If you extremity to get a amply essay, severalize it on our website: There is no need to waste a lot of time trying to! No comments:. Post a Comment Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment. Newer Post Older Post Home. Subscribe to: Post Comments Atom. At that point I was a skeptic bordering on a critic. Eventually I realised I had to adjust my view. Please understand though, I certainly had not wanted, or ever imagined you would give me your date of birth!
In fact I would probably refuse if you asked. I think that my previous reply to you was perhaps unfair in that it was directed to several commenters, both here and on the Guardian post.
There are people on both sides who seem to have read what they expected or hoped to read rather than what I actually wrote. I see that the quip about charts was intended light-heartedly, but again it is an example of something that people may, in some circumstances, find problematic. I am not sure, though, about your comment regarding how I found my way to the skeptic camp without knowing my chart.
I am acting on the lack of evidence from elsewhere — or sufficient evidence that there are well-understood psychological reasons why individuals feel astrology, alternative medicine etc. The reason science has had the successes it has had is because scientists trust the work of those around them or who came before them. This can cause problems, but has generally been extremely effective and there really is no alternative. I think I will wait until the dust has settled a little further before attempting this, but in the mean time please have a look at some of these other blogged responses:.
PZ Myers totally failed to understand or, rather, failed to represent fairly the point I was making. Rebecca Pohancenik considers what this episode has to say about the role of history of science in science communication NB see the comments from Alice and Rebecca at the end: we have a battlefield, but it is not history of science vs science, and certainly not historians vs science communicators.
Billy Gotta-Job responded with a blog about Astrology and Ridicule , considering astrology, as something that is neither science nor faith, and the uselessness of rubbishing. Jin-Shei responded to my posts with one on Believers of all kinds , outlining the reality of situations where personal skepticism conflicts with the worldview of people around you.
Attack is not always the appropriate mode.
- numerology names based on date of birth 11 january in telugu?
- elle daily horoscope.
- AstroVastuRaj - Quality Vastu Consultation in Mumbai.
- The Only Astrology Book You'll Ever Need;
- lunar eclipse february 15 2020 astrology taurus.
Finally, Jon Simons let me know about a post he wrote a few months ago, which asks What are we scientists trying to achieve in our interactions with the media , provoked by his concern that over-zealous attacks on the media by some in the skeptic camp may be counter-productive. Thanks for the kind words and the link to my post. I apologize that I did not see your Guardian piece before I finished my post, which would have benefitted from thinking about the points you raise there. You certainly offered a more constructive suggestion.
Unfortunately, as you note, it seems to have been misunderstood, misread, misrepresented, or simply ignored. Thanks Darin. I think things are not quite so bleak as you suggest. Those who comment on posts in the Guardian are not, I suspect, particularly representative of those who read them. I am trusting that many have read and taken on board what I was trying to say. Likewise, I found I had much support on Twitter and in the positive posts all but Myers listed in my comment above.
The experiment provides the first evidence for seasonal imprinting of biological clocks in mammals and was conducted by Professor of Biological Sciences Douglas McMahon, graduate student Chris Ciarleglio, post-doctoral fellow Karen Gamble and two undergraduate students at Vanderbilt University. While not a study on astrology itself, it comes dangerously close to suggesting that the tropical zodiac, the zodiac based on the position of the Sun as it travels thru the seasons, actually has something behind it.
It is very easy to test if it is the influence of the seasons themselves or the stars and planets. Check what happens with people who have the same star sign but were born on the Southern hemisphere, where seasons will be out of phase. Thanks for this Beto. As you say, conflating astrology with seasonal effects is pointless. I also noted that they referred to a paper, which is usually cited as clear evidence against astrology, and Jung, who is certainly not a unifying figure for astrologers.
Not a human being, no.
Horoscopes in Astrology | Teen Ink
Ideas, yes. Bad ideas, emphatically so. We have a moral obligation to deride crap that is presented as if it merited our attention. If you stuck to the latter, you would be doing exactly what I suggested in my post s. Jolly good. Pingback: The astrology wars and abandoned scientific research programmes. The Renaissance Mathematicus.
- born 6 march libra horoscope.
- Informative Speech On Astrology? | Yahoo Answers.
- Negative Astrology Sign Characteristics;
You yourself have said astrology is trash, so it follows that those who follow it fall into one of two camps: deluded or dishonest. This is what I find so remarkable about your argument. On one hand you deny asking that we engage with astrologers but on the other hand you criticise those who deride astrology because, it seems, we do not acknowledge of their skill at reading an ephemeris, operating Astrolog or being able to distinguish Aldebaran from Betelgeuse. Why continue to attack astrologers with not knowing astronomy when some of them have a reasonable amount of knowledge?
Would it help attacks on homeopathy if you accused them of offering patients neat alcohol and killing kittens on the side? Not really. Would it incline the curious, partly-interested or semi-neutral to feel sympathy for such maligned individuals? However, while my main purpose in writing was to provide some constructive criticism, I also have to ask: Why do you feel so threatened by astrologers?.
Science has enormous dominance and respect in the modern world, astrology very little. Some astrologers may be dishonest, some may be deluded — but there are deluded and dishonest scientists. All of us are irrational and unscientific from time to time, or perhaps most of the time. Holding unscientific beliefs or acting unscientifically does not necessarily make someone anti-science.
From the very limited interaction I have had with astrologers as a result of writing these posts I would say that many seem to be perfectly honest, nice, intelligent people. Some astrologers may prey on the needy and extract money from them, but probably not that many and presumably with the strong disapproval of bodies like the Astrological Association. You may not like what they do but, in the scheme of things, they cause relatively little harm.
Even if all astrologers disappeared tomorrow, people would continue to look for signs, correspondences, concordances and patterns where none exist. Finally, there are many worse beliefs, practices and people than astrology and astrologers. All the anger you have might be better directed at tackling misogyny, racism, homophobia or other forms of intolerance that have genuinely caused severe pain and even death.
This is getting tedious, as I said it would. For some reason this example, given by a Minnesota astronomer, was widely picked up. But it has fuck all to do with what Cox said. In a generation of pop culture-savvy scientists Cox is a lead runner. Patrick Moore has said the same many times in his long-running BBC programmes. If you think the BBC should spend more time on the subject, why not pitch it to them?
Shree Rajendra Tank welcomes You
You may note that I only mention Cox in one brief paragraph and that my chief criticism is of science journalists who picked up the Kunkle story and ran with it and who made use of some very bad history remember, this is a history of science blog. You and TV scientists can say astrology is crap all you like, and those who are already convinced will applaud.
Those who are not will have learned nothing.
Astrology based on the zodiac had been around for nearly a millennium before Ptolemy introduced the tropical system, and he did it because precession, which had been discovered but not taken into account, was beginning to be a serious problem. Other cultures have retained sidereal astrology, and the two lots have occasional arguments about it.
No, actually it is. Astrology itself is based on risible hypotheses about the significance of planetary positions relative to those accidents. Astrology is a science. But you seem to be pedalling backwards and just the right speed for now.mebitypuc.gq
Informative Speech Topics About Music
If you are going to try and argue with the history of science then you should at least get that history right! Obviously the further back in history we go, before the printing of ephemerides, astrologers had to collect their own data which required sound scientific ability, but not anymore. It occurs to me that this argument persists because some people are very entrenched in holding onto their views, however incorrect or outdated, because of bias and no amount of explaining that their perception is skewed will change anything.
Feebee This is not entirely the fault of critics of astrology. I think most commenters speaking up for astrology on the Guardian post did take the same position as you, but not all. See also, for example, the Open Letter addressed to me see my comment replying to Darin above. This makes it confusing for outsiders, to say the least. But by and large I think your point highlights the weirdness of the fact that many science advocates for want of a better term seem to consider astrology so threatening to their worldview.
They call themselves X. Therefore X are idiots. And they talk rubbish!
Related astrology informative speech
Copyright 2019 - All Right Reserved