/sci/ - Science & Math

>Or would you like a reeding done?
Is that anything like a caning?

>>1626275

A reeding is when you divine possible futures and a person's current personality using the positions of the stars, representing the firmament and marked papyrus and bulrushes representing the waters of the earth and the ancients.It is more accurate than a traditional star chart reading because it evokes the souls of the passed and channels the natural chi of the planet.

>>1626270
TROLLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLO
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLO
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLO
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLO
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLO
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLO
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLO
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

There are many sorts of idiots in the world, those who believe that the light of stars, which took millions of years to reach us, depending when we where born will influence our lives, are truly one of the greatest among them

Not a science. Please go die in a fire.

Captcha: Fuck You Troll

>>1626307

Actually no. You seem to be unaware of chaos theory, I recommend you read Jurassic Park, paying particular attention to the little bits between the chapters that Ian Malcolm wrote.

What astrology is is the practical key that unlocks chaos theory so it can be made sense of in terms of human lives. any idiot who refuses to believe that the light of a star or it's position has no effect on a human life is the idiot and refuses to understand chaos theory and the Gia hypothesis and shows themselves up as an unscientific fool. These are the same sorts of people who stumble about denying the theory of evolution because they don't like what science tells them and are suspicious of people with 'book smarts'.

>>1626333

It's plausible, if you believe in Determinism it's perfectly true, even. It's just totally beyond the capabilities of humans.

>>1626347
exactly what i was about to say. Except that astrologists dont have a device to detect and simulate the interactions of every single particle in the universe.

Catchpa: Greek Delusion, sort of fitting.

Can I get a reeding? Try to not make it to freaking general.

>>1626347

I'm not claiming 100% accuracy, no astrologer does, even when it comes to weather prediction the supercomputer at the met office can get it a bit wrong because of all the variables that need to be taken into account.

This is why people are classified into 12 groups in western astrology. Your results will broadly apply to people in that group but not everything will be 100% accurate all of the time for every person in that group. For example if the stars indicated that people born under the sign of Cancer were going to have good luck and come into money this week it doesn't mean that every person born under the sign of cancer is going to win the lottery. It's more likely that could be borne out by them finding a 20p piece on the floor or something and a small proportion of them might not even get any money but unfortunately that's how it goes when you have to deal with ball park figures because of the complexity of the thing.

Predictions can have their accuracy increased by using elementals, spirits and chi but there is still a glass ceiling preventing 100% accuracy. Even after 1000s of years of study we are still not all the way there and a lot of other sciences are in their infancy in comparison.

>>1626333
Jurassic Park: The Astrologists text book.

How about some evidence that everything that you're typing isn't bullshit? Here is some evidence that it is

http://www.astrosociety.org/education/astro/act3/astrology3.html#defense

http://www.rudolfhsmit.nl/u-case2.htm

http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/stories/s1623400.htm

OP IS A FAGGGOOOOOOOOOOOOT

OP also believes that you can see the future by throwing chicken bones onto a plate.

>>1626382

So... it's useless?

>>1626364

OK, I'll try to give you a reeding. First I'll need to to get some information for visualisation purposes. Don't worry it's nothing too personal I won't even need your full name.

General details:
1) first name
2) Age rounded to the nearest multiple of 5
3) Star sign
4) Chinese zodiac animal

General questions (give the first answer that comes into your head for these, do not try to pick an impressive answer or the results may prove inaccurate, this is the first time I've done this over the internet so getting accurate visualisations is important if you want accurate results) :
A) Pick a colour
B) If you had to be turned into any animal, cryptid or mythical beast what would you choose?
C) Think about water... describe the water as you visualised it.
D) Your dream home describe it and its setting and where it would be.
E) Do you think this is wasting your time or are you interested to see what transpires?
F) If you were being executed what would you want as a last meal?

Answer those questions and I might be able to come up with a fairly accurate reeding.

>>1626414

Chicken bones can't be used to tell the future, only the past because the animal is dead, even then it would only work with things the chicken actually saw in it's life. Bet you're feeling a bit stupid now.

>>1626453

Well I sure am.

1) Mark
2) 30
3) Cancer
4) Monkey


A) Blue
B) Elephant
C) fresh water in a glass, very clear
D) A bit odd but I'd like one of those decommissioned bomb shelter bunkers in the middle of nowhere.
E) Perhaps, but I'd like to see what happens.
F) Fish and chips.

>>1626494

OK... bookmark this thread and I'll be back in a bit.

>>1626494

You were born in 1980 in Britain. You lived most of your life in Scotland but studied a biology based subject in University in the North of England.

You feel most people do not understand you. You have a girlfriend although you are yet to have sex. You are afraid of people seeing the real you especially your small circle of friends because you feel they would be disgusted.

Your love life will improve as you open up more to your girlfriend and you will marry within 5 years. It will be a good relationship but you'll only have one kid (a boy).
You remarry after her death.

You are currently out of work but I see teaching in your future and financial stability.

You will live to over the age of 60.

I hope that's enough and it is accurate.

>>1626564
Holy fuck.

You know which university I went to.

>>1626564
>2) 30
>4) Monkey
>F) Fish and chips.
>You were born in 1980 in Britain.
Hurr Durr, no shit
>You feel most people do not understand you.
That one's the classic. They always say that, and morons say, WOW YOU'RE RIGHT - HOW DID YOU KNOW

>>1626564

She dies? :(

Creepily accurate first few paragraphs but I'm still not convinced about telling my future.

>>1626588
>>1626589
lolooollololol

>>1626588
no specific university was mentioned.

ok so give us your divine explanation of both chaos theory and the GAIA hypothesis (spell it right) and how it is relevant you you nonsensical ramblings you call a science

>>1626613

If I did you would pretend you didn't understand because it is pretty obvious you're trolling and not interested in real science. In fact my chi is telling me that you're a creationist, lurking on these boards to pour your scorn on real science. My chi is hardly ever wrong.

>>1626643
ha good cover to hide your ignorance and anyone who knows anything about chaos theory knows the Jurassic park application of the theory is bogus
an I'm happy to tell you your chi is also bogus because I'm a Ph.D. physics student and don't touch religion or creationism with a barge pole
so quit hiding you stupidity and back up some claims

Am bored.

1) Nathan
2) 20
3) Capricorn
4) Snake

(By giving the age rounded to the nearest 5 you can determine roughly the decade, then you just have to match up the Chinese sign to determine the year, with the western star sign determining the month and whether they have already had their birthday)


A) Pick a colour
Grey-green
B) Don't know enough mystical animals. Robot Unicorn.
C) Lightly frothy, as if a great mass of water is moving rapidly over multiple smooth stones. Very little foam, ice cold.
D) Carved out of a mountain next to the ocean with fields behind it.
E) Might as well see.
F) Cyanide.

>>1626660

And yet you present no evidence whatsoever to prove that you are >>1626613

Or for that matter that you have a physics PhD.

Or that you're not just a creationist pretending to have a physics PhD in order to back up your antiscience stance.

This is all very suspect, is it not?

If you do not like real science like astrology, which is one of the oldest sciences in the world you are not being made to post in this thread. If you disagree so deeply with it that you have to make things up then anything I say is not going to change your mind is it so even if we were to take the hypothesis that you were who you claimed to be you would act in exactly the same way as you are now (ie like a creationist denying evolution) thus proving that what my chi told me was more or less correct, proving my claims.

>>1626713
Forgot to trip but this is me

>>1626689
I'll see what I can do. My Chi and natural energies are not running as well as they were before because of that creationist guy killing the mood and upsetting my rhythms so it might not be as accurate but I'll try.

>>1626713
You are really full of it
what does it matter who i am if you won't even present your evidence regardless of who you think your talking to then you have no compelling evidence or you don't understand that for this to be science you have to be willing to present your evidence and arguments BEFORE questioning the objectivity of the respondent
or more likely your just a troll

>>1626713
I'm not that dude who you're quoting, but even I can recognize the obvious ad hominem here. Please provide legitimate evidence of your claim instead of questioning the credentials of the one asking you to provide evidence.

Do me! Do me!

1) Erik
2) 40
3) Gemini
4) Dog (1970)

A) blue
B) tiger
C) cool perfectly clear stream moving over rocks.
D) on a large wooded lot with a body of water on it.
E) wasting my time.
F) filet mignon w/ hollandaise sauce

The stars are separated by the tens, hundreds, and even thousands of light-years. The galaxies are separated by the millions and billions of light-years. There are hundreds of billions of stars per individual galaxy.

How could it be that any of this has anything to do with what is happening to specific people on earth at specific times? Constellations change. Stars move. What is now the big dipper could at one point have been the great spear.

Also, the apparent motion of the planets across the sky of the earth is due only to their orbits and how they relate to the orbit of earth, so I fail to see how this could have anything with us either.

Thing is, I really don't even know what things to say here because I really don't even know what your claims are. What the fuck is a chi? Is it the positions of the planets related to the constellations that give you your divine prophecies? How does the sun and moon fit into all of this? What about all of the other stars beyond those few that are visible to us? What about the planets that orbit them, and the planets that orbit the other stars in the other galaxies?

Who's to say you're not just trying to play a game of cosmic feng shui?

>>1626689
Here's what I'm getting:

You were born in 1990 in the first half of January.

You are introverted and a deep thinker, currently studying for a science degree at a British university. You do not have a part time job and are not in a deep relationship with anyone right now. You have dated girls in the past but think you may be bisexual and are in two minds weather to experiment with that or not. You are about to start your third year at university and will be writing an honours project.

Your degree will go well provided you knuckle down and don't get distracted too much by the internet. In the future you will try out a same sex relationship and eventually join in a civil partnership. This will end after only 3 months however when due to his infidelity you get an STD. You will recovor from this but by that time will have lost your apitie for same sex relationships and be into women again. Although you will never marry you will have a long term female partner.

You'll do rather well in your eventual profession (embalmer) even though it will be something that you drift into and nothing to do with your degree.

Hopefully that is quite accurate, although it was hard to get a fix on you because that creationist kept popping up in my mind, so it is entirely possible some of that future stuff might apply to him.

>Astrology
>Science
>proved correct time and time again

0/10

1) Jake
2) 15
3) Libra
4) Dog


A) Blue
B) Mantis Shrimp
C) A dead-still ocean
D) A small apartment-sized place in Tokyo, nothing to impressive... I don't know...
E) A bit of both.
F) I don't think I would be able to eat.

i am curious

1) travis
2) 25
3) cancer
4) ox

A) Orange
B) Centaur
C) Sun setting on the ocean
D) Alaska, efficient, snug.
E) curious
F) steak and eggs and hashbrowns, with coffee.

>>1626775
>>1626751
>>1626742
you cant really put this in /sci/ claim that astrology is fact and then systematically ignore reasonable questions and attack anyone who demands any real information you can't see the irony in making these claims and then demanding that someone give evidence as to their identity even though it has nothing to do with the topic you should either respond in a sensible way or go to /x/

>>1626270
>Astrology is perhaps the oldest science in the world

No it isn't and no it isn't.

>yet because of elitism and snobbery it is dying out.

What's wrong with elite?

>Astrology has been proved correct time and time again...

You need to disprove all else not gather a thousand examples were yours worked.

>>1626807
Must be the creationist because only 1/4 is close.

>>1626841
>>1626751
>>1626742
>>1626660
>>1626613
>>1626589
>>1626414

Samefag

>>1626849
troll detected
assume that because the astrologer is wrong that it isn't him
gtfo

>>1626858
not samefag prove it
screenshots required

Lets see what happens

1: tom
2: 20
3: scorpio
4: horse

A) blue
B) eagle
C) a fast flowing river coming down from the mountains, lots of rounded boulders
D) a 1960's modernist apparentmen located in the paris suburbs, full of brutalist / modernist architecture / layout
E) im wondering if this will work and i reckon you do something with our IP's and social networking
F) Chicken korma, rice, coconut naan, standard indian stuff, and a nice cider

>>1626821
My chi and the ancestors are telling me you're a weeaboo born in the fall of 1994. You only fit in with a few like-minded people. You feel that you were born in the wrong culture. You like anime.

>>1626887
Eh, the culture I'm in now is fine, no better than Japan's at any rate. I'm pretty far from being a weeaboo and I have little more than a mild interest in anime.

When I was born can easily be determined by the star sign and the zodiac animal.

And the bit about feeling like I only fit in with very few individuals? It wouldn't take a genius to realise most teenagers think that way.

You've really just confirmed what I was expecting, taking the information and, rather than divining information is whatever way you claim to, stating things about the majority of people who share certain characteristics.

Good job.

>>1626915
thank you. i'm not op by the way.

>>1626849

1/4 isn't bad at all, if astrology is nonsense then he must be a pretty good cold-reader at the least to do it without seeing a person. What did he get right and what was about the creationist samefag?

What is that a picture of? Do tell.

what do you think of this OP

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iunr4B4wfDA&feature=search

>>1626821
repurteddd

As a keen cold reader, let's see if I can apply some of the concepts of the reading you just gave.

You were born in 1980 in Britain.

> Information was already stated (I think this would come under the term incidental question but I'm not sure).

You lived most of your life in Scotland but studied a biology based subject in University in the North of England.

> Was made easier by the specification of "Fish and chips" in another answer. After that, speculatory guess work.

You feel most people do not understand you.

> Barnum statement, applies to almost everyone.

You have a girlfriend although you are yet to have sex.

> General guesswork, you have a lucky guess with the girlfriend, if that hits and the rest isn't correct then the person recieving the reading will normally forget the bits that don't fit because you said something that did fit. In reality though this is just a guess. Also the person recieving the reading will make allowances and bend what you said to make it fit. For example if he has only just had sex with his girlfriend, he may regard your statement as close, and give it credit for being a good reading, but really it was just a lucky guess. If it doesn't hit, the failure is lost amongst the sure fire hits (some already explained and some yet to be explained) to make the reading seem accurate.

You are afraid of people seeing the real you especially your small circle of friends because you feel they would be disgusted.

> Another Barnum statement, possibly modified for any user of 4chan.

Your love life will improve as you open up more to your girlfriend and you will marry within 5 years.

>Peter Pan prediction, you are telling the reader something he probably wants to happen will happen.

>It will be a good relationship but you'll only have one kid (a boy).

>As before, more Peter Pan predictions, that cannot be proven.

You remarry after her death.

>More guesswork, and not even good cold reading, so my guess is you are either a king troll, or actually believe this crap is going to hit.

You are currently out of work but I see teaching in your future and financial stability.

> Down to the recipient doing all the work again to make it fit. Teaching may not mean being a teacher, just any job impart knowledge.

You will live to over the age of 60.

> Setting a benchmark below the average, making it likely. Also giving the recipient what he wants to hear, so another variation on the Peter Pan prediciton.

I hope that's enough and it is accurate.

> I hope that's enough to prove you're full of shit. In fact, I will go one further, if anyone wants to give me the same information that this assclown requested, I will give a more accurate reading, dispite being fully aware that astrology is total bullshit.

>/sci/ - Science & Math
You're in the wrong board, OP. This is where you belong:
>>>/x/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQPFoDkGFrU&feature=related
can't resist

>>1626937

Seems a bit dated. It's like saying scientific understanding hasn't changed at all since the 1960s when this film was made. Also Sagan is just raging against something he doesn't understand like a confused and senile old man throwing bricks at the moon insisting it doesn't exist. He is well known for his opinion on science that he personally finds too complex to understand ("I don't get it so I must over generalise and make strawman arguments so I can pretend it doesn't exist!"). A real scientist knows that just because they personally do not understand something it doesn't mean it doesn't happen. For example, before we understood gravity did we all have to tie ourselves to the ground with string?

My face when /sci/ believes in astrology

>>1626807

Here's what I'm getting:

>Here's what I'm getting... some bullshit.

You were born in 1990

>Information already given, sure fire hit, and you're off to a good start, the aim of cold reading is to make someone start saying yes, and then to keep them saying it. As it goes on, the person being read will deform the reading to fit the facts and make allowances for things that don't quite ring 100% true. This isn't even good cold reading.

in the first half of January.

> Guess work, if it hits you look like a God, if it doesn't he will forget it due to the year being right.

You are introverted and a deep thinker, currently studying for a science degree at a British university.

> Educated guesswork also know as "the good chance guess". On a science board, could be going off to study science. About the right age to start going to university, all information given willingly by the person being read, which you make out you gathered through other means. Also the responsibility is on the recipient to make it fit. If he isn't going to university, he might want to go, or if he is going but it isn't science etc etc, these are all ways the recipient forgets the things that don't fit and accept the bits that do.

You do not have a part time job and are not in a deep relationship with anyone right now.

> Classic cold reading, using double negative questions, could have a full time job, could be unemplyed (already mentioned student so it's expanding on the assumption that was correct, which as stated before could well be based on the information given by the recipient themself). Could be in a relationship but not deep etc etc, all would get a yes answer, but all is just clever wording.

You have dated girls in the past but think you may be bisexual and are in two minds weather to experiment with that or not.

> Barnum statement again. Would apply to almost anybody.

You are about to start your third year at university and will be writing an honours project.

> Information given by the recipient, AGAIN (this is a piss poor read...)

Your degree will go well provided you knuckle down and don't get distracted too much by the internet. In the future you will try out a same sex relationship and eventually join in a civil partnership.

> Some more Peter Pan predictions, bad reading on the same sex bit, but who cares, you can't be proven wrong!

This will end after only 3 months however when due to his infidelity you get an STD. You will recovor from this but by that time will have lost your apitie for same sex relationships and be into women again. Although you will never marry you will have a long term female partner.

You'll do rather well in your eventual profession (embalmer) even though it will be something that you drift into and nothing to do with your degree.

> Bad cold reading and obviously again can't be proven.

Hopefully that is quite accurate, although it was hard to get a fix on you because that creationist kept popping up in my mind, so it is entirely possible some of that future stuff might apply to him.

> And chucks in the excuse to make you do all the work. There was some other reason why it might not work, not that it's all bullshit, he's basically saying it's down to you now to make these random statements fit your life and if they don't it's because of XY and Z...

SUDDENLY TRAP THREAD

>>1627033
proving you know nothing of science or carl sagan
and yes science has changed (it always does) but astrology is still bogus and everything he said in that video is valid and once again the person has been attacked instead of replying to the statements made
thus not science

Do you /sci/ducks like traps?

I would assume you do, since a lot of you come to /tg/.

>>1627074
whoops forgot my sage

Astrology is not a science, because one cannot perform an experiment and have it output the same results with every attempt.

>>1627142
That's not the definition of science and that isn't the reason astrology isn't real.

>>1627175

thank you sir. those comics were very enlightening.

>>1627180
At least they're more /sci/ related than astrology

Fin.
My work here is done.

I enjoy the images in this thread. Bump.

>>1627063

Actually,he does raise a valid point. Simply raging against something you don't like and creating strawman arguments is not the same as proving something wrong and is certainly not following the scientific method. I have respect for Sagan as a scientist but when he does all this crap it's just embarrassing. Just because you know a bit about something it doesn't make you 'the science pope'. Yet time and again the media, who usually are humanities graduates decide one scientist knows everything and his word is gospel above and beyond the experts in the field already.

Say for example the media elect a new science pope and you're a scientist who has been studying ducks for 35 years? Tough shit, here comes the science pope to tell his tv audience about ducks, after all this particular science pope is a professor of Chemistry so must know everything about biology. Now watch as in the eyes of those that don't understand real science ducks become suddenly non existent because science pope has lived in the city all his life and not seen a duck. Sure science pope read about ducks but as he hadn't seen one he had all the evidence he needed to disprove ducks. After all as science pope he is automatically right about everything.

cont...

>>1627350 cont...

You see just because Sagan or any of the other science popes state an opinion and rant a bit this doesn't make their opinion any more valid than that of joe bloggs down the street, it is not science if it is just an opinion. Just because a guy knows a lot about one thing it doesn't mean they have all the answers about everything else and you shouldn't put them up on a pedestal because they are involved in some big 'science pope' scam perpetrated by the media to sell lightweight documentaries without much research behind them to tv companies who'll then show them to pseudo-intellectual humanities graduates who'll them pat themselves on the back and think they understand science because they listend to the science pope and can repeat his proclamations parrot fashion.

SCIENCE DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY!

TL;DR fuck the media and their science pope bullshit.

>>1627350
>>1627355
Looks like my work isn't done after all, asshole.

>>1627392

You do know that astrologers love dick girls, right? Mystic Meg swears by them and frigs to nothing else.

>>1627431
I don't know who Mystic Meg is nor do I care,

>>1627446

She's an astrologer who correctly predicted a lottery winner on the UK's lottery show the week before it happened.

She also is known for her dick girl fondness.

>>1627456
I thought I said I don't care, but whatever.

Fin.

This thread brings joy in my pants

>>1626270
O.o astrology is not a science by definition.

>>1626333
Chaos theory is correct, to a high degree anyway, but do you have any idea how far stars are away from each other? A human being can't possibly imagine a light year in its full scale, how do you think astrologers would predict anything if they can't accurately imagine the true effects of the universe has on its self. Its also tiny, the effects. Astrology is junk.

>>1627607

Not really, astrology deals with the effects planets, stars and stuff have on Earth, they would definitely have effects on other planets too but as we don't live there it is not as if we can observe them.

Astrology didn't seem to account for Uranus and Neptune before they were discovered. Fancy that.

>>1628132

It's more like weather prediction. The more that gets discovered and added to the system and models the more accurate it becomes.

>>1628228
but it never works anyway, unless you can give me proof.

>>1626270
OP, can you do a reading for me?

>>1628249

I would but it's too late at night right now, look me up tomorrow if I'm on here then.

>>1628235

As someone mentioned earlier mystic meg did predict that lottery winner. Also you may want to get the dvd of dave goreman's great astrology experiment where astrology was scientifically and statistically proven with graphs and everything.

Anyone who posted here was brutally trolled.Well done OP,well done.

>>1628288
troll detected
mystic meg did not predict a winner as by the very rules of the game if the out come of the draw or winner can be accurately predicted before the draw then it is scraped in fact its the law
and dave gromans thing was 2 people ie not statistical at all and was certainly not scientific

>>1628457

Mystic meg said "... and a belly dancer will be celebrating toooooo...." and the next week they brought on a belly dancer that had won £10. Read it and weep naysayer. It's sad that when people are confronted with irrefutable proof they try to pretend it didn't happen because they don't like their cosseted, blinkered and unscientific world view to be shaken. They are like creationists denying the truth of evolution, just ignoring the facts because they don't like them or can't understand them.