-Submitted by David Durmm (Nal), Guest Blogger
Professor Brian Cox, a particle physicist at the University of Manchester and host of Wonders of the Solar System on the Science Channel, has brought the wrath of the Astrological Association of Great Britain upon himself. Professor Cox, on BBC2’s “Stargazing Live” show, said that “astrology is nonsense” and the Association wants the BBC to commit to “making a fair and balanced representation of astrology in the future.”
There’s a lot of money at stake.
It’s estimated that hundreds of millions of dollars are spent on astrology every year in the United States alone. If people start listening to Professor Cox, there will be less stupidity for the astrologers con-artists to prey upon.
Astrology is a fraud that racks in hundreds of millions of dollars. The fraudsters must maintain the illusion of the con. Those that point out that the emperor has no clothes must be dealt with swiftly and harshly. The facts must be kept out of the media. I have little sympathy for those who believe in astrology, but I have no sympathy for those who exploit them.
The stupid and their money are soon parted.
H/T: Pharyngula, Bad Astronomy.
Re: Reagan, I may have posted this thought before, I recall doing so but I have wondered if the whole Nancy/astrology wasn’t a cover story. Nancy was said to dictate Ron’s schedule based on the stars etc. and disrupt the working schedule of the White House with these shenanigans but Reagan was a victim of Alzheimer’s. Perhaps Nancy, knowing his condition, would simply not let him work on his bad days.
If his absence and the disruption was blamed on Nancy being under he sway of an astrologer it would appear that reagan was condescending to the ‘illness’ or obsession of his wife (like Lincoln) and it would be culturally acceptable. The truth would have been a political crisis. It worked for the Harding’s.
we are made of the same stuff as stars…
J. Brian Harris, Ph.D., P.E.,
“Which con?”
===================================================
astrology
RE: Blouise, January 29, 2011 at 4:42 pm
“In America, unlike India and China, there are far more practitioners working the con.”
########################
Which con?
So, that’s China focuses education far more on engineers than lawyers and the United States of America focuses education far more on lawyers than on engineers?
That is how the con of the Anglo-American Adversarial System has become far more of a con than any other similar con?
I find the con-undrum of the Anglo-American Adversarial System to be a con that is con-trary to the real public safety interest and to any intelligible notion con-comitant with the intent of the framers of the Con-stitution.
I work to avoid being con-fused as to what is con-tiguous with reality which is purported to be law and am not con-tent to let wrong be done without objection.
Whereas, my life circumstances and my personal con-stitution con-vince me to con-test abuse by law, and so have been con-demned by adversarial damages to work to con-vey the possible valye con-tained in my con-tinuing bioengineering research, according to the con-victions of my con-science, I work to con-clude learning how to con-duce human society into a concelebration of biological science and human law through a form of con-cretion of diverse human con-siderations.
Note: I here present my professional view without assigning any fault or blame or other criticism to any person, that this comment may be correctly understood as of civll discourse.
People in brick houses throwing glasses?
I love to study how people use diversionary tactics.
That love takes me into effort beyond arduous: The unriddling of the enigmatic tragedy of bullying…
I keep finding myself amazed by the disingenuously ingenuous ingenuity which diversions can assume..
Rather fascinating to me is how some folks in one blatantly fraudulent industry hasten to point to another allegedly fraudulent industry, perchance vainly hoping that attention to fraud will be directed away those in the blatant industry, and toward those in the allegedly fraudulent industry.
It has become my personal and professional observation that the outer limit of fraud comprised of the set of delusional beliefs which undergird “The Adversarial System.”
Time after time, I find myself observing truly decent, yet badly hurt and hurting, people being caught and veritably destroyed by the very system in which they seemingly have put their professional faith.
Lawyers sometimes get disbarred. Lawyers sometimes get convicted of crimes. Legislators sometimes get convicted of violating what legislation requires. Judges sometimes get judged and convicted for errors of judgment.
Were I to state what I find to be the greatest fraud of all possible frauds, I would truthfully state that I find “The Adversarial System” to be the greatest fraud humanity will likely ever encounter.
I state this in my licensed capacity as a Wisconsin Registered Professional Engineer, and I state that, if this view of mine, herewith stated, can be shown to be in any way deceptive, I shall fervently seek the revocation of my professional license, and I shall seek for myself the absolute maximum possible punishment available under law.
The enigma of the adversarial way, as I can fathom it, is that retaliation is a mental mechanism which drives itself, and which, once well-learned, takes even the best people on a ride toward hatred of self and others which is as though like a ride on a whirligig on a roller-coaster on a merry-go-round on a Ferris Wheel on an accelerating-to-disintegration gyroscope.
I find, in my licensed capacity as a Wisconsin Registered Professional Engineer that it is a scientific fact, and not mere opinion, that no mistake ever actually made either could or should have been avoided, and that any belief which differs from this is, to the extent of difference, an atrociously overwhelming psychotic delusion.
I find, in my licensed capacity as a Wisconsin Registered Professional Engineer, that “The Adversarial System of Law and Jurisprudence” is inextricably deceptive, especially with regard to time-confusion and time-corrupted learning, and thus also is inextricably fraudulent.
I deem it affectively imperative to observe that I state as fact that the system, as a social activity, is fraudulent, AND I also unequivocally state without qualification that no person is fraudulent nor ever can be fraudulent, and that the legalistic notion of personal liability is of purely dishonestly deceptive fraud, and therefore I stipulate that no person is actually deceptive or fraudulent, at actual fault, or truthfully blamed, for anything, in any way whatsoever.
People who have been well deceived exhibit their having been deceived without deception. Hence the fraud which is the Anglo-American Adversarial System.
The people who work professionally within the Anglo-American Adversarial System are not the System, and are not of the System, and bear no responsibility for the System; they were born into it because it existed before the people whose profession is of the System did.
I herewith stipulate that I, in my licensed capacity as a Wisconsin Registered Professional Engineer shall continue my duly diligent effort to be of very real assistance to the profession of law; the law as written is not at issue, what is at issue is the purported fact in pais (to wit, that the Anglo-American Adversarial System is other than fraudulent), it being a legal fiction contrary to ultimate biological fact, as to how the law is interpreted and by whom it is interpreted.
What greater fraud is possible than my being required, by law, to obey law which no lawyer can explain to me sufficiently well that I can, by dint of conscience, know without error how to never be in violation of any law?
I doubt that any Astrologer will ever be able to approach that degree and extent of fraud.
Albert Einstein was perhaps perplexed by quantum coupling (Spooky action at a distance.)
There is a recognized physical basis for some of the notions of Astrology (Spooky action at a distance). There is no recognized physical basis for such aspects of the structure of law as command that something not be what it is, and therefore, be what it is not.
Adversarial Law appears to me to be far more ancient, superstitious, and dastardly than any aspect of Astrology can ever be.
Oh. Sorry. I pay no attention to Astrology, I find it unduly superstitious, though only about a trillionth as superstitious as I find the present Anglo-American Adversarial System to be.
As I may have previously indicated, I am not a nice person because I choose to be a kind, decent. truthful person in a social world where actual truthfulness is as though the trans-ultimate violation.
When one profession finds fault with another, I study the one doing fault finding. Beware. I find no fault with the legal profession, but am troubled by murderous aspects of the ancient superstitions which linger, embedded within the legal system through precedent.
The conundrum is not the people, it is an ancient superstition which masquerades as an ancient fact.
Astrologers are no more charlatans than are attorneys-at-law.
Indeed, no Astrologer has commanded me to do what I always find impossible and always threatened me with dastardly punishments for my ineluctable failure to do as commanded.
I ponder guessing that astrologers are vastly less charlatans than are lawyers?
Folks, I come to help, not hurt, the law profession.
I describe the horrendous damage the adversarial system has done to my close family, so those who practice law professionally may learn better to understand the effects of the contemporary structure of law on profoundly truthful people.
I come to help the law become lawful in terms of actually observable human biology.
Were we to take away law from society, there would erupt such dastardly chaos as to make even the present mess nearly ideal by contrast.
What the responses, and non-responses to my posted comments has given me is a far greater grasp of the pervasiveness of the defect in the process of human thought which is simply belief in adversariality as an stunningly addictive trauma response.
Personally, I type angry letters to the editor whenever I see any public official make a joke about tea reading. I can tell it’s effective because after that one episode of the X-files I’ve never seen tea reading mentioned in pop culture.
Nibiru= the End of the Trinity
along with the positions of the Sun, Moon and comets and the person’s time of birth and Zodiac Sign … another centuries old belief system
Isn’t the world suppose to come to an end in 2012.
Dr Brian Cox (formerly ther keyboard player with D-Reem) is currently my favorite science presenter – he has a great talent for using simple evryday objects to explain the way the universe works.
I saw a 5 minute interview with him a few months back where he was asked who his infuences were. Without a moments hesitation he said “Carl Sagan”. Now I know why I like this guy so much.
Woosty’s still a Cat,
I purposely did not mention Saturn’s role in determining the likelihood of the con.
I like Feng Shui too 🙂
And 9star-Ki,
Prayer, Meditation and Chiropractic….to me these things are always better than the practice of, oh lets say…the Law, which uses Lawsuits as the beaker for reason in its methodological outcome…another pseudoscience whose outcome derives from the whims of an unstudiable set of unpredictable and often unknown elements…yet claims its necessity to society and that it’s practice is built on ‘objective’ standard.
There is always conflict in belief…but it is the study of the EFFECTs of a thing that measure its importance at any given time….I think that is another way of saying ‘Is this thing doing more good than harm’….
‘fraid I’m not doing a very good job of saying the obvious…ie; those in glass houses…..
Woosty’s still a Cat,
True, for like any belief system, good and bad results are determined by the user … which was the point I was trying to make … perhaps too subtly as one has to be careful when discussing this subject.
For instance … let’s say my 8th house (for the purposes of this discussion, representing other people’s money)is heavily impacted on a certain date with favorable aspects and the ruler of the house is also favorably aspected and well placed, natally, in the 2nd house … do I choose to gamble in Las Vegas or run a con on someone who is planning to gamble in Las Vegas … the user determines the choice.
Astrology is a belief system and as open to the con as any other belief system. In America, unlike India and China, there are far more practitioners working the con.
I like feng shui, myself. It’s a step above the hoi polloi of newspaper astrology and, because it’s more expensive, it’s classier.
http://www.fengshuidesign.net/index.html
yes, those statements may be true, but they are not the sum total of all the truth related to astrology. To condemn a small part risks throwing out the good with the bad….to condemn astrology (which as you say, is an important block in the foundations of many cultures)risks more than say, studying the science of astrology which may prove more that is salvageable if not too dismissively condemned…
Woosty’s still a Cat
Jyotiṣa or Vedic (western version) astrology has been around for centuries and very much a part of the Hindu religion determining marriage, opening a new business, buying a new home, and naming a baby. “Astrology even manages to retain a position among the sciences in modern India. Following a controversial judgement of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in 2001, some Indian universities even offer advanced degrees in astrology.”
And then, of course, we have Chinese astrology, wherein a person’s destiny is determined by the position of the major planets at the person’s birth along with the positions of the Sun, Moon and comets and the person’s time of birth and Zodiac Sign … another centuries old belief system very much in practice today.
Astrology is a belief system or, in the Hindu and Chinese cultures, part of a belief system and those who practice it do so with the same fervor as any other religious devotee.
Now I, personally, have found it very useful when visiting Las Vegas. I call it my “Winner Winner Chicken Dinner Astrology” and for a small monthly dollar amount I will cast …… 😉
(That’s a come on similar to tithing 10% to the preacher hoping Jesus will make you a lottery winner …… )
Professor Brian Cox is messing with a perfectly good con!
Blouise,
I’ve heard before from a couple of conservative friends how “The Wall” came down because of Reagan’s speech. Those friends conveniently forget about things like Solidarity, a Polish pope, Gorbachev, etc. They won’t accept anything other than Reagen being the impetus for the wall’s destruction. Some people like simplistic history.
*****
AY,
Good points about Reagen’s “not-so-popular” past.
Elaine,
Excellent rebuttal material to the “Reagan saves the world” thought and I suspect indicative of the way history will ultimately view his role in the matter.
At this present time there are still far too many conservatives who wish to take the “short view” in order to propagandize their only popular Presidential figure. History will dissect the matter, dismiss the hyperbole of fad and take the “long view” and Reagan will be presented as he really was.
“Depend upon it there comes a time when for every addition of knowledge you forget something that you knew before. It is of the highest importance, therefore, not to have useless facts elbowing out the useful ones.”
“But the Solar System!” I protested.
“What the deuce is it to me?” he interrupted impatiently: “you say we go round the sun. If we went round the moon it would not make a pennyworth of difference to me or to my work.”
– Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, A Study in Scarlet
Patric,
I doubt it was Reagen’s “Great Speech” alone that brought that wall down. There was a lot going on on the other side of the “Iron Curtain” that many here in the US forget about when giving credit to those who were responsible for the tearing down of that wall.
*****
From Foreign Policy (11/6/2009)
Who Brought Down the Berlin Wall?
Reagan? Economics? The CIA? Why the usual suspects get too much credit.
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:y_M60LDGkikJ:www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2009/11/06/who_brought_down_the_berlin_wall+who+brought+down+the+berlin+wall&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&source=www.google.com
Excerpt:
Throughout the 40 years of the Cold War, popular uprisings against governments established by the Soviet Union in east-central Europe took place over and over again — in East Berlin in 1953, in Hungary in 1956, in Czechoslovakia in 1968, and in Poland almost too many times to count — but repeatedly failed.
In the fall of 1989, they succeeded. No one saw revolution on the way, and certainly no one could have predicted that it would take place as peacefully as it did. (The exception, of course, was the violent revolution in Romania, but even there the casualty figures were not large.) These were complex events, and the details differed substantially from country to country. Most historians would probably agree that the outcome was the result of a mix of factors. Yet simplified views still abound — and the 20th anniversary of the wall’s fall will offer plenty of opportunity to rehearse some of them yet again. Here’s a reality check on the most persistent myths:
No. 1: It was Ronald Reagan.
In this version of history, U.S. President Ronald Reagan’s resolute hawkishness and emancipatory eloquence saved the day for the free world.
On June 12, 1987, in front of the Brandenburg Gate in West Berlin, Reagan issued a challenge to Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev to make good on his promises of liberalization. “Come here, to this gate! Mr. Gorbachev, open this gate! Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!” Reagan’s supporters claim that this speech played a key role in sparking the events of 1989, but there’s little evidence to back this up.
In fact, Reagan’s words left little obvious imprint on the thinking of dissidents behind the Iron Curtain. The opposition movements in East Germany and Czechoslovakia were more peacenik than Grand Old Party; in Poland, Solidarity activists already had their own pope as a moral beacon. Neither the Washington Post nor the New York Times even ran Reagan’s speech on the front page. Some Reaganites tended to regard the speech as a grand bit of political theater, intended mainly for consumption back home, with limited real-world repercussions. Reagan’s own national security advisor, Frank Carlucci, later recalled thinking, “It’s a great speech line. But it will never happen.”
And in West Berlin itself — where the late-1980s population included a disproportionate number of Greens and counterculture refugees from West Germany’s draft — the applauders were outnumbered by the rioters, who chose to protest against Reagan’s conservative policies rather than applaud his chutzpah. If anything, it was Reagan’s willingness, throughout most of his second term, to meet Gorbachev halfway that helped the Soviet leader back away from the use of force — an achievement that led British journalist Victor Sebestyen to dub Reagan “America’s Leading Dove.”
“those who believe a horoscope is the picture of one’s soul traveling through time and those who believe that one’s soul actually travels to heaven are no different from each other in that they have placed their faith in absurdity.”
…and yet the physical evidence of gravity upon physical matter is real…and the movement of the stars is in part (if not wholley) dependant upon gravity…which does change and is acted upon all of us…and so there is at least, reason to believe that the the movement of the stars is a small part of the mirror of effects upon us…just because it is not completely understood (a blessing!) does not mean it is not real and should not be studied further…
and there are charlatans in EVERY proffesion…..again:“It is a wise person who rules the stars, a fool who is ruled by them”~ Darryl Martinie AKA the Cosmic Muffin. 😉