Skip to main content

At Mother Jones, Chris Mooney writes More and More Americans Think Astrology Is Science:

"I believe in a lot of astrology." So commented pop megastar Katy Perry in a recent GQ interview. She also said she sees everything through a "spiritual lens"…and that she believes in aliens.

According to data from the National Science Foundation's just-released 2014 Science and Engineering Indicators study, Americans are moving in Perry's direction. In particular, the NSF reports that the percentage of Americans who think astrology is "not at all scientific" declined from 62 percent in 2010 to just 55 percent in 2012 (the last year for which data is available). As a result, NSF reports that Americans are apparently less skeptical of astrology than they have been at any time since 1983.

Astrology poll
The data on Americans' astrological beliefs are compiled by NSF but come from a variety of sources; since 2006 they have come from the General Social Survey. Over the years, the GSS and other surveys have asked Americans a recurring question: "Would you say that astrology is very scientific, sort of scientific, or not at all scientific?"

In response, a substantial minority of Americans, ranging from 31 to 45 percent depending on the year, say consider astrology either "very scientific" or "sort of scientific." That's bad enough—the NSF report compares it with China, where 92 percent of the public does not believe in horoscopes—but the new evidence suggests we are also moving in the wrong direction. Indeed, the percentage of Americans who say astrology is scientifically bunk has been declining ever since a high point for astrology skepticism in 2004, when it hit 66 percent. [...]


Blast from the Past. At Daily Kos on this date in 2013Kochsman Marco Rubio likely to offer same old, same old energy ideas in State of the Union response:

Rebecca Leber at Think Progress points out that Sen. Marco Rubio may perhaps include something about the need for more dirty energy in the official Republican response to President Obama's State of the Union address tonight.

It certainly would be no surprise given that Rubio is one of the five senators who, for his votes, received an A+ last year from Americans for Prosperity, the advocacy group founded and funded by the brothers Koch—David and Charles—to ensure, among other things, that nothing substantive on climate change or green energy manages to emerge from the Senate or the House.

Rubio himself got a career total of $32,200 from Koch Industries, $353,891 from the Koch-connected Club for Growth and $252,134 from the oil and gas industries.
While he isn't as aggressive a climate-change denier as, say, Sen. James "It's a hoax" Inhofe, Rubio does still deny in his smarmy way as can seen in this exchange hosted by Buzzfeed just a week ago:

Ben Smith: Do you see global warming as a threat to Florida?
Rubio: The climate is always changing, that’s not the question. The question is if man made activity is what’s contributing the most to it. I know people said there’s a significant scientific consensus on that issue, but I’ve actually seen reasonable debate on that principle.

Tweet of the Day:

Because nothing says "war on the rich" like forcing food pantries & soup kitchens to turn away hungry people. http://t.co/...
@billmon1



On today's Kagro in the Morning show, Chris Christie's gang faces a new round of subpoenas, including ones aimed at finding out whether the man himself took a helicopter flyover of the Fort Lee traffic jams. Greg Dworkin talks flu (specifically mine) plus the looming "constitutional crisis" Christie may be provoking. House Republicans appear to be crumbling on the debt ceiling, and the employer mandate is delayed again. Armando joined in as well, and we talk about poor Bob Costas' eyebola virus, the Michael Sam story, and the latest Christie twists. Adding to Christie's troubles, the WaPo's look at his record of, let's say, stretching ethical boundaries.


High Impact Posts. Top Comments. Overnight News Digest.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Bronx River Triptych (34+ / 0-)

    If anyone is interested it the precise location or camera details, click on the photo and read the text.  

    Bronx River Triptych

    Bronx River Triptych

    Bronx River Triptych

    The only freshwater river in New York City is one excellent example of citizen conservation and how far people power can go. At this disgusting industrial waste dump of my youth, the abandoned autos and factory equipment have been replaced by canoes and kayaks in the summer. When I was young, not even a Mallard would be caught dead in this river. Now just about every east coast water bird can be found in this pristine New York City sanctuary and after a two hundred year absence, this is the part of the river that is once again populated by beaver.

  •  997,367 registered users on dKos now. (13+ / 0-)

    Here are the 10 newest registered users on dKos.  Hope to see their comments and diaries here soon!  (If they're not spammers.)

    filexdavid (user #997,358: spammer)
    Gary Lewis Maynard
    awaverr (user #997,360: spammer)
    Susan WS
    newsman47
    Citizens United
    optictopic
    Fred Stawitz
    server 891011 (user #997,366: already banned)
    johnrtownsend


    And since our society is obsessed with numbers that end in a lot of zeros as milestones, here's a special shoutout to users:
    #996,700: lorreinferre (already banned)
    #996,800: kt17 (already banned)
    #996,900: Ctipartydk (spammer)
    #997,000: Joanna VanRaaphorst
    #997,100: daniela67 (spammer)
    #997,200: treker46
    #997,300: SPGarrison (already banned)

    We've added 673 more users in the last five days.  We're no longer being flooded with all those fake users, though it seems there's been a recent rash of increase in spammers.


    And for your Diary Rescue music pleasure, here's "Everything Is Awesome" from The LEGO Movie, as performed by Tegan and Sara with The Lonely Island.

  •  Careful (11+ / 0-)

    99% of the people who believe in astrology are flakey liberal women over 40. Are you sure this is where you want to go?

  •  I hate it when this happens (18+ / 0-)

    :)

    Suicide Bomber Instructor Blows Up Suicide Bombers-In-Training:

    The commander of an Iraqi militant group accidentally killed 22 members of his unit Monday who were training to become suicide bombers after he conducted a demonstration with live explosives, the New York Times reported

    http://talkingpointsmemo.com/...

    “I would like to get rid of the homophobes, sexists, and racists in our audience. I know they're out there and it really bothers me.” ― Kurt Cobain

    by Jeff Y on Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 08:39:07 PM PST

  •  Astrology Poll Requires a Control (14+ / 0-)

    There needs to be consistent polling on the DEFINITION of astrology to weed out those who confuse it with astronomy.

    I've mingled among the rich and dirt poor all my life, and numerous minorities since I was a teen. Don't recall large numbers of people talking about stars and planetary alignments favoring or opposing actions they were contemplating. Definitely some; never many.

    Maybe a hundred times as many crediting The Lord for everything from choice of spouse, promotion, election of a local or national pol, sports win, whatever.

    We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

    by Gooserock on Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 08:40:23 PM PST

  •  I think this astrology thing correlates with (7+ / 0-)

    …climate denial.

    Plus, looking at the chart -- I believe Pluto was in retrograde in 2005, hence the spike of dour skepticism.


    ___________
    See my latest Nastyass Diary

    by Pluto on Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 08:43:09 PM PST

    •  I find that extremely unlikely (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Pluto, fenway49

      I'm pretty sure astrology belief correlates with New Age woo, not fundamentalist Protestantism.

      "Let’s just move on, treat everybody with firmness, fairness, dignity, compassion and respect. Let’s be Marines." - Sgt. Maj Michael Barrett on DADT repeal

      by kyril on Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 09:47:08 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  And a lot of medical woo like homeopathic (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Ajipon, grover, JeffW

      And neurology and chiropractic 'medicine' (what works there will be done by any physical therapist) and acupuncture, faith healing, herbal remedies and all sorts of 'alternative medicine' which has no scientific data to back it up. They may have their own insular 'peer review' studies but when looked at in the real world there is little to no value to any of it and in fact much of it is dangerous. If nothing else, it's dangerous in it's effectiveness. It leaves desperate people high and dry and sometimes kills or maims them outright.

      We on the left seem susceptible to some of this new age nonsense as much as conservatives are unscientific when it comes to climate or evolution. America is largely a scientifically illiterate country.

    •  There's a relationship (0+ / 0-)

      Astrology is just another tool to dumb the public down, to make them capable of believing whatever crap they're trying to sell this month. Remember the "Sylvia the Soothsayer" character in "Network"?

  •  On the same day an Arizona senate committee (11+ / 0-)

    votes to nullify federal gun laws, news broke that former AZ congresswoman Gabby Giffords will write a book about gun control, only to be greeted with comments like these on Breitbart:

    How about a book on how to duck.
    Actually Mark Kelly plans to write a book about gun control and capitalizing on his semi-braindead wife Gabby Giffords.
    Oh cry me a river. We all have really tough things to get thru in life.
    And worse .... sick sick sick.

    stay together / learn the flowers / go light - Gary Snyder

    by Mother Mags on Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 08:43:26 PM PST

  •  Us Tauruses (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Aunt Pat, thanatokephaloides

    are really earthy folk. We believe in science because anything else is too airy, too spacey.

    John Muir was a Taurus. Just sayin'. Just so you know.

  •  Astrology is not science. (7+ / 0-)

    But, it can be fun and entertaining. I might post a weekend horoscope later this week and see what kind of response it gets.

  •  Chris Christie's growing scandal (4+ / 0-)

    Steve Kornacki, filling in for Chris Hayes, talked with Paul Butler, New Jersey state sen. Loretta Weinberg (D), Brian Murphy, and Lynn Sweet.

    Rachel talked with Darryl Isherwood about the latest subpoenas.

    Lawrence talked with David Corn, Joy Reid, and Shawn Boburg.

  •  Never understood the worth of "belief" polls. (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JML9999, JeffW, LinSea, Jeff Y

    Either check something out or don't. Belief is merely  an opinion based on no, or miniscule, knowledge.

    After 65 years, the ONLY thing I know absolutely and positively about life is that the check is SUPPOSED to be in the mail. That's it. Nothing else. PERIOD.

    by franklyn on Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 08:48:50 PM PST

  •  Congress and the debt ceiling (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JML9999, Jeff Y, greenbird

    Steve talked with Evan McMorris-Santoro and Rep. Dan Kildee (D-MI) about the debt ceiling being raised.

    Rachel talked with John Stanton about it.

    Lawrence talked with Ezra Klein.

    Ed talked with Rep. John Larson (D-CT) about the debt ceiling, and with Dr. Corey Hebert about the latest on Obamacare.

  •  Hillary in the news again. (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JML9999, Aunt Pat, Jeff Y, greenbird

    Lawrence talked about the new Hillary book with its authors, Jonathan Allen and Amie Parnes.

    Ed talked about it with Joy Reid and Connie Schultz.

  •  Other assorted MSNBC clips (6+ / 0-)

    Steve looked at Sen. Rand Paul's (R-KY) conundrum in endorsing Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) over a Tea Party challenger.

    Rachel looked at our energy infrastructure as West Virginia suffers ANOTHER coal waste spill.

    Lawrence carefully and slowly explained the IRS non-scandal to Bill O'Reilly, since O'Reilly is being a dumbfuck again about it.

    Ed talked about Michael Sam coming out with Donte Stallworth.

  •  I finally got to the end of the internet today (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Aunt Pat, glb3

    And this is what I found:
    .

    “I would like to get rid of the homophobes, sexists, and racists in our audience. I know they're out there and it really bothers me.” ― Kurt Cobain

    by Jeff Y on Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 09:01:45 PM PST

  •  Believes in aliens? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Jeff Y

    Hell, she married one!

    To put the torture behind us is, inevitably, to put it in front of us.

    by UntimelyRippd on Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 09:06:22 PM PST

  •  Rick Stengel (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Jeff Y, greenbird, Ishmaelbychoice

    Lawrence O'Donnell informed us on tonight's show in one of the quickie segments they don't post online that former TIME managing editor Rick Stengel has been confirmed by the U.S. Senate today to become the Undersecretary of State for Public Diplomacy.

    Stengel, who was nominated for the post late last year, was confirmed by the Senate in a 90-to-8 vote. The eight senators who voted against his nomination were Republicans John McCain, David Vitter, Richard Shelby, Pat Roberts, James Risch, Mike Lee, Jim Inhofe, and Mike Crapo.

    Stengel, 58, will now be responsible for leading “America’s public diplomacy outreach, which includes communications with international audiences, cultural programming, academic grants, educational exchanges, international visitor programs, and U.S. Government efforts to confront ideological support for terrorism,” according to the State Department’s website.

    Lawrence wondered why McCain didn't want someone at the State Department to help combat ideological support for terrorism, as McCain and the 7 others never bothered to give any statement on why they opposed Stengel's nomination.  I mean, when both Bernie Sanders AND Rand Paul can agree on something...!!!  (FYI, Tom Coburn and Bob Corker were the two that missed the vote.)
  •  Finally. (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Gooserock, JeffW, LinSea, Jeff Y, greenbird

    Immigration groups turn to anger

    Immigration reform advocates are done playing nice with House Republicans.

    After holding their fire for years at the urging of the Obama administration, several immigration reform groups now plan to unleash their anger at the right.

    A new, more aggressive campaign kicks off Tuesday, when these groups say they will begin confronting Republican lawmakers at public appearances, congressional hearings and events back in home districts. The goal: Shame Republicans in swing districts into taking up the issue — or make them pay at the ballot box in November.

    It’s unclear if the strategy will truly damage Republicans with their constituents. Or worse, whether it might backfire and oust some of the movement’s best potential allies across the aisle.

    About damn time.  Of course, if you scroll down to read the comments section of that Politico piece... wow.  It's like the white supremacists at Stormfront all migrated over there.  Ugh, yuck, vomit.
    •  The problem is the Republican gerrymander (0+ / 0-)

      House Republicans don't have to worry about any blowback because most of their gerrymandered districts don't have large Latino (or Democrats in general) populations. The people who show up at their townhalls are angry old, racist Teabaggers.

      Nothing is going to change until Democrats can figure out a way to break up the 2010 Republican redistricting clusterfuck.

      “I would like to get rid of the homophobes, sexists, and racists in our audience. I know they're out there and it really bothers me.” ― Kurt Cobain

      by Jeff Y on Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 09:41:55 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  I do not believe in astrology (8+ / 0-)

    But I do offer this one possible scientific justification for some of its components.
    For tens of thousands of years, mankind had only the stars to serve as a calendar.  It is entirely possible that there are patterns and cycles in life or in the pulses earth's environment that modern man is blind to, but that early man could correlate to the complex patterns of the stars, much in the same way that modern medicine has superseded valid but now forgotten 'natural' cures

    •  Seasonal Affective Disorder for One nt (5+ / 0-)

      We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

      by Gooserock on Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 09:22:36 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  likewise alchemy and chemistry (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      terrypinder, cordgrass
      For tens of thousands of years, mankind had only the stars to serve as a calendar.  It is entirely possible that there are patterns and cycles in life or in the pulses earth's environment that modern man is blind to, but that early man could correlate to the complex patterns of the stars, much in the same way that modern medicine has superseded valid but now forgotten 'natural' cures
      A much similar idea can be applied to alchemy and chemistry. Scientific chemistry was impossible until Mendeleev. Scientists kept trying to systematize chemistry, but until Dmitri Mendeleev perfected the Periodic Table starting in 1868, there was still a considerable degree of "art" in chemistry.

      "It's high time (and then some) that we put an end to the exceptionalistic nonsense floating around in our culture and face the fact that either the economy works for all, or it doesn't work AT all." -- Sean McCullough (DailyKos user thanatokephaloides)

      by thanatokephaloides on Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 10:32:05 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Natural cures (0+ / 0-)

      that have been proven to work become modern medicine.

  •  Having actually STUDIED astrology for 34 years, (8+ / 0-)

    and having observed and witnessed it's effects, I don't believe in it; I am convinced of it.

    After 65 years, the ONLY thing I know absolutely and positively about life is that the check is SUPPOSED to be in the mail. That's it. Nothing else. PERIOD.

    by franklyn on Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 09:30:35 PM PST

  •  Astronomy is not science (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Gooserock, Ajipon

    I remember back in the early 70's when  I was attending college. I had signed up for an Astrology class and it was packed. The professor came in and asked the class if they were here to learn about horoscopes or to learn about celestial bodies and how they formed. Many were confused. So he added if you want to read about horoscopes go to the Student Union and read the paper. You will find them next to Ann Lander's column. Nearly half the class left.
    This might be the problem today if you substituted horoscope for Astronomy more people would say it is not a science.

  •  My favorite take on Astrology (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JeffW, 714day, Ajipon, terrypinder

    Can be found on the best page in the universe:

    Astrology is bullshit. Astrology is bullshit. Astrology is bullshit.

    I once got into a pretty heated argument with a friend's girlfriend at a party I was hosting. She was raving to anyone and everyone about astrology--unbidden. I was letting it go until she uttered the phrase, "astrology is a science."

    Whoa. Nope, not gonna let that slide. So I asked her to tell me the scientific theory of Astrology.

    "Well, there are stars and celestial bodies that move..."

    "Yeah, that's ASTRONOMY."

    She couldn't come up with any coherent justification for calling it science, and she knew she couldn't, so she just huffed: "whatever, I know I'm right." Which is essentially what Ken Ham asserted in his debate with Bill Nye in regards to his Creationist views.

    I think my favorite line as it pertains to astrology is to note just how similar it is to racism. After all, both are intent on making unfounded and prejudicial conclusions based on the circumstances of one's birth...

    •  Bullshit x 3 is certainly eloquent, I admit, (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      librarisingnsf

      but as far as astrology being without scientific basis, I invite you to read up on the experiments of the French statistician, Michael Gauquelin.

      After 65 years, the ONLY thing I know absolutely and positively about life is that the check is SUPPOSED to be in the mail. That's it. Nothing else. PERIOD.

      by franklyn on Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 09:47:18 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  The Mars effect, yes. (4+ / 0-)

        I've read of it. Gauquelin's methods were poor and have been roundly criticized from many directions. There was a huge amount of selection bias in his samples. His results have not been replicated, and that's because he pretty much ignored those who didn't meet his desired outcome.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/...

        Any better examples?

        •  You've already provided an example of (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          librarisingnsf

          cherry-picking the reaction. He is largely respected for his services in this area.
          Don't take my word or his, folks. This isn't politics. It's a search for truth. Look around.

          After 65 years, the ONLY thing I know absolutely and positively about life is that the check is SUPPOSED to be in the mail. That's it. Nothing else. PERIOD.

          by franklyn on Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 10:02:54 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Largely respected by whom? (6+ / 0-)

            Astrologers? Gauquelin wasn't a statistician or a scientist. He was a psychologist who was a strong pro-Astrology partisan. His methods were not statistically sound and have been consistently refuted.

            Find me a non-biased source that accepts his methods and results, such as a scientific journal, and we'll talk. Otherwise, any claim that his 60+ year old study based on incredibly flawed methods with cherry-picked samples is somehow "scientific" is as empty as those of any Creationist or homeopath.

            •  He was a skeptic. That's why he did it. (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              fenway49, librarisingnsf

              Non-biased depends on which end you're standing when the shit is flung.
              Incidentally, don't ask me to find you anything. I don't work for you.

              After 65 years, the ONLY thing I know absolutely and positively about life is that the check is SUPPOSED to be in the mail. That's it. Nothing else. PERIOD.

              by franklyn on Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 10:36:12 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  How was he a skeptic? He called himself (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                terrypinder, miked789, JeffW

                a "neo-Astrologer." That doesn't connote skepticism to me. Do you have anything to back that up?

                And no, proper use of statistics in science eliminates bias. Claiming that any refutation of his methodological shortcomings must be coming from an equal state of bias is not a sound argument at all. It's just dismissive hand-waiving to get around the uncomfortable truth that his claims do not hold up to scrutiny.

                As for "not working for me," you're basically asking me to do your work for you. If you weren't interested in providing actual sources for your claims, you shouldn't have bothered responding to my post at all. It takes a particular level of sanctimony to make bold assertions of fact and then balk when someone asks for you to back them up.

                •  As you pointed out, his study was 60+ years ago. (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  fenway49, librarisingnsf

                  Would Uranus on the ascendant be the same now as it was when Neptune was in Libra as opposed to Pisces as it is now?
                  That's astrology. It is the continuous record of change, moment by moment, of existence. Each moment leading inexorably to the next. Like a second-hand. Each moment somewhat the same, but definitively different.
                  I realize you haven't a clue as to what I'm talking about. I could wander into a physics class and be asleep inside of a couple of minutes.  But I wouldn't embarrass myself by arguing, 'cause I don't know squat.
                  As for Gauguelin, you presented Wiki, which I too love, But it is not the be all and end all. Yes, there were those that disagreed with him, but, those who agreed, also. Each had their reasons. Investigation on your own is required.

                  After 65 years, the ONLY thing I know absolutely and positively about life is that the check is SUPPOSED to be in the mail. That's it. Nothing else. PERIOD.

                  by franklyn on Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 11:13:39 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I very much (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    JeffW

                    doubt you have any idea what your talking about.

                    Astrology is bullshit.
                    Astrology is bullshit.
                    Astrology is bullshit.

                    I concur thrice.

                    Watching someone trying to prove otherwise is just as painful as watching someone trying to prove vaccines cause autism, homeopathy works, or trickle down theory works.

                  •  Thank you for proving my point. (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    JeffW
                    That's astrology. It is the continuous record of change, moment by moment, of existence. Each moment leading inexorably to the next. Like a second-hand. Each moment somewhat the same, but definitively different.
                    It's nonsensical, vague assertions like this that prove Astrology is a bunch of nonsense. I could say the same thing about almost anything. But the leap to having a record of planetary movements to claiming they have some effect on our personality, lives, well-being, etc. is completely unsupported fiction.

                    Astrology is hand-waiving woo that takes a select number of facts, applies unsupported metaphysical nonsense to them and then makes unjustified conclusions. That is the hallmark of any pseudoscience. It is ridiculously unscientific, which is why we don't see any universities with an Astrology department, do we?

                    It's ironic you accuse me of "not having a clue" about Astrology, as I never claimed I did. But you were the one who came here and claimed that there was a scientific basis for it, which shows you don't have a clue as to what science is. Or statistics, if you think Gauguelin's methods were sound. You haven't provided any evidence that those who agreed with him are in any way relevant scientific or statistical experts who actually thoroughly examined his work. You can disparage the Wiki article all you like, but it is sourced, and the sources show that no one has ever been able to validate/replicate his results. If you knew anything about science, you would know that a single study doesn't mean anything if it can't be replicated with the same results.

                    The only people who believe Guaguelin's work proved Astrology worked are--surprise, surprise--astrology lovers. That's the only place where you see his work cited as proof of anything. Otherwise, real scientists who investigated his claim showed there was nothing there, and they also showed his methods were piss-poor. I repeat: find me a scientific journal that corroborates what Gauguelin claimed, and we'll talk. Until then, you're just wasting my time with your dismissive, unsupported nonsense.

                    •  I suggest that you read this, and, yes, (0+ / 0-)

                      it is from an astrology site. It is up to you.

                      "That we can now think of no mechanism for astrology is relevant but unconvincing. No mechanism was known, for example, for continental drift when it was proposed by Wegener. Nevertheless, we see that Wegener was right, and those who objected on the grounds of unavailable mechanism were wrong.”

                      Carl Sagan, astronomer, astrophysicist, author, cosmologist, broadcaster and sceptical of astrology.

                      Lest you think I'm one-sided, the author states:
                      Is astrology a science?
                      The short answer is no. However, much depends on your definition of science. If you are looking for laws, objectivity and predictability, then science is really confined to physics, chemistry and molecular biology. The scientific part of astrology: tidal, seismic and meteorlogical correlations are an ancient and important part of astrology, but not enough to classify astrology as a hard science.
                      It is a long, detailed article with links and footnotes galore from everyside. Assuming one is interested in everyside.

                       

                      After 65 years, the ONLY thing I know absolutely and positively about life is that the check is SUPPOSED to be in the mail. That's it. Nothing else. PERIOD.

                      by franklyn on Wed Feb 12, 2014 at 11:45:44 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  My bad. Here is the link: (0+ / 0-)

                        After 65 years, the ONLY thing I know absolutely and positively about life is that the check is SUPPOSED to be in the mail. That's it. Nothing else. PERIOD.

                        by franklyn on Wed Feb 12, 2014 at 11:47:39 AM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                      •  As I thought. (0+ / 0-)

                        Not science. Admitted to, right there. Oh yes, there is an attempt to lend it undue legitimacy with this:

                        If you are looking for laws, objectivity and predictability, then science is really confined to physics, chemistry and molecular biology.
                        Except that's not remotely true. Cosmology? Astronomy? All biology outside of the molecular kind? Those are definitely real sciences based on objectivity, empiricism and predictability. This is precisely why Astrology advocates can be disregarded: trying to redefine science to apply to the woo they peddle.

                        You can't just claim"tidal, seismic and meteorlogical [sic] correlations" and expect that to suffice for any rational person. First off, we must reiterate the obvious that correlation does not equal causation. Asserting such betrays such a fundamental lack of scientific literacy that it boggles the mind.

                        I will take your complete failure to produce a reputable scientific source that supports the assertions of Astrology as a concession that you know it's unsupported hokum, even if you can't admit it.

                        I'll as again: if Astrology had any sort of factual basis, why aren't there courses in university science departments about it? Why don't capitalist businesses have Astrology departments to assist them in making gobs of cash (whereas they do employ a massive amount of empirical, scientific evidence to do so)?

                        If Astrology had any merit whatsoever, we'd see it normalized as a scientific subject by now, considering it has been around for thousands and thousands of years. The fact that it is still regarded--overwhelmingly--as utter tosh by actual scientists tells you all you really need to know.

                        •  Again. (0+ / 0-)
                          Why don't capitalist businesses have Astrology departments to assist them in making gobs of cash (whereas they do employ a massive amount of empirical, scientific evidence to do so)?
                          Check with Wall Street. This one is absolutely, undeniably truth.
                          And, for God's sake, get off your lazy ass and look it up for yourself.

                          I've gone out of my way to try to be courteous. If you want to play the dozens, son, I'm warning you, you're fighting a nuclear war with slings and arrows.
                          Come on back if you're dying for, "When the hell am I gonna learn to shut my fuckin' mouth?"

                          After 65 years, the ONLY thing I know absolutely and positively about life is that the check is SUPPOSED to be in the mail. That's it. Nothing else. PERIOD.

                          by franklyn on Wed Feb 12, 2014 at 11:49:05 PM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  LOL oh please. (0+ / 0-)

                            Yes, I'm sure in all of your mightiness, you can do what no one in human history has been able to do: show Astrology has scientific merit. I like how you selectively ignore the rest of my post and focus on the one item you think is true. OK, prove it: show me Fortune 500 companies that rely on astrology for their business decisions, and show me (more importantly) that it's a common enough practice to be outside the overwhelming norm. Oh, and I'm not talking individual traders, as anyone can bring their personal beliefs into their business world, sure. I'm talking about as a matter of company policy. And there's the whole question of, "does it actually work better than normal?"

                            I love how you accuse me of laziness, which is just more hypocrisy from you. You're the one making a positive assertion as to the truth of Astrology, the onus is on you to back up your claims. Saying "look it up" is not different than Ken Ham's "it's in this book!" tactic in the debate with Bill Nye. It's hand-waiving, lazy and intellectually dishonest. I am not going to do your work for you.

                            Ok, so bring it on. Provide me those scientific journals and University Astrology departments and Wall Street firm policies all backing up your claims. I can't wait for you to pepper me with links to astrology sites written by astrology nuts. Or, better yet, links to real articles that don't actually support your claims.

    •  While astronomy is bullshit, (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      thanatokephaloides, terrypinder

      linking to that sexist douchebag isn't a great idea either.

      "Let’s just move on, treat everybody with firmness, fairness, dignity, compassion and respect. Let’s be Marines." - Sgt. Maj Michael Barrett on DADT repeal

      by kyril on Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 10:05:42 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Hey, I'm not endorsing his views on all (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        thanatokephaloides, terrypinder

        subjects.

        Still, when you actually read those, I am thinking you're not picking up on a pretty strong element of Colbertesque character satire going on:

        I don't understand this whole gun control thing. I mean, if guns were suddenly banned, then people would start killing each other with chainsaws and sand blasters. At least that's what I'd use (a sand blaster). Or a disk grinder. Doesn't anybody care about the criminals anymore? What are they going to rob with? They have it hard enough as it is, they don't need some stupid hag making it harder to buy guns.

        Guns make everything better. Take a car for example: normally it's stupid. Add some guns to the roof and you have a badass machine. Someone cuts you off? No problem--blow them the hell off the road. If they don't like it, tell them tough-shit. It's a perfect plan. I call it the "get the hell out of my way" plan. It'll never happen if that agenda-pushing bitch Rosie gets her way.

        Where the hell is the feminist movement today? I looked through some feminist books at the library, and almost every one of them bitched about male patriarchy. Oppression this and equal rights that. BORING. Where's the violence? Nobody wants to read about a single mom trying to raise a kid and keep a job. People want to read about explosions, monsters, and exploding monsters.
        I'm preeeeetty sure these were not written as serious complaints...
      •  Hhhhmmmm.... (0+ / 0-)

        When they say: Nothing's wrong.
        What they mean: Pack your bags, because you're going on a one-way guilt trip.

        "Onward through the fog!" - Oat Willie

        by rocksout on Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 10:57:39 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Ignorance is getting stronger, and the Rethugs (4+ / 0-)

    are leading the way. One would think, after the 2012 non event, that most would realize astrology is silly. But I wonder if they are confusing astrology with astronomy, (not that it makes any difference to the 6,000 year old earth crowd, who would supresss almost all knowledge.)

    May you live in interesting times--Chinese curse

    by oldcrow on Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 09:37:30 PM PST

    •  No. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      thanatokephaloides

      Our largely constitutionally-protected owners are leading the way.

      The Republicans are merely the reality party: they serve the reality of what our system actually is.

      We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

      by Gooserock on Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 10:10:40 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Astrology (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      librarisingnsf

      has nothing at all to do with the 2012 non-event, which was based on a misinterpretation of the Mayan calendar.

      I can't imagine the fundamentalist 6,000-year-old earth crowd are the ones showing interest in astrology. Most of them think it's from Satan.

      “Republicans...think American standard of living is a fine thing--so long as it doesn't spread to all the people... And they admire of Government of the United States so much that they would like to buy it.” Harry S. Truman

      by fenway49 on Wed Feb 12, 2014 at 05:16:51 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Is Pseudoscience a kind of Science? (0+ / 0-)

    What's next?

    Everything Right is Wrong Again - TMBG (lyrics)

    by GreenPA on Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 09:42:00 PM PST

  •  Nothing a good reading can't fix. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    geez53, thanatokephaloides
    Americans who think astrology is "not at all scientific" declined


    I’m not a big fan of vegetable gardens. Like my chickens, I prefer my salads to be cage free.

    by glb3 on Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 09:54:07 PM PST

  •  It makes me wonder (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    thanatokephaloides

    whether more Americans are somehow in need of other explanations outside the mundane but very real reality of life in America.

    'A civilization flourishes when people plant trees under whose shade they will never sit' Greek Proverb

    by janis b on Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 09:59:58 PM PST

    •  What Determines "Need?" (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      janis b, thanatokephaloides

      The perspective of an Enlightenment democracy? The perspective of a New Deal through Great Society social justice? Or the Neoliberal perspective in which society and its interest are entirely equated to those of its few owners?

      We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

      by Gooserock on Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 10:13:07 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  happy year of the horse's ass (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    thanatokephaloides, terrypinder
    In response, a substantial minority of Americans, ranging from 31 to 45 percent depending on the year, say consider astrology either "very scientific" or "sort of scientific." That's bad enough—the NSF report compares it with China, where 92 percent of the public does not believe in horoscopes—but the new evidence suggests we are also moving in the wrong direction

    Warning - some snark may be above‽ (-9.50; -7.03)‽ eState4Column5©2013 "I’m not the strapping young Muslim socialist that I used to be" - Barack Obama 04/27/2013 (@eState4Column5).

    by annieli on Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 10:05:07 PM PST

  •  Well of course astrology is bunk ....... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    thanatokephaloides

    I read it in my Tarot cards, and backed it up with my shaman throwing bones. Used voodoo dolls for the control.

    All very scientific and stuff.

    ;}

    21st Century America: The distracted, superficial perception of a virtual reality. Gettov Milawn

    by geez53 on Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 10:08:17 PM PST

  •  Astrology and most psychology are both crap (3+ / 0-)

    and they are the same kind of crap. Personality theory works much like astrological signs: "Big 5" personality "types" and astrological signs are both so vaguely defined that they might apply to anybody. Projection and imagination do the rest of the work of getting people to believe.

    It's true that psychology is a pseudoscience: it misapplies statistical methodology to garbage "data" that are not actually measurements of anything.  Astrology is not even a pseudoscience -- it is just a traditional system of beliefs.

    •  psychology (0+ / 0-)
      It's true that psychology is a pseudoscience: it misapplies statistical methodology to garbage "data" that are not actually measurements of anything.
      I've also heard it stated slightly differently: "Psychology is a science precisely because it admits that it isn't."

      WTF??!!??

      :-)

      "It's high time (and then some) that we put an end to the exceptionalistic nonsense floating around in our culture and face the fact that either the economy works for all, or it doesn't work AT all." -- Sean McCullough (DailyKos user thanatokephaloides)

      by thanatokephaloides on Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 10:44:42 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  It's all a matter of perspective (3+ / 0-)

    As in "Mercury in retrograde" is only valid if you're on Earth looking at Mercury......if you're on Mercury looking at Earth, Earth will appear to be going backwards.  Oh, right, it has been doing that lately hasn't it?

    ~Arianna_Editrix-- I willingly accept Cassandra’s fate, To speak the truth, altho’ believ’d too late

    by Arianna Editrix on Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 10:15:20 PM PST

  •  It's about as close to science as they're ever (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    thanatokephaloides

    going to get, as I am reminded by a superstitious fundamentalist relative who proudly announced to me that she doesn't want to know anything she doesn't already know.

    Ted Cruz president? Pardon my Vietnamese, but Ngo Pho King Way.

    by ZedMont on Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 10:20:34 PM PST

  •  oh ye ching ... (0+ / 0-)

    i mean, ye GODS !!

    (sneak the i ching in while they're not looking.)

    TRAILHEAD of accountability for Bush-2 Crimes? -- Addington's Perpwalk.

    by greenbird on Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 10:51:42 PM PST

  •  katy (0+ / 0-)

    For the record, I'm pretty sure Katy's statement about her belief in astrology has nothing to do with her understanding of science, whatever that might be, and astrology has always been a best-seller amongst women, not just American, but world-wide.  In my own experience, aside from religious folk, there's always been a certain amount of general interest in astrology, give it a try in party conversation and you'll see, probably more due to the personality aspects of it, rather than any actual belief in the stars.

    free the information

    by freelixir on Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 10:57:07 PM PST

  •  *SIGH* (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    atana
    More and More Americans Think Astrology Is Science.
    At the rate we're going, it isn't going to be long before a large part of the population is saying "Go away! 'baitin!" and watering plants with Brawndo...

    "There was no such thing as a "wealthy" hunter-gatherer. It is the creation of human society that has allowed the wealthy to become wealthy. As such, they have an obligation to pay a bit more to sustain that society than the not-so-wealthy." - Me

    by Darth Stateworker on Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 10:57:08 PM PST

  •  isn't Astrology based on observable phenomena ? (0+ / 0-)

    True that Astrology gives unscientific (and I would add somewhat preposterous) meaning to those phenomena. But maybe people label it somewhat scientific because it is based in astronomy- even though that basis gives false meaning to natural phenomena

  •  Astrology is bunk (0+ / 0-)

    Jesus told me so.

    “He talks a lot and he's not very bright. And that's a combination I like in Republicans.” James Carville

    by Mokislab on Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 11:10:41 PM PST

  •  Astrology (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    terrypinder

    The stars have move since your stupid "charts" were made, the universe is not static, nor does it grant wishes.

    Study astronomy instead.

    I would tell you the only word in the English language that has all the vowels in order but, that would be facetious.

    by roninkai on Wed Feb 12, 2014 at 12:14:55 AM PST

  •  Astrology is not a science (0+ / 0-)

    but it's pretty uncanny at times. The way the sun signs interact, or don't, is pretty apt. Anyway I find it amusing and sometimes telling. Cancers and I don't gel well, nor Scorpios. I have the "Secret Language of Birthdays" book and it is quite interesting. Sometimes right on the money, sometimes meh, but amusing in a non-serious way. I'm not making decisions based on it.

    I suppose we could classify it as a methodological system for the purpose of.......wonderment.

  •  Sigh! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    terrypinder

    My day has mostly been influenced by the assholes that I dodge on the way to work, rather than by the gravity some planetary objects.

  •  I imagine Louis Gohmert would say: "Teach the (0+ / 0-)

    controversy." "Give both sides."

    "Let a thousand flowers blossom" (Oh wait, a commie said that).

  •  So... how do you define "alien"? (0+ / 0-)

    It certainly isn't crazy to believe in the probability of at least unicellular or otherwise very basic life existing elsewhere in the universe.   When you consider the enormity of the universe, you'd have to be pretty foolish not to be open to the idea. I mean, hell, NASA is.

    But little green men in flying saucers?  Yeah, you can attribute that crap to 1950's scifi hysteria.

    And to the people who DO believe in intelligent alien life; Could you PLEASE stop broadcasting signals to them in an intentional effort to draw them to us? I don't understand the new-age folks who illogically assume that advanced alien beings would be peaceful! Google "Cortez and Aztec" and tell me what you find.

    Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room!

    by bigtimecynic on Wed Feb 12, 2014 at 05:05:44 AM PST

  •  I have a relative (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    librarisingnsf

    who is a professional astrologer. I find that most people who say it's bunk are not even familiar with it beyond sun-sign newspaper horoscopes. I don't know if I believe in it fully, or how it's supposed to work (though she says there's a theory relating to the same wavelengths that make radio work). But once you start getting in to the deeper stuff (all the planets, houses, angles between planets, etc., how the current planetary positions interact with someone's chart) it's pretty uncanny how well I've seen it work.

    “Republicans...think American standard of living is a fine thing--so long as it doesn't spread to all the people... And they admire of Government of the United States so much that they would like to buy it.” Harry S. Truman

    by fenway49 on Wed Feb 12, 2014 at 05:22:19 AM PST

  •  Astrology, evolution & climate change (0+ / 0-)
    a third (33%) reject the idea of evolution, saying that “humans and other living things have existed in their present form since the beginning of time.” 
    http://www.pewforum.org/...
    Two-thirds of Americans (67%) say there is solid evidence that the earth has been getting warmer over the last few decades, a figure that has changed little in the past few years.
    http://www.people-press.org/...

    So about one-third don't believe in evolution (!), or climate change, and almost half believe astrology is scientific. Sheesh. An informed populace is .....?

    Resist much, obey little. ~~Edward Abbey, via Walt Whitman

    by willyr on Wed Feb 12, 2014 at 05:53:04 AM PST

  •  Coincidentally, a financial blog I read reported (0+ / 0-)

    this morning that they had just received a spam email offering a course to teach them how to use astrology to make BIG BIG PROFITS in the market, for the low, low price of $3,600.

    Incidentally, there have been cases of astrologers who have seemed to have done well in the market.  IMO, what happens for those for whom this works is that focusing on astrology distracts their conscious mind allowing their subconscious mind to sense market patterns more effectively.

    Beyond that, I doubt that anyone is capable of filtering out the impact of the gravitational influence of planet earth and our moon to focus on the much weaker gravitational influence of the planets.  And I'd bet only a small percentage of people live in areas where light pollution is low enough that they can even see the planets, and also care enough to look for them, so any psychological impact of the position of the planets would be limited to just a relative handful of people.

    •  A truck driving close to you (0+ / 0-)

      has more gravitational effect on you then does Mars, Jupiter or Saturn at their huge distances away from you.

      The Sun accounts for 99.8 percent of all barionic (regular matter made of atoms, protons, neutrons, electrons) matter (mass) in the solar system.

      Barionic (regular) matter only accounts for 5 percent of everything that makes up the universe, the rest is dark matter and dark energy.

      Somehow I doubt astrologers magic thinking and fake formulas take account of this.

      Nor do they take account of the fact that close light objects have a greater effect on other objects then do objects that are heavy and far away. For instance, a heavy truck influences you more then does Jupiter, even though Jupiter is exceptionally heavy.

      But even so, all of this is supposed to be determined by the time and date our birth? Just more magical thinking. Sometimes I despair for humans.

  •  "sort of scientific" (0+ / 0-)

    The term “scientific” is already far too broad a classification, especially if hedged as in “sort of scientific”. In fact, astrology is “sort of scientific” in that it involves learning to integrate a mass of detailed knowledge (science is derived from Latin scire, to know); has different schools of thought that defend their positions in sort of a scholarly manner; and is based on the observation of natural phenomena (although there is no empirical connection between these observations and actual astrological predictions).

    To me something that is “sort of scientific” is about the same as something “pseudoscientific” or “fake scientific”. Would the poll numbers have differed if the question had been asked that way? Perhaps not as much as you'd think.

    A more interesting/scary question in my view would be more along the lines of “How frequently is your personal decision-making affected by astrology”? Never/Rarely/Frequently/Always.

    •  Astrology was the infancy of astronomy (0+ / 0-)

      at a time when the planets were believed to be gods. Obviously, it must be important for us to know what the gods are doing up there!

      But it turned out that the only thing that could be reliably predicted about these "gods" was where they would be found in the sky. The Christians replaced the planetary gods with planetary Angels, but Galileo's telescope eventually revealed objects that didn't really look all that Angelic.

      Kepler was the last astronomer who believed in astrology, and he invented a system of astrology that was too complex for astrologers to understand, so it never caught on. In the west, astrologers continue to use the signs and dates of sun passage through the signs as they were defined in the time of Ptolemy; Indian astrologers use a different system, and in India the planets are still associated with deities

      There is nothing of modern science in astrology -- it is a magical/religious tradition which has not died out, despite the fact that Abrahamic religions tend to condemn it.

  •  A while ago somebody noted a not necessarily (0+ / 0-)

    linked uptick culturally in belief in angels, and interest or belief in all things "supernatural."

    That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt --

    by enhydra lutris on Wed Feb 12, 2014 at 11:18:49 AM PST

  •  I'll post this again but not as a reply (0+ / 0-)

    So I don't hurt anyone's overly sensitive feelings:

    Don't open your mind so much
    that your brain falls out.

    I've heard this from many a people, I've never seen or heard ANYONE take it as an insult before in my entire life. Until now. Well done admin.

    Tim Minchin: If You Open Your Mind Too Much Your Brain Will Fall Out
    http://www.youtube.com/...

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site