The science behind planets and astrology

smilingsteph

Well-known member
Almire,
I will not throw rocks :)
I appreciate your thoughts to human behaviors and their repetition.

They are repetitive for the basic needs of human survival (Maslow): breathing, food, water, sex, homeostatis, excretion. These things are all innately within so that we can survive.

If you come from a more psychological backround then you will also agree with me (?) that the human experience itself is not repetitive.

Sure we all do the basics of what it is to live, but the living (life) experience is unique to us all.

From above, we look to be of the same; from within the experience is detached from the rest and very personal.

"According to Dr Percy Seymour, a Theoretical Astrophysicist, resonance is what makes it possible for a radio telescope to tune into specific vibrations in the Andromeda Galaxy (14 million, million, million miles away) and accounts for the Solar System playing a symphony of vibrations on the magnetic field of the Earth."http://www.kathryncassidy.com/articles/how-astrology-works.cfm

I found this to be very interesting as most anti-astrologers theory's argue that the outer planets do not have any action towards the earth, nor do they interact with the magnetic field.

Dr. Seymour also stated that when working with NASA scientists noted that going away from the sun the solar winds became violent, while going towards (conjuncting) the winds were more calm.

I do belive that the planets in our solar system have an effect on us, because they affect the earth.

I just dont think that they can be statistically proved by the scientific method, but can be proved through the human experience of living.
 

almire

Member
And the theory would be that the different magnetic fields affect our synapses and glandular flows thus affecting our emotions and thoughts, it is an interesting point of view.

The human experience is very unique, because of the infinite variations of day to day living. Yet on the core not only do we have the same needs (Maslow) but also we work along the same structures (Jung´s Archetypes) and interact in the same way (Berne´s Games) with the same primal needs (Freud), creating in a broader sense, a cyclical nature to life in the collective.

¿Maybe a convergence of theories might be more complete?
“The earth, nature and the human race live on a series of cyclic behaviors that have been observed for 4000 years and categorized with the stars as a calendar. These natural cycles are then reaffirmed and entrenched by the non-local quantum force we have given these planets through our observations and associated concepts. With micro-variations of the cycles caused by vibrations and local fields that exert changes on our regular patterns of thought"

What do you think?
 

smilingsteph

Well-known member
Almire,
I say yes, and yes.
I agree there.
But I think it is much more personal then these theories make life out to be.

I agree with what you are saying, based on the cyclic life patterns that move the biologic process of life along.

We are bogged down by the basics of living. However, there is also the emotional side to life that is lost within the theories here.
Last year I would have wholly agreed that life is life, and we are innately designed to live as structured as it is meant to be; breathe or die.

But after the personal experiences that I dealt with over the year, I have been touched by life on a different level. A level that brought this emotional and spritual side to life that has forced me in a way to change my view on things. I dont think it was due to alterations of the planetary movements on my glandular processes.

I needed to breathe air to live, but I add to that (on a higher spiritual level), the ability to breathe in life to live.

I do agree in your last paragraph. I actually love it!
 
i want to make a quote to further confuse you people just for the heck of it;

Many scientists have documented that over 95% of Human DNA does not have a known purpose. This DNA has been colloquially referred to as “Junk DNA”.

Up to 97% of the human genetic information (DNA) is seemingly needless, repetitive “junk” – only about 3% is known to generate proteins, deserving the name “gene”. The rest used to be called “junk DNA”, lately renamed as “non-coding introns”, sometimes labelled by the mysterious, though not very explicit description that these self-similar strands “regulate gene expression”


evolution.gif


However, other researchers have not been content to simply classify this predominant part of DNA as “one of life’s mysteries”. Scholarly groups at the forefront of investigative researchers are gathering details which suggest that DNA may not substantively exist as a “building block of life”. Rather, it appears that the substantive function of DNA is to act as a “parasitic inhibitor” and “regulator” of life on planet Earth.

Recent work by Russian biologist Piotr Garjajev and some Russian linguistic experts suggests the same thing, and, more specifically, this research may show that junk DNA, rather than being a discard, is “a computer hologram that works with laser-type radiations.” In short, DNA is an extraordinary generator of perceptions, an instrument of virtual reality.


By accepting the link between DNA and emotional and mental activities, we may begin to imagine DNA as a complex program that directs the life process (regulating our metabolism, for instance), but impedes our consciousness from complete manifestation.

Research testimony that includes ancient representations, suggest that DNA was implanted in humanity by Manipulative Extraterrestrials. The fact that over 95% of DNA does not support vital biological living processes suggest that it is conceivable for biological life to exist without any DNA.
More than 95 % of all DNA, had been first called “Junk DNA” by molecular biologists, because they were unable to ascribe any function to it. They assumed that it was just “molecular garbage”. But, if it were “junk”, the sequence of the “syllables”, i.e. the nucleotides in DNA should be completely random. However it has been found that the sequence of the syllables is not random at all and has a striking resemblance with the structure of language (ref. Flam, F. “Hints of a language in junk DNA”, Science 266:1320, 1994), that is alien to humanity. Scientists now generally believe that this DNA must contain some kind of coded information.

http://fractogene.com/full_genome/fractogene.html



NOW, go figure the relationship between junk dna and astrology.
 

07.Re

Well-known member
i want to make a quote to further confuse you people just for the heck of it;
NOW, go figure the relationship between junk dna and astrology.

2complicated, hereunder is an excerpt from the first link I posted:

Cells have what might be best described as teeny tiny, directional antenna on the cell walls, which are in a state of constant fluctuation while an embryo is still in the womb. At birth, and shortly thereafter (a matter of days), these antenna cease their fluctuating existence and lock into place. Thereafter, these antenna need only feel the impulse of the appropriate signal to notify the cell to contact the blueprints of its DNA and do its thing. The antenna are basically timing devices for the cell (or its descendants) to be active.
One theory is that the planets are all interconnected to the cells’ antenna via subtle electromagnetics. When a planet approaches the point in space where the electromagnetic field around it (on Earth, they include the Van Allen belts, for example) is able to trigger the directional antenna of the cells, the cell checks its DNA blueprints, and physically affects the human host.

So while I acknowledge that this is just a theory, perhaps it is enough to influence the remaining (purposeful ?) 5% (?) of DNA, indicating that there is a correlation between planets / DNA.

Oh and if you google "debunk junk DNA", you will see websites dedicated to doing just this.
 

astro09

Well-known member
For me the following is a (simple) way to connect science and astrology .
1. The hypothesis is generated based on an educated guess…that can be tested using independent and dependent variables; correlating the variables… I will introduce some astrological characters- indicators in order to proof my hypothesis that astrology can be linked to science…
Ex. HYPOTHESIS: A harsh aspect between the moon and Saturn correlates with a somber, emotions controlling type of individual.
Notes:
a. Saturn is related to structure, conservatism, discipline, somberness….
This is an educated guess. There have been writings that support this.
b. Moon is associated with our mother, emotions, domestic life, nurturing…. This is another educated guess.
c. The aspects have also been correlated depending upon the distance between the planets.
d. Harsh aspects between the moon and Saturn has been connected with sad feelings
2. Test the hypothesis-Find those individual with no contact, soft aspects and hard aspects between Saturn and the moon. Aim to weigh on the individual’s feelings, emotions….
3. Observations - Collect the data… record the observations. Since human being behavior is not such a white and black variable, depending on the way the questionnaire is designed, there is a numerical value that can be constructed; measured.
4. Analyze your data –draw your conclusion (accept or reject the hypothesis).
5. The repetition of the experiment is always highly recommended. In science, the more the observation is repeated, the more credible is.
Astrology, in large fraction, takes validity as the observations are repeated. That’s why so many times we speak and associate archetypes, tendencies and so on….If the repetition would not exits, we could not use astrology as we do.
Taking a whole question, for instances, and trying to examine it as one big unit, does not work. However, applying the rules (emerging from repeated observations) we can analyze the critical parts concerning our question. (The analysis is a breakdown of the whole into smaller part). Afterwards, we can build up our conclusion.
Besides, astrology is also an art…how we interpret the chart….
 

07.Re

Well-known member
Thanks astro09.

However, what you are describing is the art of astrology... observing the affect of the planets on individuals.

What I want to know is how the planets affect us whilst they are all so very far away - what scientific explanation could explain this cause and effect.

Unless I have interpretted your post incorrectly, what thoughts do you have on this?

:)
 

astro09

Well-known member
.07,
For some reason I understood the question as to how to connect astrology to science....If I understand correctly now, your question is around how is that a particular planet (position) influence on the individual... In that case, I do not have a better answer than the ones expressed above...I think someone with a background in physic-chemistry can speaks better than me.
...Sorry... Yes, it is an interesting question.
 

07.Re

Well-known member
Another point I want to throw into the mix is the affect planets may or may not have on animals.

Take for example beached dolphins. Now there are many theories on why dolphins beach themselves but nothing is conclusive. This got me thinking that perhaps animals are also influenced by the planets. If I'm correct (if I'm not, someone please correct me), animals do not have an ego... they operate from a subconsious / prime survival instinct.

But on the other hand (and yes, this is my Libran stellium working here), if the planets do affect dolpins in this way, why then don't we see many more deaths of dolphins by beaching themselves?

Any thoughts?
 

07.Re

Well-known member
.07,
For some reason I understood the question as to how to connect astrology to science....If I understand correctly now, your question is around how is that a particular planet (position) influence on the individual... In that case, I do not have a better answer than the ones expressed above...I think someone with a background in physic-chemistry can speaks better than me.
...Sorry... Yes, it is an interesting question.

As Olivia mentioned earlier in the thread, better minds have been grappling with this question too... I reckon we'll just grapple along with them :)

Are you in for the ride?
 
haha, it's very interesting how i thought there "would be" a relationship between "junk dna" and the space, while you are trying to associate it with the part that actually does something that we are aware of.

i gotta quote this again;

However it has been found that the sequence of the syllables is not random at all and has a striking resemblance with the structure of language (ref. Flam, F. “Hints of a language in junk DNA”, Science 266:1320, 1994), that is alien to humanity. Scientists now generally believe that this DNA must contain some kind of coded information.

we have no insight or whatever. all we have is this ability of memorizing things and associating them with other things. that's all. it's just people who memorize more, have more to associate it with. and then we think that this person is insightful, spiritual, no, he just memorized stuff without questioning it... now, i said these things because i doubt if we discovered the thing in itself. the very essence of matter. there's just no way to answer all the questions, okay, neutrons and protons stick together because of strong force and it's generated by gluons and quarks. but what makes quarks act in the way they do... do they also exchange some other even smaller particle... does it even matter if we find they do... the question is still there... we don't know what's the essence. we explain everything with another question... x, because of y. y because of q... in the end, we just describe what we see and name them.

in this sense, yeah, cells can be antennas and communicate with planets. also there would be pink elephants flying at the dark side of the moon but only when no one is looking.
 

07.Re

Well-known member
I hear what you are saying 2c, but if we don't push boundaries and question and search for answers, we're not learning.... perhaps this isn't a question that can be answered in our lifetime. I certainly wish I had the science skills to make a difference in developing an answer though.

:)
 
let's see what we know;

we say universe has its limits. anyone can imagine what's in the end? a brick wall? complete emptiness? (emptiness is still something)

when i look at my wine, i see how it's surrounded by the glass. when i look at my glass i see how it's surrounded by earth's atmosphere. when i look at the earth from moon, i see how it's surrounded by space. when i look at the space, i can't see how it's surrounded or not by whoknowswhat or not.

we don't have imagination too. it's still memorizing and associating. i love giving this example, so i will. what's the most unique extraterrestrial being ever imagined by us? gotta be giger's alien.

review_18alien_3.jpg


well, even this, when you deconstruct into smaller parts, has a humanoid body, tentacles, lots of buglike features, produces lots of saliva, fangs, claws, scorpionish tail and stuff... nothing out of this world. just a weird mixture of things living in earth. just another sphinx or griffin.

we are thinking in the only way we can. knowing 3 dimensions, having a lot of trouble adding time to that, 5th dimension is something we can never visualize or truly understand.

being no real predators, we don't know if it's a great pleasure, taking down a gazelle and breaking its neck with bone crushing teeths and feeling the warm blood splashing all over our faces and drinking it like roarrrr grrrr harharhar...

and when you add all this into "parasitic dna" theory, it makes perfect sense. i don't consider my left arm myself. it's just a part of me. what's me to me, is my consciousness and the flow of my thoughts and "experiencing the now". we are short sighted. dna is not.

it first makes us horny, it chooses what kind of people we will like and then duplicates itself. even transformes itself into an even better dna.

haha, what a mess of a post, but whatever.
 

smilingsteph

Well-known member
Astro09:

Sure you can apply that method to the art of astrology, but the answers are subjective, based on perceptions, not real data. What you are showing is the example of astrology on an everyday basis, what we already know to be true, or else we wouldnt be interested in it at all. (based on years and years of the artform that brings us these conclusions).

What I think 0.7Re is looking for is how this artform came to be....
How the planets affect us, how what we do on this forum works.

By use of collecting objective data would be the way to form a possible conclusion.
By use of data that can be collected without using the senses. Such as a watch or a thermometer.

I know that the moon alters the earths tides, because this is based on scientific research.

Everything in life is a theory. We theorize here that astrology is real and we debate about it.

I dont think that astrologers necessarily debate whether astrology is truly a science. It would be like debating whether or not my painting is as pretty as yours, as this information is very subjective, because I think astrology is that, subjective.

Even with my theory stated, I enjoy it very much and will continue to dive in deeper to the depths of the art and craft of astrology.
 
maybe we just love adjectives. give me a lot of adjectives, attributes o magic natal chart.

[deleted offensive comments - Moderator]
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Neptune613

New member
Imagine an older tv with rabbit-ears antennae. When a person walks in the room to a specific spot near the door the tv flickers a little. when the person walks over to the chair it goes a little fuzzy. When he walks to the lamp the vertical hold goes wild. Then change the directions of the tv's antennae and walk to the same places- there'll be different responses in each place.

It seems like that's how aspects work. When a planet is at a certain angle from another planet, each planet's electric field react together. When you move away from that angle a bit, that reaction goes away until you reach another angular distance from another planet which creates its own response based upon its magnetic or radiation fields.
 
Top