obsidianmineral
Well-known member
Once you get into the field of Theoretical Physics, very few can see it working. Lots of disagreements in the field.
So once you get to the field of "probably but not proven (theoretical)" physics, then there is a lot of disagreement, because it's probable but not proven. That didn't really add any kind of context nor information to the discussion related to astrology. The analogy doesn't work, you see. Just because something like string theory hasn't been proved yet it is likely that it could be proven at some point, it does not mean that applies to every other theory or pseudo-science is the same. If you truly want astrology to be more accepted, you'll need more than mere anecdotical evidence. Not only is anecdotical evidence scientifically useless, it's also based on subjective perception, so therefore it is subject to variations.
I think many astrologers are really easy to fool and manipulable. From my observation, I've seen that most people in this forum just think the pseudo-science works as a result of casual observation. They also tend to stretch the meanings and interpretations of everything included in a chart; I get it, astrology is more of an art than a science and somewhat subjective, but you simply can't use the "close-enough" thing everytime. There's so many misinformation and stupidity these days that I would advise many of the people here (and this isn't any personal attack to you; I'm speaking of the people here in general) to reconsider astrology as a whole.