Volker.Doormann

Autonemesis,
if you are interested in astrology but as well in astronomy, you may take a look on doormann.tripod.com/asssky.htm about Astronomy in Babylon. There are a lot of background information and some specific hints to the astrological character of the planets, mistaken as gods until now from scholars. The worship was only the respect to the character of the planets, because of the ruler for some human emotions and feelings. As the Jews had broken the knowledge of astrology (search for 'astarte' (=Venus in the bible), they have banned the planets as false gods or idols. This anathema will hold up until now as an part of education on high schools and in these skeptic brains here. Jupiter, the Marduk in Babylon, as the astrological principle of justice is converted in the Bible to 'Melchezedek' or 'Melechzedek' which means 'king of righteous' as a 'priest'. Until now it is believed, that the people in mesoptamia/Babylon are slaves of the planets as gods, but one can find, that it was an intelligent search for the truth in the spirital aere of nature. The Sumers in 2300 BCE have said: 'Into an open mouth, a fly enters'; and this may show, that coolness is not a patent of the people of this age.

Volker

echidna

Actually Australians say this quite a lot as well. But over here we mean "keep your trap shut when you're talking bullshit". You might consider it good advice !!!

Volker.Doormann

You are on my ignore list

Arken

So you're looking past the core of my argument, that the prediction was almost totally incorrect, and just looking at the words I use? I'm not impressed. How about addressing the issue?

Also, as I already said, I don't have energy and my fury doesn't pass quickly when I have it althought I don't get furious all that often. I'm not sure what that arms part means. I've never been in a physical fight of any sort.

Volker.Doormann

If you would be taken seriously in a scientific forum then it is up to you to argue adquate. Bullshit is not a SI unit and Fucking is not a helpful dimension to evaluate truth. The difference between science and and pseudoscience is, that science distinguish beteen truth and untruth and pseudescience mixed it up and adding bias of any kind to it. Thruth does not need promotion or discredit, it needs a clean clear logic argumentation for them who listen to, to find this in their spirit and not in their emotional pelvis. The keypoint is, that your sayings and arguments are taken only for serious, if you do argue seriously. Why should I take you serious?

Volker

Arken

Good question. I certainly am having a hard time taking you seriously.

Volker.Doormann

Thank you for the talk, Arken.

Arken

Thanks for the insults.

scombrid

How about explaining why the horoscope for Arken contained contradictory statements. Might it be that the technique requires shutgunning where several predictions/characterizations are blindly made and the astrologer counts on the con victim only remembering the his and forgetting the misses? You only need separate contradictory statements by a few lines for the true believer to forget the wrong bits.

Arken's reply was more substantive than the bits you selected yet you only replied to the bits where arkens expressed frustration at the nonsense waded through. Why ddin't you address Arken's substantive replies? Have you no answer for legitimate criticism?

Volker.Doormann

A human psyche is not one bit. Depending on weather, hunger, time, environment the emotions can be different, because a human being is able to be smart in general, but also aggressive in general. This is not really a contradiction in the sense of philosophy, which would be taken, to reject contradiction sayings.

If you can follow this argumentation and you can agree on it, then this is a good base for a discussion. If you do not agree on this, and you do argue, that this is a contradiction of philosophy, and you have arguments, then this is a good base for a discussion.

While a discussion is mind war in general, but a dialog is more effective finding the truth, I prefer a dialog. Nobody must discuss with me, but I must discuss also not with each one, who has a dirty speech.

A dialog needs to relate to arguments in the reply. A dialog avoids to attack the person, moreover it serve the to be discussing subject.

This are common rules and if they are hurt, if one think, that this rules are not valid discussing astrology, god or anything else, then I switch off. I hope you can agree on that.

I am not responsible for the text from astro.com, but I am willing to give help - and my critical thoughts - if I can on exact that base on dialog.

There is nothing to determine in this world, but all to recognize. A personal opinion may be adequate in listen music, but in recognizing truth of nature - and astrology is part of nature and not created by Ron Hubbard - a personal opinion is of no need.

I have no intention to work on to interfere people who are arguing as persons of authority. There are a lot of empty space in the ignore lists here.

Volker