What Makes A God?

And...i said you are throwing a fit when you don't need to. I'm not a dick i am a scientist.

What does you saying he is afraid have to do with it. You are doing an egotistical dance and frankly someone who is in that space doesn't know what they are talking about because they are not measuring accurately. If you see wrong, you are not seeing right.

 

Throwing a fit? I'm simply saying what I have asked for and this has dragged out forever. Clearly he's hesitant and holding out for reasons other than confidence. You're throwing a fit at me for asking for all the required parts.

 

You are missing the point.

And it's because you never answered my question, what do you use astrology for chinacat?

You think it is to make predictions

if that is so it is useless

What use does astrology have for us then

Our use for it would be what we want it for.

There is only one desire

To have it better.

Have what better

Your life

I am telling you something so you can have a better one, in this moment and all moments to come.

If our science doesn't give us a better life then it is of no use.

You don't know what is better for you because you want it

until you solve your own condition

You are a bag. of hot and cold air. (Sometimes you feel okay and you just breath and then you are not a gas bag, for the moment)

Until you solve your own condition science is of no use to you

When you solve you own condition you know yourself.

If you know yourself

You are the magus

Mr' writer does not want a specific and accurate chart

He wants you to demonstrate how it could be useful to him

If you are trying to be predictive of influence in order to find improvement in your life Then you don't know what it's use is.

Astrology is only useful to the astrologer

Only the magus uses everything and only he then knows what he is doing

He also knows what you are doing.

 

He knows he doesn't do it better he knows what he does

He knows we do it together

 

The reason astrology is alchemic is not that it tells you what you are looking at.

It teaches you how to be observant both to what is out there and what is in you

The practice of being equally attentive to what is outside and what is inside

Helps you become totally aware.

 

I would say that it is you that has no grasp on the rigors of science. How can we really study astrology without really understanding what they're trying to do? The difference between a good astrologer and a bad one is that a good astrologer can tell you why the planets effect our fate. Though he may be unable to speak for fear of boggling our minds with the revelation of what our relationship to the cosmos is.

Is it falsifiable to say that the purest form of studying a thing contains some expectation that you will get a result? I now call into question the true motivation for the study. Was it performed properly? Am I simply to trust that strangers smarter than me have my best intentions at heart? Cuckoo.

It's a matter of what it means to study something. I propose a real scientific test of astrology in which people who call themselves scientists attempt to become astrologers under the tutor of reknowned astrologers.

 

LOL. That's just such a hardcore Dr. Mengele thing to say it makes me laugh. Of course science has to show some respect for humanity. Otherwise shouldn't we be testing nuclear bombs on the populous because we'll learn something about the effects?

 

Yes, I am just going to take this to heart, especially coming from the guy who just suggested that scientists treat astrologers like fictional wizards.

 

Not so of a good astrologer. The only value of an astrologer to any one else is his relationship with the astrologer. We are not fated.
Astrology serves only one thing, interest.

Now about who really understands the rigors of grasp... the one who is grasping

Your last sentence is correct except the last entry, under the tutor of renowned astrologers.

If it is tutoring that helps, you need a good teacher.

 

How many times do I need to repeat that the study is UNREALISTIC? They aren't taking into account the Location of where the people were born. Therefore, everybody is going to have different Ascendants, and therefore completely different charts, even if they all were born at the same time. Try to grasp that the study is literally missing the entire point. Astrology isn't just Sun Signs. It's the entire chart.

The equivalent to this study is if they were to study 2,000 people with the same skin color and try to determine whether their lives all turn out the same or not. 2,000 people are going to have 2,000 different lives! Nobody has the exact same Astrology chart, which is a combination of all the different planets combined into your unique signature. This is not hard to grasp if you understood Astrology even a little bit.

 

HOW MANY TIMES do I need to repeat there were 2 different studies, I am not referring to the Longtidunal study.

 

Reputations are distinctly unreliable

 

How many times do I have to tell you that reliably producing something meaningful to anyone is unrealistic.

You are not the one with the information if you are asking how many times.

 

LOL...just LOL

 

So to pull this shit together

One part of astrology is astronomical observation seeing what is out there with scientific accuracy

The other part is self observation with scientific accuracy

Here is a self observation from the process

If you are negatively concerned about anything it is because you don't know.

 

Ok well that's one study down. The second study, in regards to lining up the different charts...did the Astrologers meet the people or not before looking at the charts?

 

Why don't you pull the study up and analyze it for us?

 

I was simply expressing a desire to treat them as they'd like to be treated. Just because a figure is fictional doesn't mean he couldn't also be quite real. Indeed fictional characters could be said to be most real, as so many may inspire to become them.

 

LOL again at YOU laughing at ME. Mr. "I'm so delirious I think science should be perfected without regard for human dignity".

 

That is not really the reason why respect is important to science. The argument you make is a moral one.
The reason it is important to science is because you you can't accurately appreciate the value of something you think has no value.
The value of science is the accurate report.

This was supposed to be connected to post 379