From       16m 65kb       Home       Fast-Find Index

Readers' comments on specific topics
With our response as at July 2013

Abstract -- So far (1) Twelve general comments including suggestions for research. Indian reader. Tests are not enough. You need to expose the absurdities of astrology. (But these are already well discussed on this website.) UK reader. Try testing quintile and septile aspects. (This fails to consider the whole chart.) American reader. Recent studies found a strong effect of month-of-birth on human lifespan. (As did Huntington in 1928.) Australian reader. Have you seen Leos that act like Leos? (Yes, and Leos that act like Scorpios, Librans, etc.) Australian reader. Is astrology helpful or harmful? (It can be both.) UK reader. You ignore things that show astrology working. (Like what?) UK reader. Your case against astrology is bigger than your case for. (What are we missing?) American reader. You ignore business astrology. (Yes, because it does not allow clear conclusions.) Argentinian reader. It is not the purpose of astrology to satisfy scientists. (We agree.) Indian reader. Astrology is obviously not useful so why bother with empirical tests? (Why have arguments when you can have tests?) American reader. Why don't you test astrology fairly? (Like how?) Australian reader. If our view of reality is flawed then the scientific arguments against astrology may also be flawed. (As in jumping off cliffs, outcomes are not changed by our views of reality.) (2) Four comments to which reasoning errors are relevant. American reader. Science seems biassed against astrology. (The problem lies with astrologers ignoring cognitive biasses, ie hidden persuaders. It is easy to produce a persuasive astrology reading by hidden persuaders alone.) Same American reader. Do astrologers really ignore other explanations? (Yes.) UK reader. Astrology really is a mystery. (Hidden persuaders are not a mystery.) French reader. Astrology cannot be tested scientifically. (Who says?) Over the years various unsupported comments have been received claiming that astrology cannot be investigated by science, etc, as if asserting the case was enough to decide it. All involved matters that we deal with in detail on this website. (3) Five comments about astrological forces and white crows. German reader. You don't understand the nature of astrological energies. (No need for energies to explain astrology. Hidden persuaders are enough.) American reader. Leo Knegt is a genuine white crow. (Details are too meagre for us to be sure.) UK reader. Astrology needs a mechanism. (See above.) American reader. Astrology needs a force. (See above.) Same American reader. Gauquelin's planetary effects demand an explanation. (First remove artifacts.) (4) Five questions from a Swedish radio station. Why did you start (To show the facts.) Is it important to show facts about astrology? (Yes.) What kind of reactions from astrologers? (Denial or outrage.) How do you look upon astrologers? (They are generally warm and caring.) What impact will your research have on astrologers? (None.)

Full article including this abstract       16m 65kb       Home       Fast-Find Index