Meh.

I'm an Oregon resident. We have a big homeless population because Portland is the teen runaway destination. I don't exactly see how that's a shame.

Now, if were shooing away our homeless with weird, unfriendly benches, I could see a cause for shame.

@Jessss
Indeed, the writer was not a scientist. And the data should be taken less seriously then if it were a rigorously reviewed study by competent statisticians and scientists.

However, it's the most thorough investigation of Sidereal astrology from a statistical point to date. There's just not enough research to warrant a strong knee-jerk opinion either way.

And obviously, from a scientific point of view, we know where the burden of proof lies.

But I never claimed that the Sidereal Zodiac exists, just that there are some interesting statistical anomalies that occur when you account for the Sidereal placement.

The only thing I am convinced of (by adequate scientific research) is that the Tropical Zodiac signs are complete bunk.

3 of 3

*By the way, Gaugelin's research, which pretty much disproved Tropical Astrology, did discover an interesting thing called the Mars Effect. A verifiable correlation between the presence of Mars in a person's chart (which is not affected by issues of Sidereal vs Tropical astrology), and the person's athletic eminence.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_effect

2 of 3

A correction of my earlier statement. The raw data they used was not from the 1950 survey, but from a sample of about 16,000 people compiled by Michel Gauquelin

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michel_Gauquelin

Jessss I replied, but I think it had too many links, and is being moderated. They should publish it soon enough.

@Jess my post got held in moderation (probably for having to many links. I'll try to split it up.

1 of 3

@Jessss, I didn't condemn him. I criticized his post.

I'm personally agnostic about the sidereal zodiac. As far as a mechanism; I would first want to demonstrate reliably a correlation before I jumped to finding a causation.

I seriously doubt we'll discover that the stars somehow influenced our personality at birth; at the same time I imagine it could be possible that a cycle on earth corresponds to the cycle of the zodiac, in the way that seasons, lunar months, and days do. But that's all pretty useless speculation.*

The research I mentioned was done by someone I know. It's not a scholarly article, so take it or leave it as you wish.

It's a large (68MB) PDF. The relevant sections are pages 64-72 of the PDF.
http://www.thelema.org/publications/bp/bp_set_10-11.pdf

The persons doing the study went through and changed the attributed signs based on the individual birthdays. The results are graphed and subjected to statistical analysis.

@Jessss, I didn't condemn him. I criticized his post.

I'm personally agnostic about the sidereal zodiac. As far as a mechanism; I would first want to demonstrate reliably a correlation before I jumped to finding a causation.

I seriously doubt we'll discover that the stars somehow influenced our personality at birth; at the same time I imagine it could be possible that a cycle on earth corresponds to the cycle of the zodiac, in the way that seasons, lunar months, and days do. But that's all pretty useless speculation.*

The research I mentioned was done by someone I know. It's not a scholarly article, so take it or leave it as you wish.

It's a large (68MB) PDF. The relevant sections are pages 64-72 of the PDF.
http://www.thelema.org/publications/bp/bp_set_10-11.pdf

The persons doing the study went through and changed the attributed signs based on the individual birthdays. The results are graphed and subjected to statistical analysis.

A correction of my earlier statement. The raw data they used was not from the 1950 survey, but from a sample of about 16,000 people compiled by Michel Gauquelin

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michel_Gauquelin

*By the way, Gaugelin's research, which pretty much disproved Tropical Astrology, did discover an interesting thing called the Mars Effect. A verifiable correlation between the presence of Mars in a person's chart (which is not affected by issues of Sidereal vs Tropical astrology), and the person's athletic eminence.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_effect

@MadMolecule

My claim (that when you go through the data from the peer-reviewed 1950 study, using sidereal signs, the correlation is interesting, and not in line with what you would expect from chance) has not been subjected to peer review.

I'm sorry I mistook this court of law, or a scholarly board, for a blog.

By the way, if you're going to subject anonymous posts to the same scrutiny as a group of scholars, we're going to have to establish that you're an expert, and not just a monkey copying and pasting the phrase, "please provide a link to a peer-reviewed scientific journal to substantiate your claim."

I'm all for scholarly review and empiricism to verify and substantiate correlations with data.

I'm just not into using the narrow range of peer-reviewed knowledge to dictate my casual conversation topics.

Yep, Tropical (standard) astrology is bunk.

Since the '40s, a handful of astrologers have been working with he rediscovered, correct system, called Sidereal astrology.

The error was introduced accidentally by Ptolemy.

2,000 years ago, he observed that 0 degrees Aries corresponded to the spring equinox. Since then, we've been mistakenly keeping 0 Aries fixed at the equinox, while the earth precessed.

There was a 1950 study published as "Profession and Birth Date" where they surveyed 2,492 people and found zero correspondence between birth date and profession using standard astrology for Sun and Moon signs.

However, when you correct he data, using Sidereal astrology, there is a correlation that you can't chalk up to mere coincidence.

@Alan because she's not tortured by the delusion that there's only one right way to do things...

There's a big difference between not bathing, and not using shampoo or soap.

When I shampooed, my hair would be dry and unmanageable for a day, then would start to get greasy by day 2 or 3. I had to use a bunch of product, and then strip it away every day with a lot of shampoo.

I stopped using shampoo last year, and started to "wash" it with a little conditioner nearly every day. For the first couple weeks, my hair was greasy (because using shampoo every day stimulates over-production of scalp oils).

Then, after a few weeks, my hair changed. It became soft, manageable, and healthy like never before. My wife (a shampooer) can testify to the state of cleanness. I don't need to use product, because my hair isn't stripped and frizzy any more.

Sorry, that was a bit ambiguous. What I meant was:

"A lot depends on how you [the original possessor of the sees] got those seeds."

While you legitimately question the justice of a squatter being able to take your land, you open the door to question the justice of your owning land to begin with.

A lot depends on how you got those seeds.

@q_park

40 years before International Business Machine was a typewriter, it was a punch card driven database system to help the Nazis find and track Jews.

You know what they say: Saw off my hand once, shame on you, saw off my hand twice, shame on me...