Addressing Astrology Skepticism
The dominant astrology of today, what sells and almost everything on-line, is a watered down form of an ancient science: overly simplistic methods yielding content applicable to anyone, laden with poetic, heartfelt inspiration and false hope as a means to help you construct your own self-fulfilling prophesies.
To those who doubt the validity of astrology, I don’t believe in the form of astrology you’ve been exposed to either.
There are only 12 signs of the zodiac. How can there be only 12 types of people?
Sun sign astrology (i.e., “horoscopes”) isn’t authentic astrology. Of course there aren’t only 12 types of people. Please see this article for more information. This article outlines why the astrology you’ve been exposed to is trivial.
How can you say that astrology “influences” anything? Jupiter’s distance from Earth, for instance, is over 500 million miles. How does Jupiter influence anything?
While you may hear astrologers say things like “the influence of a planet,” it’s a misleading thing to say.
Alternatively, it’s accurate to say the patterns involving heavenly bodies symbolize life circumstances and human nature.
Although the Moon influences the tides, my belief is that all associated phenomena (e.g., lunar eclipses, Moon Void of Course, Full Moon, Moon in detriment, etc.) and other celestial phenomena don’t make anything happen, but they do absolutely correspond to real life events, based on how those universal events show up in your comprehensive charts.
How can you say astrology is real science? I don’t believe it. Isn’t it a pseudo-science?
Again, I don’t believe in the astrology you’ve been exposed to either. As a science, astrology peaked in the Middle Ages. Authentic astrology isn’t pseudo-science.
Rather than only one or a handful of factors applying to any given person, such as “Leo” (Sun sign) and a corresponding “horoscope” that reads like a fortune cookie, real astrology includes hundreds of indicators derived from the full date of birth, location, and exact time that form patterns. Pattern recognition, symbolizing personality and life events, is the basis of this empirically based science.
For example, even though a person may have only a modest net worth at the moment, having 93% of all related indicators favoring upcoming exceptionally rewarding financial conditions, the subject will undoubtedly see an upswing in funds.
Accuracy in prediction and personality analysis relies on a solid system of checks and balances. My proprietary systems include handwriting analysis, and comprehensive astrology and numerology (ancient and modern forms of both).
The Age of Reason in the 1600s AD began astrology’s serious state of decline due largely to a scientific superiority complex by the self-appointed science authorities. A biased redefinition of science prevailed through the pretense of “logic” and astrology (and numerology, known as “number mysticism”) were downgraded and tossed on the pseudo-science heap.
The Age of Reason activists claimed astrology could not possibly be a science because it didn’t hold up under their scientific method, which entails logically compiling observable, measurable data.
That verdict is baseless because astrology (the astrology from that time) is a science by definition: results are empirically, regularly derived from the same sets of circumstances.
Merriam-Webster dictionary defines science as “A knowledge or a system of knowledge covering general truths or the operation of general laws especially as obtained and tested through scientific method.” Also, it defines scientific method as “Principles and procedures for the systematic pursuit of knowledge involving the recognition and formulation of a problem, the collection of data through observation and experiment, and the formulation and testing of hypotheses.”
Authentic astrology is empirically based—“…objective collection of data through observation and experiment and the formulation and testing of hypotheses.” It is truly a science.
An aside, scientific method, by modern standards, doesn’t automatically make a notion valid, no matter how many peer reviews. Peer review has proven to be futile time and time again.
“…Peer review is the benchmark by which most new scientific research tends to be judged. If that research is to be taken seriously by the scientific community then it must be accepted for publication by one of a fairly small number of academic or quasi-academic journals, such as Nature, Science and Scientific American.
Peer review is not a perfect system. In the golden era of Twentieth century science it wasn’t even thought necessary: neither Watson & Crick nor Einstein were peer reviewed. But in today’s abstruse, fragmented world where the various branches of science have grown increasingly recondite and specialized, peer-review has become widely accepted as the least worst method by which quality science can be sifted from junk science…” “…What we see happening is the deterioration of ‘peer review’ into something more akin to ‘pal review.’”
Considering the enormous amount of skepticism regarding astrology, surely there are studies that prove it invalid?
Incredibly, there aren’t any. All skepticism seems to be directed toward trivial astrology, and I agree with that criticism.
I’d be interested in finding out about the empirical research of the skeptics. I suspect they simply dismiss the science of astrology after a quick Internet search without any serious evaluation on their part at all.
It always amazes me when people draw conclusions based on the limits of their understanding.
I have yet to see any study attempting to invalidate comprehensive astrology. Please see this article for more information.
You can’t prove a theory valid, you can only invalidate it.
My credentials are the result of objective, empirically based research involving my work (clients, public figures, people of all walks of life, real-world concerns, etc.) and I state my findings about astrology and numerology as theories. For example, comprehensive astrology and numerology represent human character, compatibility, and unique personal life circumstances and events. My theories have yet to be invalidated. Support of my theories comes from my clients, in that they value my findings enough to pay me.
The legitimacy of authentic astrology is realized through informally observing the life events and circumstances of other people without telling them, in conjunction with paying attention to their personal natal and cyclical timing charts. In this way, “self-fulfilling prophesy” isn’t applicable.
Once you witness, as I have, the constant repetition of the patterns in the comprehensive astrology and numerology charts absolutely corresponding to personality traits and events in peoples’ lives, it is easy to stop rejecting the concept of personal fate and the sciences of numerology and astrology.
According to one of my favorite scientists, over the course of the last 2000 years, the Earth has wobbled, which has changed the signs from their original positions. Aren’t astrologers off one full sign?
No, astrologers aren’t off one full sign. And 2000 years from now they won’t be off two full signs.
Again, it always amazes me when people, especially scientists—esteemed scientists, draw conclusions based on the limits of their understanding.
Astrologers have accepted the concept of precession–the Aries point moving slightly backwards each year–for approximately 2140 years, since Hipparchus discovered the precession of the equinoxes.
This discrepancy is reflected in the Sidereal zodiac, but not the Tropical zodiac, which is, by far, the dominant zodiac used in Western astrology.
More information here: Your Real Sign Hasn’t Changed and 11 Other Astrological Truths.
Comprehensive astrology, as part of a complex system of checks and balances, successfully delineates personality, compatibility, and allows you to foresee unique trends and circumstances in your life, significantly reducing your risk.
Copyright © 2012 Scott Petullo