Women who take zodiac signs seriously

[usernamedox11]

Noone here is saying astrology is a science or that it is confirmed or anything like that. We are just saying we have found out some quite interesting and accurate things about ourselves through it so it's one to keep an eye on. The way you refute an idea without probably even trying it out for yourself (go check your birth chart, you will be wondering) is just narrow minded. I don't need to ask an astrologist about anything. There are countless websites that predict with astonishing accuracy, really surprising, even details about people I personally know that are not "he is cute and sweet" type of ****.

Oh, believe me, I've checked that stuff out. None of it is compelling. What is narrow minded is not considering how you might have played yourself.

 

[PeasantPlayer]

The "Million Dollar Challenge" is a publicity stunt, intended to be used as a hammer by skeptics against the paranormal. It is not in any way scientific, other than perhaps being scientifically designed to ensure that it can never be won.

Randi deserves credit for coming up with a good publicity stunt, so you have to give him that, but lots of other people caught on quickly and so designed similar stunts: Challenges to prove evolution, the age of the earth or that Jesus is not God ... all equally unscientific and designed to never be won, only used as a hammer.

It has been pointed out that the rules of the million dollar challenge (specifically the required levels of proof) could be used to throw-out any number or cherished scientific beliefs, from the big bang theory to abiogenesis, because it doesn't meet scientific requirements for evidence ...nor is it designed to do so.

http://www.dailygrail.com/features/the-myth-of-james-randis-million-dollar-challenge

 

[PeasantPlayer]

Oh, believe me, I've checked that stuff out. None of it is compelling. What is narrow minded is not considering how you might have played yourself.

You're just not that smart, considering the fact I have had pre-cog dreams and flashes of ESP.....well you rambling is mute to me, I'm done

 

[lizardking82]

Oh, believe me, I've checked that stuff out. None of it is compelling. What is narrow minded is not considering how you might have played yourself.

Again, it is quite mind boggling to find out that a website knows when you break up with your girlfriend, knows for how long you two stay without talking and it just happens to describe all relationships you've had with women to fine details in a way that just cannot be bull**** and coincidence LOL

 

[usernamedox11]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/...andi-debunking-the-king-of-the-debunkers.html

Ouch

That is more of a hit piece. I've actually seen more compelling pieces written on Randi by people in the skeptic community trying to be skeptical of him. One of the guys proved James Randi wasn't fair or completely truthful in his investigation of the Stanford Research Institute.

The thing is, people who have participated in the one million dollar challenge have to agree to the protocols and they have to agree that they are fair. After they go and attempt it and fail, they go whine and call the test unfair (why did you agree to it, then?).

I admire James Randi because I was a bit more gullible before I found him, and I have a much better BS detector now thanks to him.

And seriously, why are you attacking him for being gay? His sexual preferences have nothing to do with any of this.

 

[usernamedox11]

Again, it is quite mind boggling to find out that a website knows when you break up with your girlfriend, knows for how long you two stay without talking and it just happens to describe all relationships you've had with women to fine details in a way that just cannot be bull**** and coincidence LOL

Yes, I've seen and used those websites, and they were wrong in my case.

Here's the thing you have to realize, just because they were right in your case, it doesn't prove anything. Even a broken clock is right twice a day. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence and anecdotal claims don't cut it.

 

[usernamedox11]

You're just not that smart, considering the fact I have had pre-cog dreams and flashes of ESP.....well you rambling is mute to me, I'm done

You're smart, unlike me. You get laid all the time, apparently unlike all of us. And you have supernatural ability, unlike us mere mortals.

Hahaha, you are quite the character.

I've had psychic readings done by what the psychic community would consider the best psychics in the world, including one that did a good job debating Richard Dawkins:

(interesting video)

None of their predictions panned out for me, including predictions from him and a couple others.

 

[usernamedox11]

No point you don't understand how to read a scientific paper

Here is a study though
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/3220564/JSE 291 Oshop.pdf

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Naropa_University



Have anything from some more credible universities?

Even Cracked made fun of them: http://www.cracked.com/article_20312_5-insane-private-schools-you-wont-believe-actually-exist.html

Like I said, there are ZERO credible studies from credible sources out there.

Look, I'm going to be honest. I know you think you're smart and all, but you are unbelievably dense.

 

[ubercat]

Science is performed by human beings so of course it has it's fair share of crappiness. But there's a couple of things I do love about it. If there are a number of conflicting studies a scientist or more often a team of scientists will do a literature review to summarise what we think is true what is not true and directions for future research to plug the gaps. You can see this with tricky areas like research on human diet. There are a number of contradictory recommendations for years and now basic research has plugged enough of the gaps that's very exciting Fields of research opening up like the effect of gut bacteria on the whole body.

 

[ubercat]

I can't get the link but if you Google on these words you'll find an interesting study from the University of Essex on the psychology of why people believe in astrology.

by N Allum - ‎Cited by 9 - ‎Related articles
Losh and colleagues, in a review of 20 years of US survey data, found that many Americans believed in astrology, with polls putting the .

 

[PeasantPlayer]

Science is a mess because of fudged controls, money, politics and corruption. Science has taken a dark turn it has turned in to a religion, they call it Scientism.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/next/b...social&utm_campaign=nova_next&linkId=33521182
https://www.theguardian.com/science...natural-selection-of-bad-science-claims-study

https://qz.com/789489/scientists-ha...end-their-ways-before-they-lose-public-trust/

 

[PeasantPlayer]

http://bigthink.com/neurobonkers/be...ublished-research-findings-are-probably-false

 

[PeasantPlayer]

http://www.abc.net.au/radionational...ckleton-on-scholarly-misconduct-fraud/7660464

 

[PeasantPlayer]

http://retractionwatch.com/
https://phys.org/news/2016-10-scientific-wrong.html
https://qz.com/603356/why-scientific-studies-cant-be-reproduced/
http://healthland.time.com/2010/10/20/a-researchers-claim-90-of-medical-research-is-wrong/
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jerryb...tudies-you-read-about-are-wrong/#4d206a0c4003

 

[ImTheDoubleGreatest!]

No point you don't understand how to read a scientific paper

Here is a study though
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/3220564/JSE 291 Oshop.pdf

Correlation does not equal causation. Read the book, 'Outliers' by Malcolm Gladwell, he explains how being born in the right place at the right time matters, but not because of the position of the sun relative to our point of view during the time of the year. That's hogwash.

 

[ubercat]

OK there's no point debating a conspiracy theorist. Any evidence you come up with will just be labeled part of the conspiracy. The Guardian article was quite nice. However the central point was that many results reported could not be replicated. Yeah of course academic pressure leads to some dodgy studies being published. A classic was the room temperature cold fusion claims of 10 years ago. However look at the replicated part. The results are checked by other studies. I used to buy new scientist which is a pop science magazine. Even a relatively lightweight publication like that would publish errors and retractions in other words they are actually checking. I very much doubt that peer review is big in the astrology community.

 

[PeasantPlayer]

Correlation does not equal causation

That applies to all areas and research of science, hence the reason why I posted all those articles you failed to read, I'm assuming

 

[PeasantPlayer]

OK there's no point debating a conspiracy theorist. Any evidence you come up with will just be labeled part of the conspiracy. The Guardian article was quite nice. However the central point was that many results reported could not be replicated. Yeah of course academic pressure leads to some dodgy studies being published. A classic was the room temperature cold fusion claims of 10 years ago. However look at the replicated part. The results are checked by other studies. I used to buy new scientist which is a pop science magazine. Even a relatively lightweight publication like that would publish errors and retractions in other words they are actually checking. I very much doubt that peer review is big in the astrology community

Who's a conspiracy theorist? What does that term even mean? I prefer critical thinker. Not everything is a conspiracy theory.

No one said science doesn't report or retract studies, the fact is people in the industry have come out and will continue to come out about scientific studies not being repeatable. Not only due to human error, fudging statistics, cognitive biases, bribery, poor controls, and grants. Most research can't be replicated, a head doctor believes it ups to 90 percent, that means a lot

 

[PeasantPlayer]

http://www.nature.com/news/1-500-scientists-lift-the-lid-on-reproducibility-1.19970

1,500 scientists, not layman like you guys blowing the lid wide open on the reproducibility crisis

And let's keep in mind not all scientists are "smart" Its like sports, you have you bad ones, average, good and great. Sad thing is there is no great ones from this era

 

[ubercat]

Hmm that s certainly not true in Melbourne. We do have great scientists in the medical field. Recent Discovery is included bionic eyes the ability to attach Discovery is included bionic eyes the ability to attach nerves to computer chips, new treatments for Alzheimer's and the most common cancers. Tell all the people whose lives and quality of life this will save that it isn't great.