upon a mound of made of the preponderance of evidence that it works. Astrotheology is noting more than simple extensions of the world of the authors and those that understood the relationships between soul, souls ascension, true knowledge and the universe put to paper. Or maybe it was papyrus. :happy:

Mr. Bonacci, in the heat of his passion, misses this point entirely. Why would he want astrology to be accepted by modern science?
I don't.
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion :smile:


None of the responders on this thread is either 'right' nor 'wrong'... in India for example, astrology is most definitely considered a Science and IF one feels a need for official definition, then one has the option to practice Indian/Vedic astrology - since that is officially scientific.

If one learns astrology as practised by Vettius Valens and the ancients one may draw one's own conclusions.

However, few are willing to learn and apply the ancient techniques and so all that remains are these theoretical 'discussions' based on 'opinion'. How long is a piece of string?

Kaiousei no Senshi
07-04-2013, 04:50 PM
None of the responders on this thread is either 'right' nor 'wrong'... in India for example, astrology is most definitely considered a Science and IF one feels a need for official definition, then one has the option to practice Indian/Vedic astrology - since that is officially scientific.I disagree. The courts declaring something a science doesn't mean it fits the definition of what science is. Especially in the western world when we do have a pretty hard definition of science. If anything, the courts saying that just made a bunch of people roll their eyes (this poster included).

Truth is, astrology cannot be considered a science - by modern science standards - since it is not a funded project of modern science. No funding, no study. No study, no results.

I also disagree with this. Lack of funding isn't why astrology isn't a science. Astrology isn't a science because (even if there were funding) there wouldn't be a way to test it, there's no known cause of astrology, it isn't repeatable, etc. Astrology as science just has a lot of problems that it's best to overlook. That's not to say that some of these problems couldn't be solved, as, after all, everything that is now known was once unknown and thought impossible.

This isn't to say that at one time astrology wasn't or couldn't have been considered a science, but it struggles to live up to those expectations with the current definition.

JUPITERASC
07-04-2013, 05:04 PM
I disagree. The courts declaring something a science doesn't mean it fits the definition of what science is. Especially in the western world when we do have a pretty hard definition of science. If anything, the courts saying that just made a bunch of people roll their eyes (this poster included).

I also disagree with this. Lack of funding isn't why astrology isn't a science. Astrology isn't a science because (even if there were funding) there wouldn't be a way to test it, there's no known cause of astrology, it isn't repeatable, etc. Astrology as science just has a lot of problems that it's best to overlook. That's not to say that some of these problems couldn't be solved, as, after all, everything that is now known was once unknown and thought impossible.

This isn't to say that at one time astrology wasn't or couldn't have been considered a science, but it struggles to live up to those expectations with the current definition.
Perhaps then the question to answer is: '

What is meant by the word Science'?

How long is a piece of string? :smile:

greybeard
07-04-2013, 06:38 PM
Science is statistical in nature. It takes one million molecules, or beams of light, or specimens of the Martian Boreal Red Fungus and determnes laws that hold true for this statistical mass. It seeks material causation.

Astrology is a science of individuality. What it seeks to understand is the Exception to the statistical norm. It wants to find out the what and how of Difference, not Conformity. And its causation is of the not-material realm.

Not something "science" can chew on and digest. Astrology is superstion, pseudo-science and Hokum.

It can't be proved, except by understanding how it works, and then examining its results.

And just what is astrotheology? Are we going back to the worship of Ishtahar?

One "proof" of astrology (of the correctness of its teachings from long ago) is found in the Lagrange Points (gravity-neutral points or areas in space lying between/around two massive bodies, such as Sun and Jupiter.)

These points (two of them, L4 and L5) demonstrate in "the real world" -- in interplanetary space -- the nature of the trine aspect, which turns out to be just what ancient astrologers always said it was.

Go to my thread on the nature of the aspects. The trine is described there. Then go to "Lagranian Points" online. The European Space Agency has a good site on the subject, and you will probably want to study at least two or three other sites as well.

You will note that both L4 and L5 lie at the third apex of an equilateral triangle (the basis of the trine aspect), with Sun and Earth, or Sun and Jupiter, or Sun and Neptune forming the base of the triangle from the other two apices. Both "momentum" and "accretion", properties of the trine aspect, are illustrated at L4 and L5.

Astrology is a curious mixture of hard science and art. (But then, most of "hard science" involves a lot more art than is normally recognized.) The foundation of astrology is hard science, rigorous mathematical calculation, etc. It is still astronomy. But once the horoscope (a map of the sky) is cast, science and disciplined method are joined by art, and this is why astrology "can't be proved."

BobZemco
07-04-2013, 11:26 PM
Mr. Bonacci repeatedly claims that "astrology is science" or science-based but fails to make a definitive case for that statement.

Then he doesn't sound too bright, so stop reading the nonsense he writes.

I am not an astrology expert by any stretch but I am of certain countenance that does say if you are going to arrange yourself as a proponent of astrology proven by science - or that it is a science - then one should have to be detailed as to the those facts.

There are Sumerian texts from 7,000 years ago (circa 5,000 BCE) that talk about Planets ensnaring things in their "nets" and casting light and casting rays.

What does that mean? It means they were infinitely more intelligent than we are....this is the 21st Century, you have public education systems in nearly every State on Earth, and yet the vast majority of people don't even know that the formula for the Force of Gravity is...

F(g) = M1 * M2 / d^2

How would you explain Gravity to a child that is 4 years old?

"You know how you dip your net into the water to catch goldfish or tadpoles?"

"Yeah."

"Well, Gravity is just like your net, only you can't see Gravity."

It isn't until the late 1950s that our so-called "advanced civilization" figures out there really is a "net" and they call that "net" a "Gravity-well."

And so for science fiction shows for the next 20 years or so -- like the Original Star Trek -- you hear them saying things like: "Captain, we're going to get caught in the Planet's Gravity-well."

If you get stuck in Earth's Gravity-well, you need to be moving at a speed of 17,500 Miles Per Hour to escape the net...and no, I don't know what that is in Kilometers Per Hour (and don't care).

In the Arabic, Farsi, and Latin texts, you see the phrase "[Saturn]...hurling its rays at...."

That's real....it really happens....and that is science.

In reality, the Sun is the only celestial body that actually casts light; the Moon and Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn reflect light...

....that's why we can see them.

Light is electromagnetic radiation.

In the middle of the electromagnetic radiation band are the colors....to the right of the blues, you have violet, then ultra-violet (UV), then X-Rays, then Gamma Rays.

To the left of the electromagnetic radiation spectrum, you have your yellows, oranges, reds and then infrared (IR), microwaves, radar, VHF/UHF, short wave radio, AM and FM radio bands.

Your eyes have evolved to allow you to see select frequencies in the electromagnetic radiation spectrum which are the colors.

An object absorbs frequencies of electromagnetic radiation, but reflects certain frequencies back at you, and that is what you are seeing....the reflected frequencies -- the color --- the specific wavelengths in the electromagnetic radiation band.

Asteroids do not reflect light, therefore, logically, rationally, scientifically, asteroids have no impact or affect on you. Likewise, the Outer Planets -- Uranus, Neptune and Pluto do not reflect light, and they have no affect on you individually and there is no possible way using math or science to justify that they do.

In addition to reflecting light, the Sun, Moon, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn also hurl rays (although the Sun really does cast Ultra-Violet Rays, X-Rays and Gamma Rays).

Space is not "empty." Space is filled with particles -- electromagnetic radiation -- from the Sun.

As the Planets move through Space, their mass, their orbital velocity (speed) and their exact chemical/elemental make-up creates something called the magnetosphere.

The magnetosphere reflects (some but not all) electromagnetic radiation away from it.

The magnetosphere on each of the Planets is "tuned" to attenuate certain frequencies in the electromagnetic radiation spectrum. The Earth's magnetosphere does a great job of screening out Gamma rays, a decent job of screening out X-Rays, a mediocre job of screening out UV rays and then a really bad job of screening out everything from the colors through microwave, radar and the radio bands.

But, then....we already knew that, didn't we?

If the Earth's magnetosphere filtered out electromagnet frequencies in the color band, then we wouldn't see anything outside of Earth, and if it screened out frequencies in the radio band, we would not be able to communicate with are satellites and probes.

Anyway, the magnetospheres of the Planets reflect certain frequencies at certain rates to Earth....

...and that is scientific fact, not speculation.

Since the advent of radio in the early 20th Century, it has been known that radio are affected by other forms of electromagnetic radiation. The primary cause is ionized particles in the Earth's stratosphere and mesosphere. The region in the stratosphere and mesosphere that is heavily ionized is known as the "ionosphere."

These ionized particles severely degrade the performance of microwave, radar, VHF, UHF, Short Wave and AM radio signals, and diminish the performance of FM radio signals.

This degrading of performance caused a lot of angst in the US Army, Air Force and Navy, and also with companies involved in radio communications, like Motorola.

It was noted that certain alignments of Sun, Moon, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn could either neutralize the effects of the ionosphere, or amplify the effects. Scientific studies, published in peer-reviewed scientific and engineering journals showed that Planets in sextile marginally improve radio performance; in trine they strongly improve performance; in square they strongly hamper performance, and in opposition they severely impede performance; and that Planets in conjunction could harm or help.

What is the Doctrine of Aspects in Traditional Astrology?

Sextiles indicate weak friendship
Trines show strong friendship
Squares show enmity
Oppositions conflict
Conjunctions can be helpful or harmful

Well, there you go....scientific proof that people knew more about the world around them 7,000 years ago than they do now.

Anyway, asteroids do not have sufficient mass and/or speed to generate magnetopheres, which is the other reason we ignore them, and while Uranus and Pluto generate magnetospheres (no verification yet on whether Pluto does), they are nothing like the size of magnetospheres of Jupiter and Saturn, and their vast distance from Earth precludes the possibility that the Outer Planets can affect individuals...

...F(g) = M1 * M2 / d^2

Good luck with that.
As far as the mathematical side of Astrology, archeaological excavations in Jericho show it was inhabited and functioned as trading.military outpost 9,000 years ago circa 7,000 BCE. A fresco on a wall in one of the buildings depicts a crab --- Cancer. Well, no kidding, since 9,000 years ago was the Age of Cancer.

What a shocker.

We know the Zodiac existed then. The Sumerians claim that 12,000 years ago circa 10,000 BCE during the Age of Leo there was a cataclysmic event on Earth, and that after this event, the pyramids at Gizeh were erected, and the sphinx --- a man's head on the body of a lion --- commemorated the event.

Another shocker.

In caves in France and Spain, drawings depicting a bow and arrow were originally believed to be a symbol for hunting, but now some archaeologists and anthropologists are claiming that the bow and arrow are actually the symbol for Sagittarius, and that people occupied the caves during the Age of Sagittarius some 22,000 years ago circa 20,000 BCE, which would indicate the Zodiac existed even then.

Wow, the common sense is shocking.

And then Sumerian and Akkadian texts claim the Zodiac was put together during the Age of Pisces.

Because of the effects of precession, the Zodiac moves backwards... Pisces, Aquarius, Capricorn, Sagittarius, until you get to 29°59' of Aries, and then eventually 15° of Aries and then eventually, um, Zero Point Aries.

Gosh, what a shocker.

So the Zodiac is ancient and more than that, it incorporates the Base 60 (Sexigismal) Number System instead of the Base 10 (Decimal) Number System.

Everything I have studied about Astrology going back to Mesopotamia, suggests one of two possible conclusions:

1] Astrology evolved from Numerology as a divination system; or

2] Numerology evolved from Astrology as a Poor Man's version of divination.

I lean very heavily toward the latter. Does that mean I "believe in" Numerology?

No. I categorically reject it in is entirety.

Why? I just explained why. It is 100% corrupted. Numerology was founded on the Base 60 Number System, so you cannot use it with the Base 10 Number System. If you could find and translate ancient texts about Numerology, and if you could figure out the Base 60 Number System, and if you could then correctly employ the Base 60 Systems with the doctrines, I think you might be onto something. But I don't see that happening anytime soon.

Anyway, there are so-called "sacred" numbers like 1, 12, 60, 72, 120, 360, 3,600 and 432,000 that are preserved in one way or another in many different schemes, systems and relationships.

Traditional Astrology (but not Modern Astrology) preserves a lot of those sacred numbers. There's an almost fanatical obsession with the number 120.

The number 120 is prominent in Hebrew texts, and 120 * 3600 = 432,000.

According to Norse (and other north/central European) traditions, there are 800 doors in Valhalla, and on Judgment Day, 540 warriors will exit each of the 800 doors...

....540 * 800 = 432,000

If we go to India, the yugas are based on multiples of 432,000.

Shocker.

Anyway, much of the knowledge about Astrology, including the true mathematical basis and relationships were lost over time.

A group of people –- the Gutians -– came from where ever it was they came from and destroyed the people Kushites (who lived west of the Zagros Mountains) and then proceeded to dismantle Sumer & Akkad circa 2100 BCE.

Then there was about 100 years of “barracks emperors” (sort of like in Rome after Marcus Aurelius died) and then the Akkadians rose up and routed the Gutians.

Then circa 2000 BCE, there was the incident at Sodom, Gomorrah and the cities of the plains, which scientists and archaeologists are now suggesting an asteroid or comet exploded over the region in the same manner as Tunguska causing its destruction.

For whatever strange, fascinating, bizarre reason, that incident caused the total collapse of the Sumerian Civilization, and they fled, never to be seen again (supposedly), and then the Amorites --- erroneously called Babylonians --- over-ran the Akkadian Civilization and that was the end of that.

To make matters worse, circa 1900 BCE, the Celts, a group of Slavs and another unknown group over-ran and totally wiped out the Hittite Kingdom and Civilization.

Just as Rome was the cultural and scientific learning center of the world, and the light went out when it was destroyed and we entered the Dark Ages, the same thing happened here.

Sumer & Akkad were the cultural and scientific learning centers of the ancient world, and when the light went out, we entered the Dark Ages.

Information flowed from Sumer & Akkad to Egypt, and then through the Hittite Kingdom to the Eastern Greeks in Phrygia and Lydia, and then to the Western Greeks on the mainland. The destruction of the Hittite Kingdom cut off the flow information out of Mesopotamia, and the destruction of Sumer & Akkad cut off the flow of all information.

From that point forward, you have two separate distinct civilizations rise, the Greeks and the Egyptians (and further east of the Zagros Mountains the Persians and Medes).

And then the Greeks conquer the Egyptians and Persians, and then the Romans conquer all of them, and then the Turks conquer all of them, and the next thing you know, it’s Spring-time in Germany for Hitler.

If people cannot figure out an organic alcohol chain or botch it up its formation, that does not mean that organic chemistry is fatally flawed….it just means people don’t get it.

Likewise, there is nothing wrong with Astrology, but there are people who don’t get it, people who muck it up intentionally, and then the artful practitioners are still trying to get to the bottom of many of the doctrines, and that’s hampered by not having access to texts or being able to locate/recover ancient texts.

So, there you go.

BobZemco
07-04-2013, 11:28 PM
One "proof" of astrology (of the correctness of its teachings from long ago) is found in the Lagrange Points (gravity-neutral points or areas in space lying between/around two massive bodies, such as Sun and Jupiter.)

These points (two of them, L4 and L5) demonstrate in "the real world" -- in interplanetary space -- the nature of the trine aspect, which turns out to be just what ancient astrologers always said it was.

The things I did not know.

DinoCrisis
07-05-2013, 04:28 AM
Lack of funding isn't why astrology isn't a science. Astrology isn't a science because (even if there were funding) there wouldn't be a way to test it, there's no known cause of astrology, it isn't repeatable, etc. Astrology as science just has a lot of problems that it's best to overlook. That's not to say that some of these problems couldn't be solved, as, after all, everything that is now known was once unknown and thought impossible.

This isn't to say that at one time astrology wasn't or couldn't have been considered a science, but it struggles to live up to those expectations with the current definition.
On this we agree and is why I question Mr. Bonacci's insistence on claiming astrology - or astrotheology - is a science.

What I find additionally disconcerting is that Bonacci shows strict and repeated irreverence to all major religions and mainstream modern science yet, in a fit of passion for astrology, he insists it is science.

It is my opinion that he seeks to align his version of astrology with science in order to justify it as valid in the minds of his devotees. Apparently this dichotomy works as I am the only one that I know who follows his podcasts, webinars, radio shows, etc. that has brought to light his philosophical confusion.

Or perhaps he means that astrology is "old science" or "lost science"; if so, then he has an entirely different argument.

DinoCrisis
07-05-2013, 04:36 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DinoCrisis http://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/images/futura/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/showthread.php?p=484498#post484498)
Mr. Bonacci repeatedly claims that "astrology is science" or science-based but fails to make a definitive case for that statement.

Bob Zemco warbles "Then he doesn't sound too bright, so stop reading the nonsense he writes."

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Unfair Bob, the history of proponents of astrology is chock full of excellent sources who from time to time were incorrect or imagined to be so.Bonacci's astrotheology is sound. His passion for astrology is unquestioned.Maybe he means that astrology is an old, forgotten science.

No reason to toss him off. Have you watched to any of his YouTube videos? Don't you think you should before passing such harsh judgments?

DinoCrisis
07-05-2013, 04:50 AM
And just what is astrotheology? Are we going back to the worship of Ishtahar?
Astrotheology is theology founded on observation or knowledge of the celestial bodies with special emphasis in the Western World as to how astrology (particularly the Zodiac) were the underpinnings of the Bible, the Messianic Story and its history going back to...wherever you feel comfortable. Thoth?

It shows the repetitiveness of the oral and written astrological understanding, teachings and traditions which ultimately evolved into modern Christianity (and other major religions of which I claim no real understanding).

I am surprised this forum has no subsection for it. If you are a student of historical astronomy it is impossible not to align astrotheology with it.

JUPITERASC
07-05-2013, 10:20 AM
....Bob Zemco warbles "Then he doesn't sound too bright, so stop reading the nonsense he writes."

Unfair Bob, the history of proponents of astrology is chock full of excellent sources who from time to time were incorrect or imagined to be so.Bonacci's astrotheology is sound. His passion for astrology is unquestioned.Maybe he means that astrology is an old, forgotten science.

No reason to toss him off. Have you watched to any of his YouTube videos? Don't you think you should before passing such harsh judgments?
To be fair, Bob Zemco simply commented on a comment you yourself posted criticising Mr Bonacci i.e.
Mr. Bonacci repeatedly claims that "astrology is science" or science-based but fails to make a definitive case for that statement.
And in view of what you said there was a response based on your own criticism of Mr Bonacci
Then he doesn't sound too bright, so stop reading the nonsense he writes.....
Everyone is entitled to their opinion

The title of this thread is: 'Astrology As Science' but it appears that your intention is to encourage a discussion as to whether or not SPECIFICALLY a person known as Mr Bonacci has or has not 'failed to make a definitive case for astrology being a science'

Mr Bonacci certainly seems to have stimulated your interest in a discussion on the thread title 'Astrology As Science' - and that could be an interesting discussion.

However, if you require contributors to research Mr Bonacci before responding to the theme of the discussion then I'm highlighting that in all fairness, Mr Bonacci is not the only person with an opinion on the matter - therefore one would assume that any discussion on Astrology As Science can occur with or without Mr Bonacci.

You then said:
Astrotheology is theology founded on observation or knowledge of the celestial bodies with special emphasis in the Western World as to how astrology (particularly the Zodiac) were the underpinnings of the Bible, the Messianic Story and its history going back to...wherever you feel comfortable. Thoth?

It shows the repetitiveness of the oral and written astrological understanding, teachings and traditions which ultimately evolved into modern Christianity (and other major religions of which I claim no real understanding).

I am surprised this forum has no subsection for it. If you are a student of historical astronomy it is impossible not to align astrotheology with it.
Life is full of surprises :smile:

If you would like to suggest that this forum has a subsection for 'Astrotheology' then do post your request on the 'Help With The Forums And Suggestions' forum at http://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=22

Then members discuss the issue

Meanwhile, regarding Astrology As Science, in order to clarify the parameters of this discussion, perhaps we need to define what is meant by 'astrology'

DinoCrisis
07-05-2013, 04:53 PM
To be fair, Bob Zemco simply commented on a comment you yourself posted criticising Mr Bonacci i.e.

And in view of what you said there was a response based on your own criticism of Mr Bonacci

Everyone is entitled to their opinion

The title of this thread is: 'Astrology As Science' but it appears that your intention is to encourage a discussion as to whether or not SPECIFICALLY a person known as Mr Bonacci has or has not 'failed to make a definitive case for astrology being a science'

Mr Bonacci certainly seems to have stimulated your interest in a discussion on the thread title 'Astrology As Science' - and that could be an interesting discussion.

However, if you require contributors to research Mr Bonacci before responding to the theme of the discussion then I'm highlighting that in all fairness, Mr Bonacci is not the only person with an opinion on the matter - therefore one would assume that any discussion on Astrology As Science can occur with or without Mr Bonacci.

You then said:

Life is full of surprises :smile:

If you would like to suggest that this forum has a subsection for 'Astrotheology' then do post your request on the 'Help With The Forums And Suggestions' forum at http://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=22

Then members discuss the issue.

Done, thx for the heads-up!

Meanwhile, regarding Astrology As Science, in order to clarify the parameters of this discussion, perhaps we need to define what is meant by 'astrology'


Yes, here's my attempt.

Astrology has as a basic or underlying tenet the link between celestial or astronomical phenomena and human or terrestrial events.

Clinton Soule
07-05-2013, 10:12 PM
DinoCrisis,

Max Heindel, the leader(:leo: Asc.) in the early 1900s of the Rosicrucian Fellowship in Oceanside, Ca. USA, husband of his astrologer wife Augusta Foss, stated repeatedly astrology was a science and '... that one day science and religion would become one...', no doubt through his wife Angusta he was speaking of the coming Age of Aquarius.

What studious astrologer can not see the astrological correlation recorded by John on Patmos Island and preserved for mankind in this verse?

Revelation 4:7 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation+4:7&version=KJV) KJV

7 And the first beast was like a lion, and the second beast like a calf, and the third beast had a face as a man, and the fourth beast was like a flying eagle.

Leo, Taurus, Aquarius, and Scorpio which are on many Church buildings in old Europe.

http://solsticepoint.com/astrologersmemorial/couples.html

http://www.rosicrucian.com/

William F. Lilly, acknowledged by many as the greatest horary astrologer West of Constaninople, taught that Religion, Science, and Astrology are of the 9th house.

This is a must see for anyone claiming to be an astrologer:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jz-qJuCKf-g

And of course there is more:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hgHFSONQDac

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pdq9to1ccqA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lSOBjsNsAu0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=204gWVOkJZ0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TpYhcclPkoU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OCAE6coREYo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bydlOrCMPm8


DinoCrisis, wouldn't you say that Santos would say that the scripture I cite at the end of this post is directly stating the astrological correlation of what happens on the earth is foretold in the sky?

I have to add:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUAEFKg25Jw


Clinton Garrett Soule

Wise men trully know how little they know

Matthew 18:18 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+18:18&version=NKJV) (New King James Version)

18 Assuredly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.

JUPITERASC
07-05-2013, 10:42 PM
Revelation 4:7 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation+4:7&version=KJV) KJV

7 And the first beast was like a lion, and the second beast like a calf, and the third beast had a face as a man, and the fourth beast was like a flying eagle.

Leo, Taurus, Aquarius, and Scorpio which are on many Church buildings in old Europe.
Curiouser and curiouser.... There's more than just the Fixed Signs :smile:

http://www.touchedbylight.co.uk/Images/caminoimages/day29sanisodora2.JPG

Leon: Church of San Isodora Zodiac Carvings
From left to right: Pisces, Aquarius, Capricorn,
Sagittarius, Scorpio and Libra


http://www.touchedbylight.co.uk/Images/caminoimages/day29sanisodora1.JPG

Leon: Church of San Isodora Zodiac Carvings
From left to right: Virgo, Leo, Cancer, Gemini,
Taurus and Aries


http://www.touchedbylight.co.uk/Images/caminoimages/day29sanisodora.JPG

Leon: Church of San Isodora
across the top of the arch are the 12th century Zodiac carvings.

Clinton Soule
07-05-2013, 11:50 PM
JupiterAsc, could you post another youtube on this, my govt. has blocked it in the USA on copyright grounds?

Rosencrantz & Guildenstern are Dead Tom Stoppard

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4SVVKuOr0c (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4SVVKuOr0c)


Clinton Garrett Soule

Wise men truly know how little they know

Matthew 2:1 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+2:1&version=EXB) Expanded Bible
[ Wise Men Come to Visit Jesus ] ·When [After] Jesus was born in the town of Bethlehem in Judea during the time when Herod was king, some ·wise men [astrologers; magi; C a class of wise men and priests who practiced astrology] from the east came to Jerusalem.

http://www.newsreview.com/reno/star-...tent?oid=22904 (http://www.newsreview.com/reno/star-reader/content?oid=22904)

DinoCrisis
07-06-2013, 04:40 AM
Clinton Soule;

There is nothing of which you post that I or Santos Bonacci - taking liberty to speak for him yet understanding his teachings quite well - would disagree other than my premise, in disagreement with Bonacci's - that there does not exist, nor has there been in this thread or my research shown, any definitive acceptance by modern science that astrology - or astrotheology - is a matter of science.

Because Bonacci, you or the Rosies, or anyone else states that astrology is a science does not make it so. As I have said repeatedly before, I really don't give a **** about defining astrology or astrotheology as a science.

Bonacci does.

Excellent post, thank you for that.

http://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/showthread.php?p=484923&posted=1#post484923

DinoCrisis
07-06-2013, 04:47 AM
http://www.touchedbylight.co.uk/Images/caminoimages/day29sanisodora2.JPG

Leon: Church of San Isodora Zodiac Carvings
From left to right: Pisces, Aquarius, Capricorn,
Sagittarius, Scorpio and Libra


http://www.touchedbylight.co.uk/Images/caminoimages/day29sanisodora1.JPG

Leon: Church of San Isodora Zodiac Carvings
From left to right: Virgo, Leo, Cancer, Gemini,
Taurus and Aries

http://www.touchedbylight.co.uk/Images/caminoimages/day29sanisodora.JPG

Leon: Church of San Isodora
across the top of the arch are the 12th century Zodiac carvings.

Curiouser and curiouser.... There's more than just the Fixed Signs :smile:

Much more. Much, much more. :smile:

http://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/showthread.php?p=484923&posted=1#post484923

Clinton Soule
07-06-2013, 09:54 PM
Even though I see the OP is now banned this argument that astrology is not a science goes back to the Renasaince as Robert hand has stated casting us as a pseudo-science.

But many astrologers have took the stand that astrology is a science:

1) The teachers at the Rosicrucian Fellowship

http://www.rosicrucian.com/ssa/ssaeng01.htm

2)William F. Lilly put astrology, philosophy, and Science in the same house, the ninth(Philosophy, Scince, Religion, etc.)

3)Robert Hand the Science of astrology

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bMxWRBmo-ls

4)test out if astrology is scientific:

http://undsci.berkeley.edu/article/astrology_checklist

5) What does Wikipedia say?

http://undsci.berkeley.edu/article/astrology_checklist

6)This group thinks it is:

http://www.scienceofastrology.com/

7) What does Psychology Today say:

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-decision-tree/201107/science-confirms-astrology

8)Kevin Williams says Yes, it's scientic:

http://www.near-death.com/experiences/articles012.html

9)Knowledge vs, Superstition

http://lastrealindians.com/science-v-astrology-knowledge-v-superstition-denny-gayton/

10)Arthur M. Young says:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OLqFKKXqajM

11)Albert Einstein said '...power comes in right angles..'

Now doesn't sound just like a square which is Mars like, forcing things to move?

12)Western and Vedic astrology is it scientific?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5o9pEvJ3ah4

13)Kings of the past and wise men studied astrology as a science, Why?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7AOFQMKfT5s

14)Jewish Einstein was famous for saying something about his unbelief of God playing Dice with the universe:

http://www.hawking.org.uk/does-god-play-dice.html


Clinton Garrett Soule

Wise men truly know how little they know

Psalm 19:1-4 Amplified Bible (AMP)

1 The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament shows and proclaims His handiwork.
2 Day after day pours forth speech, and night after night shows forth knowledge.
3 There is no speech nor spoken word [from the stars]; their voice is not heard.
4 Yet their voice [in evidence] goes out through all the earth, their sayings to the end of the world. Of the heavens has God made a tent for the sun,

JUPITERASC
07-06-2013, 10:57 PM
JupiterAsc, could you post another youtube on this, my govt. has blocked it in the USA on copyright grounds?

Rosencrantz & Guildenstern are Dead Tom Stoppard

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4SVVKuOr0c (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4SVVKuOr0c)


Clinton Garrett Soule

Wise men truly know how little they know

Matthew 2:1 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+2:1&version=EXB) Expanded Bible
[ Wise Men Come to Visit Jesus ] ·When [After] Jesus was born in the town of Bethlehem in Judea during the time when Herod was king, some ·wise men [astrologers; magi; C a class of wise men and priests who practiced astrology] from the east came to Jerusalem.

http://www.newsreview.com/reno/star-...tent?oid=22904 (http://www.newsreview.com/reno/star-reader/content?oid=22904)
Hi Clinton Soule - my signature now has a different link to 'Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead' by Tom Stoppard :smile:

If it's still blocked perhaps then check online video providers

JUPITERASC
10-06-2017, 11:38 PM
LAWRENCE EDWARDS WORK WITH PLANT BUDS http://www.astro-calendar.com/shtml/...edwards2.shtml (http://www.astro-calendar.com/shtml/Research/research_edwards2.shtml)

Lawrence Edwards, retired mathematics teacher
researched forms of living nature, using geometric analysis.
1982 daily began taking photographs of tree buds
on selection of trees
discovered that buds expanded and contracted
to an approximate fortnightly rhythm.
These periods varied between 13.6 and 14.7 days
but each species of bud kept the same period in their rhythm.
Edwards realised these were astronomical rhythms,
each period correlated to
Moon's alignment with a planet and Earth :smile:


'…..When Earth, Moon and planet were in straight line
buds of the tree where more rounded, expanded shape.
When Moon and planet where 900 apart
(as seen from the Earth)
the buds took on a more oval, contracted shape
sharp at one end and blunt at the other.
Even in the middle of Winter
buds are doing a rhythmic dance whose tune is called by the planetary movements......'


TREE--------------------------------ASPECTS BETWEEN-------------PERIOD DAYS

Ash-------------------------------------------Moon / Sun ---------------------------14.77

Elm -------------------------------------------Moon / Mercury -----------------------14.77
Birch -------------------------- ---- --------- Moon / Venus --------------------------14.77
Oak -------------------------------------------Moon / Mars --------------------------14.23
Maple, Sycamore -------------------------Moon / Jupiter ----------------------- 13.75
Beech, Hornbeam, Conifers ---- ------ Moon / Saturn ------------------------13.67

Senecar
02-05-2018, 01:19 PM
To answer that question, one must define what Science is.

If Science is studies for looking for the truths, but its method is based on empirical data and its analysis, then Astrology is a Science.

Because that is what Astrology is LARGELY based on. It is a combined Science of Astronomy, Religion and Psychology (in modern times).

Because also Astrology's antiquity in origin, one should not ignore, what and how the ancients dealt with the subject. One cannot just look at Astrology from present point of view, or angle of so called "professional scientists", and define what Astrology is. In that case, they are destined to arrive at narrow short sighted misconception on what Astrology is.

Doomsday
04-12-2018, 01:48 PM
I don't know what all that "Astrotheology" business is about... there's nothing to it to worship.
Is anybody genuflecting to and worshipping Pluto or the Moon... and it's improving their lives, wildly (or in any measure)?

I've always said Astrology is a mysticism, a divination... it can hardly be considered a science or religion.

JUPITERASC
04-12-2018, 04:16 PM
I don't know what all that "Astrotheology" business is about...
there's nothing to it to worship.
Is anybody genuflecting to and worshipping Pluto
or the Moon...
and it's improving their lives, wildly (or in any measure)?

I've always said Astrology is a mysticism, a divination...
it can hardly be considered a science or religion.

On our traditional board no one worships dwarf planetoid pluto :smile:

petosiris
04-12-2018, 09:12 PM
It is not. Get better and prove it.

Whoam1
04-13-2018, 12:40 AM
Hmmm.Sidereal astrology is more scientic tham tropical, using the actual positions, using angles as prominet places and the Sun if course as the main sign (or if it is hard aspect with other planets you more likely take the nature of that planet ie it's sign). The angles are active places they are more apparent but not necessarily stronger. They also study people (they take random samples of people and note there job and life span etc. Then list the averages ex: is that many sidereal sag are head if states compared to some other signs.)

However, you have me a moon in Leo, Sun in Saggitarius and angular Jupiter that has very little sidereal Saggitarius traits and they do blame some of it in Pluto (which represents disruption and is seldom used) only cause it aspects my moon is it more personal. Still scientificly speaking how could something as tiny as Pluto be so disruptive (symbolically look at its orbit).

Even if they make it more scientific it isn't a science.

I study all forms of astrology as a mystic force if it was a science then I can't say I would study it

JUPITERASC
04-13-2018, 12:50 AM
Hmmm.Sidereal astrology is more scientic tham tropical, using the actual positions, using angles as prominet places and the Sun if course as the main sign (or if it is hard aspect with other planets you more likely take the nature of that planet ie it's sign). The angles are active places they are more apparent but not necessarily stronger. They also study people (they take random samples of people and note there job and life span etc. Then list the averages ex: is that many sidereal sag are head if states compared to some other signs.)

However, you have me a moon in Leo, Sun in Saggitarius and angular Jupiter that has very little sidereal Saggitarius traits and they do blame some of it in
Pluto (which represents disruption and is seldom used)

dwarf planetoid pluto is irrelevant on Traditional board
read the Traditional board rules at top of Traditional board page :smile:
'....excludes modern planets Neptune, Uranus and Pluto...'


only cause it aspects my moon is it more personal. Still scientificly speaking how could something as tiny as Pluto be so disruptive (symbolically look at its orbit).

Even if they make it more scientific it isn't a science.

I study all forms of astrology as a mystic force if it was a science then I can't say I would study it

Whoam1
04-13-2018, 12:54 AM
Yes. Jupiter sag thats exactly my point!
If it's such a science then why would they use a dawrf planet as an explanation (which scientificly makes no sense).

JUPITERASC
04-13-2018, 10:15 AM
Yes. Jupiter sag thats exactly my point!
If it's such a science then why
would they use a dawrf planet as an explanation
(which scientificly makes no sense).

thanks for the clarification :smile:

Whoam1
04-13-2018, 10:29 AM
Yea I'm not here to argue Pluto (especially not on a scientific stand point).

JUPITERASC
04-13-2018, 10:53 AM
Yea I'm not here to argue Pluto
(especially not on a scientific stand point).

dwarf planetoids are extraneous
- so would be interesting to have your comments
on your perspective
of how astrology could be more scientific :smile:
and whether there are any forms of astrology that you consider ARE scientific

Senecar
04-14-2018, 06:56 PM
how astrology could be more scientific :smile:
and whether there are any forms of astrology that you consider ARE scientific

What is your definition of scientific?

JUPITERASC
04-14-2018, 08:47 PM
What is your definition of scientific?


RICHARD FEYNMAN ON SCIENTIFIC METHOD :smile:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0KmimDq4cSU

Senecar
04-15-2018, 09:50 AM
RICHARD FEYNMAN ON SCIENTIFIC METHOD :smile:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0KmimDq4cSU

What about your own definition? :)

There have been different definition and conception about Science throughout history, and also even now people have different views and concepts on Science.

JUPITERASC
04-15-2018, 02:52 PM
What about your own definition? :)

There have been different definition and conception about Science throughout history, and also
even now people have different views and concepts on Science.


Exactly - so what's your definition :smile:

Senecar
04-16-2018, 08:19 AM
Exactly - so what's your definition :smile:

You seem having habit of answering with questions for my questions :)

The word Science originates from Latin Scentia, which means to learn and to know.

So it is just knowledge of something, if you go by the original meaning of science.
And it is also for knowledge which is acquired by classification, observation, analysis and experimentation and comparisons from set rules and principles.

If you apply above criteria to astrology, and ask whether astrology is science, then I would think yes, there are strong tendencies, characteristics and properties that astrology is a science. It also has aspects of psychology and occultism too in some respect.

Of course, these days the meaning of the word has expanded, and also some people seem to think that science is only to do with some technological machine engineering stuff or some chemical physical biological stuff happening in laboratories. I think it is a very narrow and secularised notion of definition of science.

I was quite shocked to see also some people actually attack on the people who use science from its original or expanded meaning, as if it is not allowed or ignorant practice.

petosiris
04-16-2018, 09:48 AM
I was quite shocked to see also some people actually attack on the people who use science from its original or expanded meaning, as if it is not allowed or ignorant practice.

Calling it science when you fail to scientifically validate (in the popular sense of the term that is accepted in the skeptical community, let's not play the word game) and establish it just does not help making it science.

Senecar
04-16-2018, 10:38 AM
Calling it science when you fail to scientifically validate (in the popular sense of the term that is accepted in the skeptical community, let's not play the word game) and establish it just does not help making it science.

Astrology's main aim is not sending rockets to the Moon or to other planets, so it does not need mysterious validation you demand, to be called a science :)

JUPITERASC
04-16-2018, 11:52 AM
Astrology's main aim is not sending rockets to the Moon or to other planets, so
it does not need mysterious validation you demand, to be called a science :)


you are entitled to your opinion, everyone else is equally entitled to an opinion :smile:

Senecar
04-16-2018, 12:27 PM
you are entitled to your opinion, everyone else is equally entitled to an opinion :smile:


Of course:)

But there are definitely points which make more sense objectively :)

JUPITERASC
04-16-2018, 01:18 PM
Of course:)

But there are definitely points which make more sense objectively :)
Definitely, assuming of course
that someone studying astrology only since January 2018
has read and studied all those points in depth :smile:

petosiris
04-16-2018, 04:32 PM
Of course:)

But there are definitely points which make more sense objectively :)

Which is why I will not try to be pretentious by using my own subjective sense of the word.

Senecar
04-17-2018, 11:47 PM
Which is why I will not try to be pretentious by using my own subjective sense of the word.

Misleading and hypocritical statement itself.

It is not my own definition invented by myself subjectively, but it is a definition I have chosen to go with from many other historical and objective definitions.

petosiris
04-18-2018, 12:02 AM
historical

You mean obsolete then?

Senecar
04-18-2018, 12:11 AM
You mean obsolete then?

Nothing is obsolete. After all this is Traditional Astrology board.

petosiris
04-18-2018, 12:35 AM
Nothing is obsolete. After all this is Traditional Astrology board.

Word game again. I did not meant that history or astrology is obsolete.

You rather use a word with a different meaning from the scientific community for some purpose, that I personally and many others do not see as very useful or helpful to make astrology actually scientific.

So you are going to continue using the word ''science'' in an obsolete sense, but I and many others are going to continue reading it as ''not-science''. Hopefully you do not get offended by the difference of language, because in such case you believe you are actually doing a science, and if that is the case, then you would be deluded.

You probably do believe you are scientific, otherwise you will not be so firm in your choice of language.

And if you are actually doing something scientific, then it can easily be tested by making a scientific experiment.

Senecar
04-18-2018, 08:19 AM
Word game again. I did not meant that history or astrology is obsolete.

You rather use a word with a different meaning from the scientific community for some purpose, that I personally and many others do not see as very useful or helpful to make astrology actually scientific.

So you are going to continue using the word ''science'' in an obsolete sense, but I and many others are going to continue reading it as ''not-science''. Hopefully you do not get offended by the difference of language, because in such case you believe you are actually doing a science, and if that is the case, then you would be deluded.

You probably do believe you are scientific, otherwise you will not be so firm in your choice of language.

And if you are actually doing something scientific, then it can easily be tested by making a scientific experiment.


Your argument is like saying Traditional Astrology is obsolete because it is old.

And you clearly are talking with Laboratory Science point of view just to play with word on Liberal Science topic, or maybe are genuinely confused.

JUPITERASC
04-18-2018, 09:10 AM
Your argument is like saying Traditional Astrology is obsolete because it is old.

On the contrary, you misunderstood petosiris clear comment :smile:


Word game again. I did not meant that history or astrology is obsolete.

You rather use a word with a different meaning from the scientific community for some purpose, that I personally and many others do not see as very useful or helpful to make astrology actually scientific.

So you are going to continue using the word ''science'' in an obsolete sense, but I and many others are going to continue reading it as ''not-science''. Hopefully you do not get offended by the difference of language, because in such case you believe you are actually doing a science, and if that is the case, then you would be deluded.

You probably do believe you are scientific, otherwise you will not be so firm in your choice of language.

And if you are actually doing something scientific, then it can easily be tested by making a scientific experiment.

JUPITERASC
04-18-2018, 09:10 AM
And you clearly are talking with Laboratory Science point of view
just to play with word on Liberal Science topic, or maybe
are genuinely confused.


so after studying astrology part-time since January 2018
you now consider yourself an experienced astrologer
and not at all confused

JUPITERASC
04-18-2018, 09:11 AM
you said

Of course:)
But there are definitely points which make more sense objectively :)


Which is why I will not try to be pretentious by using my own subjective sense of the word.

petosiris comment is neither misleading nor hypocritical


Misleading and hypocritical statement itself.

It is not my own definition invented by myself subjectively, but
it is a definition I have chosen to go with
from many other historical and objective definitions.

so while you demand that members give their own definition
you allow yourself to
"choose to go with a definition derived from unnamed
uncited allegedly historical sources" :smile:

Senecar
04-18-2018, 09:23 AM
you said


petosiris comment is neither misleading nor hypocritical

so while you demand that members give their own definition
you allow yourself to
"choose to go with a definition derived from unnamed
uncited allegedly historical sources" :smile:

I didn't demand. I did ask, to which got no reply for it. :)

I only did ask, because if you are talking from Laboratory Scientific view for Science (which you seem be doing), then of course Astrology is not a Science.

All I know is that, the definition is in one of the books I read, and I thought it is quite appropriate for my definition of Science of Liberal Arts.

It's not something that is revolutionary newly discovered theory we are talking about here, as you try to make out. We are trying to debate whether Astrology could be classed as Science.

We are trying to find out where you are standing on your point of view, and you demand source and name of historical source. It just sounds like nitpicking gone mad :)

JUPITERASC
04-18-2018, 09:26 AM
I didn't demand. I did ask, to which got no reply for it. :)

I only did ask, because if you are talking from Laboratory Scientific view for Science (which you seem be doing), then of course Astrology is not a Science.

All I know is that, the definition is in one of the books I read, and I thought it is quite appropriate for my definition of Science of Liberal Arts.

It's not something that is revolutionary newly discovered theory we are talking about here, as you try to make out. We are trying to debate whether Astrology could be classed as Science.

We are trying to find out where you are standing on your point of view, and you demand source and name of historical source. It just sounds like nitpicking gone mad :)
You are of course entitled to your opinion :smile:

JUPITERASC
04-18-2018, 09:27 AM
You seem having habit of answering with questions for my questions :)

The word Science originates from Latin Scentia, which means to learn and to know.

So it is just knowledge of something, if you go by the original meaning of science.
And it is also for knowledge which is acquired by classification, observation, analysis and experimentation and comparisons from set rules and principles.

If you apply above criteria to astrology, and ask whether astrology is science, then I would think yes, there are strong tendencies, characteristics and properties that astrology is a science. It also has aspects of psychology and occultism too in some respect.

Of course, these days the meaning of the word has expanded, and also some people seem to think that science is only to do with some technological machine engineering stuff or some chemical physical biological stuff happening in laboratories. I think it is a very narrow and secularised notion of definition of science.

I was quite shocked to see also some people actually attack on the people who use science from its original or expanded meaning, as if it is not allowed or ignorant practice.
Then he doesn't sound too bright, so stop reading the nonsense he writes.
There are Sumerian texts from 7,000 years ago (circa 5,000 BCE) that talk about Planets ensnaring things in their "nets" and casting light and casting rays.

What does that mean? It means they were infinitely more intelligent than we are....this is the 21st Century, you have public education systems in nearly every State on Earth, and yet the vast majority of people don't even know that the formula for the Force of Gravity is...

F(g) = M1 * M2 / d^2

How would you explain Gravity to a child that is 4 years old?

"You know how you dip your net into the water to catch goldfish or tadpoles?"

"Yeah."

"Well, Gravity is just like your net, only you can't see Gravity."

It isn't until the late 1950s that our so-called "advanced civilization" figures out there really is a "net" and they call that "net" a "Gravity-well."

And so for science fiction shows for the next 20 years or so -- like the Original Star Trek -- you hear them saying things like: "Captain, we're going to get caught in the Planet's Gravity-well."

If you get stuck in Earth's Gravity-well, you need to be moving at a speed of 17,500 Miles Per Hour to escape the net...and no, I don't know what that is in Kilometers Per Hour (and don't care).

In the Arabic, Farsi, and Latin texts, you see the phrase "[Saturn]...hurling its rays at...."

That's real....it really happens....and that is science.

In reality, the Sun is the only celestial body that actually casts light; the Moon and Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn reflect light...

....that's why we can see them.

Light is electromagnetic radiation.

In the middle of the electromagnetic radiation band are the colors....to the right of the blues, you have violet, then ultra-violet (UV), then X-Rays, then Gamma Rays.

To the left of the electromagnetic radiation spectrum, you have your yellows, oranges, reds and then infrared (IR), microwaves, radar, VHF/UHF, short wave radio, AM and FM radio bands.

Your eyes have evolved to allow you to see select frequencies in the electromagnetic radiation spectrum which are the colors.

An object absorbs frequencies of electromagnetic radiation, but reflects certain frequencies back at you, and that is what you are seeing....the reflected frequencies -- the color --- the specific wavelengths in the electromagnetic radiation band.

Asteroids do not reflect light, therefore, logically, rationally, scientifically, asteroids have no impact or affect on you. Likewise, the Outer Planets -- Uranus, Neptune and Pluto do not reflect light, and they have no affect on you individually and there is no possible way using math or science to justify that they do.

In addition to reflecting light, the Sun, Moon, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn also hurl rays (although the Sun really does cast Ultra-Violet Rays, X-Rays and Gamma Rays).

Space is not "empty." Space is filled with particles -- electromagnetic radiation -- from the Sun.

As the Planets move through Space, their mass, their orbital velocity (speed) and their exact chemical/elemental make-up creates something called the magnetosphere.

The magnetosphere reflects (some but not all) electromagnetic radiation away from it.

The magnetosphere on each of the Planets is "tuned" to attenuate certain frequencies in the electromagnetic radiation spectrum. The Earth's magnetosphere does a great job of screening out Gamma rays, a decent job of screening out X-Rays, a mediocre job of screening out UV rays and then a really bad job of screening out everything from the colors through microwave, radar and the radio bands.

But, then....we already knew that, didn't we?

If the Earth's magnetosphere filtered out electromagnet frequencies in the color band, then we wouldn't see anything outside of Earth, and if it screened out frequencies in the radio band, we would not be able to communicate with are satellites and probes.

Anyway, the magnetospheres of the Planets reflect certain frequencies at certain rates to Earth....

...and that is scientific fact, not speculation.

Since the advent of radio in the early 20th Century, it has been known that radio are affected by other forms of electromagnetic radiation. The primary cause is ionized particles in the Earth's stratosphere and mesosphere. The region in the stratosphere and mesosphere that is heavily ionized is known as the "ionosphere."

These ionized particles severely degrade the performance of microwave, radar, VHF, UHF, Short Wave and AM radio signals, and diminish the performance of FM radio signals.

This degrading of performance caused a lot of angst in the US Army, Air Force and Navy, and also with companies involved in radio communications, like Motorola.

It was noted that certain alignments of Sun, Moon, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn could either neutralize the effects of the ionosphere, or amplify the effects. Scientific studies, published in peer-reviewed scientific and engineering journals showed that Planets in sextile marginally improve radio performance; in trine they strongly improve performance; in square they strongly hamper performance, and in opposition they severely impede performance; and that Planets in conjunction could harm or help.

What is the Doctrine of Aspects in Traditional Astrology?

Sextiles indicate weak friendship
Trines show strong friendship
Squares show enmity
Oppositions conflict
Conjunctions can be helpful or harmful

Well, there you go....scientific proof that people knew more about the world around them 7,000 years ago than they do now.

Anyway, asteroids do not have sufficient mass and/or speed to generate magnetopheres, which is the other reason we ignore them, and while Uranus and Pluto generate magnetospheres (no verification yet on whether Pluto does), they are nothing like the size of magnetospheres of Jupiter and Saturn, and their vast distance from Earth precludes the possibility that the Outer Planets can affect individuals...

...F(g) = M1 * M2 / d^2

Good luck with that.
As far as the mathematical side of Astrology, archeaological excavations in Jericho show it was inhabited and functioned as trading.military outpost 9,000 years ago circa 7,000 BCE. A fresco on a wall in one of the buildings depicts a crab --- Cancer. Well, no kidding, since 9,000 years ago was the Age of Cancer.

What a shocker.

We know the Zodiac existed then. The Sumerians claim that 12,000 years ago circa 10,000 BCE during the Age of Leo there was a cataclysmic event on Earth, and that after this event, the pyramids at Gizeh were erected, and the sphinx --- a man's head on the body of a lion --- commemorated the event.

Another shocker.

In caves in France and Spain, drawings depicting a bow and arrow were originally believed to be a symbol for hunting, but now some archaeologists and anthropologists are claiming that the bow and arrow are actually the symbol for Sagittarius, and that people occupied the caves during the Age of Sagittarius some 22,000 years ago circa 20,000 BCE, which would indicate the Zodiac existed even then.

Wow, the common sense is shocking.

And then Sumerian and Akkadian texts claim the Zodiac was put together during the Age of Pisces.

Because of the effects of precession, the Zodiac moves backwards... Pisces, Aquarius, Capricorn, Sagittarius, until you get to 29°59' of Aries, and then eventually 15° of Aries and then eventually, um, Zero Point Aries.

Gosh, what a shocker.

So the Zodiac is ancient and more than that, it incorporates the Base 60 (Sexigismal) Number System instead of the Base 10 (Decimal) Number System.

Everything I have studied about Astrology going back to Mesopotamia, suggests one of two possible conclusions:

1] Astrology evolved from Numerology as a divination system; or

2] Numerology evolved from Astrology as a Poor Man's version of divination.

I lean very heavily toward the latter. Does that mean I "believe in" Numerology?

No. I categorically reject it in is entirety.

Why? I just explained why. It is 100% corrupted. Numerology was founded on the Base 60 Number System, so you cannot use it with the Base 10 Number System. If you could find and translate ancient texts about Numerology, and if you could figure out the Base 60 Number System, and if you could then correctly employ the Base 60 Systems with the doctrines, I think you might be onto something. But I don't see that happening anytime soon.

Anyway, there are so-called "sacred" numbers like 1, 12, 60, 72, 120, 360, 3,600 and 432,000 that are preserved in one way or another in many different schemes, systems and relationships.

Traditional Astrology (but not Modern Astrology) preserves a lot of those sacred numbers. There's an almost fanatical obsession with the number 120.

The number 120 is prominent in Hebrew texts, and 120 * 3600 = 432,000.

According to Norse (and other north/central European) traditions, there are 800 doors in Valhalla, and on Judgment Day, 540 warriors will exit each of the 800 doors...

....540 * 800 = 432,000

If we go to India, the yugas are based on multiples of 432,000.

Shocker.

Anyway, much of the knowledge about Astrology, including the true mathematical basis and relationships were lost over time.

A group of people –- the Gutians -– came from where ever it was they came from and destroyed the people Kushites (who lived west of the Zagros Mountains) and then proceeded to dismantle Sumer & Akkad circa 2100 BCE.

Then there was about 100 years of “barracks emperors” (sort of like in Rome after Marcus Aurelius died) and then the Akkadians rose up and routed the Gutians.

Then circa 2000 BCE, there was the incident at Sodom, Gomorrah and the cities of the plains, which scientists and archaeologists are now suggesting an asteroid or comet exploded over the region in the same manner as Tunguska causing its destruction.

For whatever strange, fascinating, bizarre reason, that incident caused the total collapse of the Sumerian Civilization, and they fled, never to be seen again (supposedly), and then the Amorites --- erroneously called Babylonians --- over-ran the Akkadian Civilization and that was the end of that.

To make matters worse, circa 1900 BCE, the Celts, a group of Slavs and another unknown group over-ran and totally wiped out the Hittite Kingdom and Civilization.

Just as Rome was the cultural and scientific learning center of the world, and the light went out when it was destroyed and we entered the Dark Ages, the same thing happened here.

Sumer & Akkad were the cultural and scientific learning centers of the ancient world, and when the light went out, we entered the Dark Ages.

Information flowed from Sumer & Akkad to Egypt, and then through the Hittite Kingdom to the Eastern Greeks in Phrygia and Lydia, and then to the Western Greeks on the mainland. The destruction of the Hittite Kingdom cut off the flow information out of Mesopotamia, and the destruction of Sumer & Akkad cut off the flow of all information.

From that point forward, you have two separate distinct civilizations rise, the Greeks and the Egyptians (and further east of the Zagros Mountains the Persians and Medes).

And then the Greeks conquer the Egyptians and Persians, and then the Romans conquer all of them, and then the Turks conquer all of them, and the next thing you know, it’s Spring-time in Germany for Hitler.

If people cannot figure out an organic alcohol chain or botch it up its formation, that does not mean that organic chemistry is fatally flawed….it just means people don’t get it.

Likewise, there is nothing wrong with Astrology, but there are people who don’t get it, people who muck it up intentionally, and then the artful practitioners are still trying to get to the bottom of many of the doctrines, and that’s hampered by not having access to texts or being able to locate/recover ancient texts.

So, there you go.



interesting :smile:

SunConjunctUranus
12-28-2018, 09:32 PM
so after studying astrology part-time since January 2018
you now consider yourself an experienced astrologer
and not at all confused

Teach em a lesson, vet! :biggrin: