/sci/ - Science & Math

no, but then the burden of proof is on those fuckers, not sceptics.

Could astrologists give me a clearcut proof that astrology is right?

>>3943577
Nope. A theory is valid until it is disproved.

its just not science. it cannot be falsified .

>>3943579
kill yourself with a fucking potato peeler!
really??
fine, i hereby theorise that the harry potter universe is real and wizards really exist, am i correct by default? you cant prove me wrong, so it must be a legit theory, rite?

FUCKING FAGGOT!

OP here, so there is no academic literature out there disproving the Astrology as a means to predict people's lives? Seems unlikely no?

Astrology is valueless when it comes to interpersonal relationships.

>>3943586

you are such a muff diver.

>>3943590
>you are such a muff diver.
lolwat?
i mean yeh, i'm bisexual but i have a preference for men.

>>3943579
its a hypothesis by default. when it has a lot of empirical evidence supporting it, and no one has disproved it, it then may become a theory.

>>3943591
calling you a faggot just doesn't seem right.

>>3943593
'faggot' is a unisex term, feel free. =p

how about

snakes

>>3943586
Did my post make you mad? LOL
And do you know what the best thing is? I was right.

>>3943597
you wern't right, astrology isnt a theory, you dont even know what theory means, in a scientific sense.
like this guy said: >>3943592

i think i have some delicious copypasta on standby:
"Clearly you have no idea what theory means in the scientific community. Theory isn't just a guess. It's not a hypothesis or something you just think up in the middle of the night. It's the highest level an idea can have after going through years of peer review and being backed by mountains of evidence (and don't give me that "it's not the law of evolution" bullshit because you clearly don't know what a law is then either) There's also a theory of gravity, and germ theory, and cell theory. Are those just theories too? Evolution is a fact. Deal with it."

oh wait, that only partially relates...
w/e

>>3943589

Academics have better things to do.

>>3943604
Well CAN you prove astrology wrong?
Otherwise it's totally legit to believe in.

>>3943631

Some damn fine trolling going on here.

Astrology isn't 100% right, but it does definitely make some good points. Some of the things Astrology says are the same as aximo in Maths - They're just common sense.

>>3943707
>Astrology adds absolutely nothing to the field of knowledge.

>>3943707
Hahahahahahahahahahahahah- no.

>>3943729
See, that's where you're wrong. I can plan ahead who I should talk to at a social gathering based on our Zodiac Signs. That way, I can be slightly more confident that we'll get along well even before starting a conversation, causing a good impression.

>>3943731
>Science is about discovering new things about the World that surrounds us
>BUT ONLY THE THINGS I LIKE

Does astrology predict anything, or explain anything?
The answer is no.

OP is a fag, and a troll, but mostly a fag.

>>3943707
>-from the dissociation that is a scottish man's brain

It's an unfalsifiable hypothesis.

otherwise known as HURR YOU CAN'T PROVE IT WRONG BECAUSE LOLOLOLO

>>3943739
>placebo, you giggling doublecunt

>>3943739
>I can plan ahead who I should talk to at a social gathering based on our Zodiac Signs.
see >>3943590

yes.

>>3943748
Alright, I get all of the other things, but Scottish?

Blackman, if you're reading this, explain yourself. Why do you believe I'm Scottish?

>>3943752
Nope, not a placebo.

>>3943753
That chart is wrong. If I edited a periodic table so it read that every element is [H], would that disprove Chemistry?

>>3943769
>http://blog.okcupid.com/index.php/how-races-and-religions-match-in-online-dating/

It's based off data from 500,000 users, sorry.

>>3943769
>I can plan ahead who I should talk to at a social gathering based on our Zodiac Signs. That way, I can be slightly more confident that we'll get along well even before starting a conversation

No, this is called the Placebo effect.

>>3943769
because blackman is a tard.
you, me, and harriet, are all some fat scottish bald man, who posts as 3 different tripfags for some reason

>>3943779
>he thinks that he's the dominant personality

I know this is a troll thread but...

Douglas Adams wrote a bit about astrology in Mostly Harmless. A character who makes her living divining stuff from the stars concedes to a reporter that of course the position of Mars in relation to a constellation doesn't actually change anything here on earth. Astrology is just a set of rules you can apply to people, and thereby learn something about those people. The analogy Adams uses is that of blowing graphite dust onto a pad of paper to reveal what was written on the pages above.

The graphite dust doesn't really matter, it's just a tool that's useful for seeing what's already there. They could be any rules at all, it just matters that the rules exist.

>>3943774
okcupid is not a reputable source for Astrology.

>>3943778
Nope, it isn't.

>>3943779
But why Scottish?

>>3943791
because blackman is racist?
how the fuck should i know....

>>3943790
And when your "dust" reveals absolutely nothing about anything? And when every other method reveals at least something statistically significant, you still bother with this dust?

>>3943791
>okcupid is not a reputable source for Astrology.
Says who? You?

>>3943787
How can EK not be the dominant personality if she was here before me? How can I be the smartest? EXPLAIN THAT YOU FAGGOT

>>3943797
Don't ask me how (because I can't say it on /sci/), but I know the truth behind you and Blackman, lol. I thought you would know.

>>3943791
Yep, it actually is.
>and there is no reputable source for astrology, because astrology is horse shit through and through.

Perhaps you do not understand placebos? I liquify the heart of a sheep and turn it into cologne. Because I have it set in my mind that I am now more disireable due to my sheep-heart scent, I act more self-confident and aggressive. That doesn't mean the heart-scent worked, just that people are easily tricked by their own imaginations.
tl;dr you are made of retarded

>>3943798
Astrology does reveal something about its adherents. What you see might vary from person to person, but it always reveals something.

And in any case, the absence of information is information all its own. If I blow dust on a page and see no indentations.

Astrology is dumb on its own, but only slightly dumber than ideas like "personality profiles" or something.

>>3943803
Yes, I said so. okcupid is a sex site. I'm an enthusiast. Hell, fortune tellers are, ironically, the most reputable sources for Astrology information.

>>3943812
Go back to >>>/x/ .

>>3943812
>Don't ask me how (because I can't say it on /sci/), but I know the truth behind you and Blackman, lol. I thought you would know.
wait, what?

It told me that I was going to get laid today.
Didn't happen...

>>3943819
Sorry, there's meant to be an ellipsis after indentations.

>>3943819
Astrology reveals who is and isn't a complete fuckwad, in that those who follow their horoscopes are in reality, complete fuckwads.

>>3943815
I can make predictions of the future with Astrology. That's not placebo effect.

>>3943826
No. /x/ is full of crazy people. I wouldn't dare touch them with a light-year long stick.

>>3943827
Do you really want me to say it publically? I think /sci/ thinks low enough of you as is...

>>3943828
Astrology isn't that specific, nice try.

>>3943837
You make Red Shield laugh. EK is a better tripfag than you.

>>3943837
>Do you really want me to say it publically? I think /sci/ thinks low enough of you as is...
erm, let me think for a minute... YES!
i honestly have no fucking idea what you mean, but i dont give a fuck bout my reputation.
...wait a sec.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RAQXg0IdfI
lol

>>3943845
Who is Red Shield?

>>3943846
Alright. Blackman is obviously one of your old fuckbuddies who, to get back at you after you told him to fuck off, came on /sci/ to insult you. Thanks to you, he insults me and Harriet too.

>>3943853
wat?
no that cant be right, i've never like lost a fuckbuddy, i'm still with all of them at the moment, and i'm pretty sure none of them are blackman, and only one of them even posts here, and he posts as anon...

>>3943856
At least admit it. Blackman is obviously one of your fuckbuddies. Or even worst, he's a friend of yours/your brother, and you're both teaming up to ruin my and Harriet's reputation.

>>3943853
Blackman is an undergrad faggot in the US. your logic is invalid.

>>3943860
>you're both teaming up to ruin my and Harriet's reputation.
You're clearly a schizophrenic personality construct

>>3943860
i'm an only child, i dont have a brother...are you fucking trolling me?
And i live with harriet, why would i want to ruin her reputation? if i piss her off, i have to deal with an angry housemate, i still lose.

>>3943863
No. He's obviously in Scotland. Or maybe he's an online friend of EK's. She probably met him on Steam while playing CoD.

The greatest astronomers in history were astrologers: Galileo, Tycho, Kepler, Ptolemy, Aristotle, Copernicus and possibly Isaac Newton. In fact, Newton spent more time studying theology, alchemy and pseudoscience than real science.

>>3943870
Exactly. You couldn't do it directly. But if you had someone else doing it - Blackman - Then you could get back at her and not have her get mad at you. The perfect plan.

>>3943891
lol, i dont think blackman has ever posted to harriet. she doesnt post much.

>>3943888

Yeah, and guess what they're remembered for?

>>3943578
>>3943578
>>3943578
>>3943578
>>3943578

this

end thread

also fuck you pussy "agnostics" as always

Is it bad i automatically thought of Stargate when i saw OP's pic?

>>3943908
Harriet used to post a lot. How do you know Blackman didn't talk to her during that period? Did he TELL you? Are you admiting that you KNOW Blackman?

>>3943923
i dont know him IRL, but ive posted to him here.
also, i sometimes check up on harriets posts in the archives, just coz i'm a nosy bitch =p

>>3943933
Whatever, if you're going to deflect it, fine. I'm not even mad that you're jealous of me.

>>3943939

>>3943837
You cannot make accurate predictions based on astrology, that is a lie.

>>3943947
All of my lol.

What a gullible, superstitious twat.

>>3943947
How is that relevant at all?

>>3943948
I can. Just because you can't that doesn't mean it's a lie.

>>3943954
>How is that relevant at all?

Believe me. It's plenty relevant.

I think that in the classical period, when infants were outside with their parent, the first couple months of their lives probably had a very important effect on their psyche.

Its probably different now.

Forget to take your medicine, EK?

>>3943954
>How is that relevant at all?
it isn't, it just makes you look like a gullible /x/-fag, and tarnishes your reputation somewhat....

>>3943954
No, you cannot.
And that actually does make it a lie.

>>3943958
oh hai!
you're one of my fuck buddies apparently...

>>3943579
Theory is only speculation if it doesn't have some explanation about the nature of relations it tries to understand.

Astrology never explains what is method of how stars and planets affect the physical world and lives of people. If the celestial bodies really affect the world then there must by a force or energy flow somewhere and the astrologists should prove that method of interaction first before anyone has to take them seriously.

Teacup is the /x/ophile who argued that turtles didn't have spines, right?

>>3943966
apparently...

>>3943965
Don't they imply something to do with gravity? (like that would somehow affect personality, but let's go with it)
You change the gravity force on yourself by taking one step up a stairway more than the combined gravitational effects of both Jupiter and Mars if they were perfectly aligned.

So, yeah, astrology is horse shit.

>>3943952
Why are you laughing at me?

>>3943956
Not for the matter at hand.

>>3943958
YOU, YOU LITTLE FUCKWAD, YOU'RE TO BLAME FOR ALL OF THIS. WHY DO YOU SAY I AM SCOTTISH

>>3943959
So what if I used to browse /x/? Why would that tarnish my reputation?

>>3943962
Alright, want me to predict something about you?

>>3943966
>>3943968
Turtles do not have spines. It would make no sense for them to have both spines and shells.

ITT: Perfect experimental evidence for a paper on dissociation

>>3943970
>So what if I used to browse /x/? Why would that tarnish my reputation?
because this is /sci/, and superstitious shit is the antithesis of the scientific method we know and love

>Alright, want me to predict something about you?
>cold reading
>being vague as fuck
>could apply to anyone
it's not difficult...

>>3943970
I've already explained the situation on /sci/ dozens of times... You know why you are Scottish.

This thread was hilarious to read through by the way.

>>3943972

>>3943972
>-from the dissociation that is a scottish man's brain

>>3943972
uhuh, and that image of the turtle skeleton i just posted is clearly photoshopped. you can tell from some of the pixels and from being a gullible /x/fag in your time.

>>3943975
I fail to see your point. Multiple religious people made huge contributions to science, and no one says they're wrong. Why give me shit just because I believe I had a paranormal experience?

Real astrologists =/= Online horoscope

>>3943972
>Turtles do not have spines.

>>3943982
having a small sense of anatomical biology still does not make you the dominant personality

teacunt=niggerman=rose=harriet

fat scottish man with dissociative identity disorder and schizophrenia.

>>3943985
heheh, alright sorry, i dont mean to be too harsh on a fellow tripfag.
keep the superstitious stuff to a minimum please, and lets do some fukken scinece!

>>3943976
didnt he say he was from some obscure brazilian colony?

>>3943976
No. Tell me, tell me why you say that I am Scottish. You never explained that. Explain it.

>>3943979
It doesn't. Why would you need two different things protecting your insides and supporting your other bones?

>>3943980
Stop that.

>>3943982
It's not a picture, so it could easily be manipulated.

>>3943970
A prediction about me? Oh boy, let's hear it.
And in the interest of true science, I'll give you no details about myself.
Go.

>>3943996
you're scottish because you are also blackman. blackman has identified you as scottish and therefore himself. you are all scottish for you are the same person.

>>3943990
Don't ever say that.
Anyways, we know they are Scottish and we have proof that I am American. Furthermore, I am the one who found out about EK/Teacunt/Harriet's disorder and has been at the forefront of this investigation

>>3943996
>It doesn't. Why would you need two different things protecting your insides and supporting your other bones?

>>3944003
>>3944003
this

>>3943986
They don't. Is this news to you?

>>3943992
I didn't forget about you and Blackman.

>>3943993
No.

>>3943997
I can't do that. That's like telling someone to tell you which number will come out of adding two variables. I need some information to give you a prediction.

>>3943999
I am DEFINITELY not Blackman.

>>3944006
>They don't. Is this news to you?

Pic related

>I need some information to give you a prediction.

We know. It's called cold reading.

>>3944003
>Furthermore, I am the one who found out about EK/Teacunt/Harriet's disorder and has been at the forefront of this investigation

And why do you think that is? You are obviously them, but just don't know it.

>>3944003
There is no investigation, we are not the same person and you haven't told me why you think I'm Scottish. Please Blackman, just because EK and you had some trouble in the past doesn't mean you have to insult me.

>>3944004
Stop greentexting me.

>>3944006
>I am DEFINITELY not Blackman.
oh, but you MIGHT be me?
thats some nice fucking consistency you got going on...

>>3944006
I could swear it was someplace where they speak Brazilian.

>>3944010
this is actually possible.

this would be very interesting, in this case Blackman would appear to be the dominant personality.

I would love a modfag to respond on this matter just to see if they have the same cluster of IPs

>>3944014
>be scottish
>have personality disorder
>post as 'teacup' on 4chan
>think turtles dont have spines
>believe in demons
>ask people ITT to stop greentexting you
>2011

Despite I assume repeated attempts at gathering reliable statistically significant evidence in favor, all we have found is evidence against.

Also, it contradicts materialism and what we know of how the universe operates.

>>3944010
>>3944020
Lol.
I have posted about EK being banned a shit load of times. Josef and I, however, share the same IP.

>>3944006
>They don't. Is this news to you?

BWUhahaa. Next you'll be telling me turtles are reptiles.

>>3944025
i heard about that, how is that even possible??

>>3944008
So I guess math with numbers doesn't count? 2 + 2 really isn't 4?

>>3944017
You weren't relevant for what I was saying. I'm not you or Harriet either. But I definitely am not Blackman.

>>3944019
Huehuehuehuehue gib money pls

>>3944020
Why is Blackman our supposed dominant one now?

>>3944025
fuck so josef=blackman=teacunt=ek=harriet?

I almost stopped coming to /sci/ because I was tired of seeing EK's posts, but I think this whole pretending that EK is a personality of a bald, fat Scottish man could most definitely make them bearable.

>>3944025
what's your major, anyhow?

A double blind test shows that giving random unrelated fortunes to people is equally or more accurate than giving them tailored ones created according to astrology guidelines.

Therefore, astrology is no more effective than random chance.

Therefore, it's claims are erroneous.

It's pretty straightforward. it's been done a few times. One sec...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dlMiKrwCRQ0

There we go. In before Ad Hominem or Poisoning the Well.

>>3944023
I am not you, so you shouldn't have started that by >be scottish

>>3944025
So you're Josef? But I like Josef, he's a nice person. I can't not like you if you're Josef.

>>3944031
No.

>>3944029
We attend the same university
>>3944033
Molecular Biology and Biochemistry...

>>3944008
>I need some information first
This is why nobody takes you seriously.
Christ on a cracker you are a stupid person.

>>3944035
EPIC WIN!
/thread

>>3944025
>I have posted about EK being banned a shit load of times.

Are you implying you are a mod? How do you know when EK is banned?

>>3944035

>>3943573
I can't. You know why? BECAUSE IT'S ALL REAL!

http://lifescapeastrology.com/

>>3944040
i'm not scottish either! i'm actually in London.

>>3944035
>>3944046
That proves nothing.

>>3944042
I NEED TO KNOW A FEW THINGS. GOD, I CAN'T ADD VARIABLES AND GET A NUMBER WITHOUT ANY OTHER INFORMATION, CAN I?

>>3944049
Blackman, a mod? Well, fuck me silly...

>>3944030
>So I guess math with numbers doesn't count? 2 + 2 really isn't 4?

No, retard. That has nothing to do with anything. I'm telling you the reason you need information from him is because you're cold reading.

>>3944060
>I NEED TO KNOW A FEW THINGS.

You need him to tell you specific information about himself so that you can tell him vague information about himself. Yea, we know how that trick works. Cold reading is your proof of astrology?

>>3944060

I'm not the guy you've been responding to, but I'll bite. What information do you need?

>>3944061
I can't make a prediction based on just his post number. This is not a curse, this is predicting the future. There's a difference.

>>3944049

>>3944060
>I NEED TO KNOW A FEW THINGS.

If astrology predicted things, you could predict even a basic fact about me without knowing anything else. Am I a man or a woman? 16 or 30? Gay or straight?
Go on 'psychic', make a prediction.

>>3944064
This is not cold reading you idiot.

>>3944066
I need his Year, Month, Day and Hour/Minute/Second (if possible) of birth, plus his gender, age and country where he was born.

LOL I <3 you teacup

>>3944070
>I can't make a prediction
you can stop right there.

>>3944060

>>That proves nothing!

Yes, things that disagree with irrational beliefs seldom meet the high standards of "evidence" irrational people expect. Despite that in the video (which you did not have time to watch before posting, indicating you are not actually even listening to opposing arguments) a famous Astrologer is asked to perform an experiment to prove it's effectiveness and refuses. Because he knows what the results will be

Well, so do I. So, I volunteer. Predict something about me. I will either tell you my astrological sign and ask you to guess parts of my personality, or give you my personality and ask you to guess parts of my sign.

So, which will it be? I am all for experimentation.

>>3944076
I can tell you if you're gay with >>3944078's information.

>>3944077
I remember a huge image where someone zoomed in on me saying that turtles didn't have spines.

>>3944070
>curse

>>3944078
1988, June, 5, 11:30 AM, male, 23, Los Angeles California, USA.

>>3944078

I was born on October 21st, 1993, I can't tell you the exact time it happened, I'm male, and I was born in the USA.

>>3944067
so you can confirm ek=teacunt?

My predictions about Teacup:
You have a great need for other people to like and admire you. You have a tendency to be critical of yourself. You have a great deal of unused capacity which you have not turned to your advantage. While you have some personality weaknesses, you are generally able to compensate for them. Disciplined and self-controlled outside, you tend to be worrisome and insecure inside. At times you have serious doubts as to whether you have made the right decision or done the right thing. You prefer a certain amount of change and variety and become dissatisfied when hemmed in by restrictions and limitations. You pride yourself as an independent thinker and do not accept others' statements without satisfactory proof. You have found it unwise to be too frank in revealing yourself to others. At times you are extroverted, affable, sociable, while at other times you are introverted, wary, reserved. Some of your aspirations tend to be pretty unrealistic. Security is one of your major goals in life.

>>3944091
I predict that you're an underage faggot

>>3944082
I'm not a fortune teller. I'm not going to do 947285728 predictions to satisfy everyone.

>>3944086
>>3944091
91 has gay tendencies, possibly a bisexual. 86 is fully heterosexual.

>>3944085
I remember that thread.

>>3944084
>I remember a huge image where someone zoomed in on me saying that turtles didn't have spines.

>>3944094

Joke's on you, I turned 18 two days ago.

>>3944097
>86 is fully heterosexual.

You sure about that?

>>3944093
Uh? What's this?

>>3944094
I support this prediction.

>>3944098
That's the one.

>>3944097

I'm >>3944091, and I'm completely heterosexual. Your methods don't work, let's move on now.

There are 13 zodiac signs, not 12

>>3944107
teacunt will just say you're in denial. he cannot lose.

>>3944100
>>3944107
I obviously made a mistake. I meant 86 where I said 91 and 91 where I said 86.

BEFORE ANYONE SAYS THAT I'M LYING: Why would I start by the last one and then go back?

>>3944105
>what's this
What I say about you...using my MAAAAGIC PREDIIICTION POOOWERS

accurate?

>mfw teacup is 16

>>3944114
>I obviously made a mistake
Yes, in claiming that astrology is anything other than Barnum-level bullshit.

>>3944097

"You sound smart enough to actually call me on my bullshit, and I know what the results will be, so I'm not going to participate."

Well, I can tell you're an astrologist. That's basically exactly the response of the guy in the movie I posted.

Right, I'm done then. Can't have an argument without two sides. Thanks for giving up though, it makes it a lot quicker.

PS: You don't actually believe in astrology, you just believe that believing in astrology is good for some reason, otherwise you would be confident it would pass the tests.

>>3944114

Cherry Picking fallacy.

>>3944114
Except you didn't because I'm 86 and I'm fully hetero.

>>3944125
H+....WINS!

FATALITY

>>3944092
LOL, you gullible faggot, do you have any idea how retardedly easy it is to fake that picture? That probably isn't even what the real ban dialog looks like.

BAN ME MOTHERFUCKER

(USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST)

>>3944138

>implying i care what the truth is

I just want to see where blackman goes with this, either way.

>>3944141
The proof of the pudding is in the eating

A different approach to testing astrology quantitatively uses blind experiment. The most renowned[87] of these is Shawn Carlson's double-blind chart matching tests in which he challenged 28 astrologers to match over 100 natal charts to psychological profiles generated by the California Psychological Inventory (CPI) test. When Carlson's study was published in Nature in 1985, his conclusion was that predictions based on natal astrology were no better than chance, and that the testing "clearly refutes the astrological hypothesis".

U MAD ASTOLOGISTS? OH WAIT YOU DON'T KNOW HOW TO SCIENCE NEVERMIND

only one or two posts in this thread actually make it /sci/ i am horribly disappointed in everyone else.

please read more books

astrology is not science becuase
random chance
falsifiability
post hoc ergo propter hoc

>>3944138
>mfw user was banned for that post

>>3944138
>>3944138
>>3944138
>>3944138
>>3944138
>>3944138
>>3944138
>>3944138
LOL

>>3944138

>>3944097
>91 has gay tendencies, possibly a bisexual. 86 is fully heterosexual.

How is offering a generic personality analysis that could apply to anyone not cold reading again?

>>3944138
i'm 12 years old and what is this

>>3944138

>>3944138
so this is why blackman posts all of those troll threads and is never banned...

>>3944164
I dunno, posting porn on /sci/ like that to provoke the mods is certainly a bannable offense. That could have been anyone.

Did Teacup give up and leave to go drown her sorrows in cake?

>>3944172
teacups male

>>3944145
if I have an ivy league degree, can you help me be a mod for sci?

>>3944168
then blackman would've been banned too for impersonating team

i'll report the post now and see what happens

i'll probably be banned too, but whatever

>my face when an actual mod banned that poster to make it seem like Blackman is a mod when he isn't

>>3944174
Really? I always attributed a whiny, know-nothing 16 year old girl to Teacup.

But alright then. Did HE leave to go cry and eat cake because his beliefs are easily ridiculed by anyone with half a brain?

>>3944145
post with ## Mod

i'm still skeptical

>>3944187
this

>>3944176
post was deleted; blackman isn't a mod

/sci/ has some moderation team, that wasn't even 5 minutes

>>3944179
or more accurately, because >138 posted porn on a SFW board...

>>3944184
lol, nah, teacup doesn't afraid of anything. tough scotsman, dontcha know.

>>3944201
back to the drawing board

>>3944205
usually don't they just delete the image?

Self-fulfilling prophecy, astrology, that is.

>>3944205

So, would Teacup claiming not to be a scotsman be an example of the "No True Scotsman" fallacy?

>>3944207
nope, poster's also get b& for it.

>>3944212
Shut up.

>>3944215
i dont think i've ever seen the "user was banned for this post" text on /sci/ before.

>>3944216

Found her/him.

>>3944224
lol, they do:
http://archive.installgentoo.net/cgi-board.pl/sci/thread/3257761#p3257828

Watch Carl Sagan's Cosmos 3rd episode.

>>3944233
>"harriet: EK got banned? Serves her right for being racist."
i didnt notice that at the time...bitch.

>>3943579
>A hypothesis is valid until it is disproved.

ftfy. but actually it needs further adjusting:

>>A hypothesis is valid until it is disproved. And an unfalsifiable hypothesis isn't valid at all.

It's not wrong. The spirits guide us man.

http://www.quantumtouch.com/

Who would lie about this kind of magic? They only want to help us!

>>3944261

Also, "Onus probandi incumbit ei qui dicit, non ei qui negat." That is, the burden of proof is on one who makes a claim, not one who denies it.

Why two twin brothers thar was born at same date - and under same sign - are different?

> Could someone give me a clearcut proof that astrology is wrong?

Sure. There is an entire field that proves astrology is wrong/inaccurate, its called astronomy.

If you don't feel like reading a book you can start learning stuff from here:
http://www.khanacademy.org/#cosmology-and-astronomy

this thread can use some further discussion

>>3943573
theres been many studies that show that seasons and perhaps even months can affect certain personality traits.

>that feel when I missed this epic thread

>>3944299
good point, twins are so similar, it must mean astrology is true.