Astrology As Science

Senecar said:

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.

Click to expand...

petosiris said:

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.

Click to expand...

Senecar said:

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

Click to expand...

JUPITERASC said:

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

Click to expand...

Senecar said:

Of course

But there are definitely points which make more sense objectively

Click to expand...

Senecar said:

Of course

But there are definitely points which make more sense objectively

Click to expand...

petosiris said:

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

Click to expand...

Senecar said:

historical

Click to expand...

petosiris said:

You mean obsolete then?

Click to expand...

Senecar said:

Nothing is obsolete.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

Click to expand...

petosiris said:

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 I did not meant that history or astrology is obsolete.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.

Click to expand...

Senecar said:

Your argument is like saying Traditional Astrology is obsolete because it is old.

Click to expand...

On the contrary, you misunderstood petosiris clear comment

petosiris said:

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.

Click to expand...

Senecar said:

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.

Click to expand...

Senecar said:

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

Click to expand...

petosiris said:

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

Click to expand...

Senecar said:

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.

Click to expand...

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"

JUPITERASC said:

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"

Click to expand...

Senecar said:

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

Click to expand...

Senecar said:

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.

Click to expand...

BobZemco said:

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.

Click to expand...

JUPITERASC said:

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

Click to expand...