"Bob Officer" <bobofficers@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:u3ibm1dl61opikntq6pckm4n4i3s8bnfbh@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 06:27:40 +0100, in alt.usenet.kooks, "Dr.
> Flonkenstein"
> <admin@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 30 Oct 2005 19:20:59 -0800, yyyiiinnngg wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "Bob Officer" <bobofficers@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>> news:vmuam1lbpp4u7jt69dglktnnv4nk2n6c48@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>> On Sun, 30 Oct 2005 12:42:55 -0800, in alt.usenet.kooks,
>>>> <yyyiiinnnggg@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>"Bob Officer" <bobofficers@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>>>>news:a7v8m1h4o6kpodsi2hao5bj12mortba9uu@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>>> On Sun, 30 Oct 2005 00:42:54 -0700, in alt.usenet.kooks,
>>>>>> <yyyiiinnnggg@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"Bob Officer" <bobofficers@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>>>>>>news:5kp8m1tkan1dj8ap7c5ote935ojtloiaic@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>>>>> On Sat, 29 Oct 2005 23:01:32 -0700, in alt.usenet.kooks,
>>>>>>>> <yyyiiinnnggg@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>"Bob Officer" <bobofficers@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>news:a888m1dl9ljnqdldgj7dhn4r7nd4f2ot9q@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 29 Oct 2005 18:19:31 -0700, in alt.usenet.kooks,
>>>>>>>>>> <yyyiiinnnggg@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>"Bob Officer" <bobofficers@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>>news:55q7m1p4ctm4vrc86kgqigcl7s83tc9t75@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 29 Oct 2005 14:08:41 -0700, in alt.astrology,
>>>>>>>>>>>> <yyyiiinnnggg@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>"Bob Officer" <bobofficers@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>>>>news:77b7m11d7rauhqa9ncgfkbcgjkh46pv5j3@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 29 Oct 2005 10:45:17 -0400, in alt.usenet.kooks,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "KOTY=DNC_TN@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
" <KOTY=DNC_TN@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On Sat, 29 Oct 2005 09:21:27 -0400, "Lambdascorpii"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><lambdascorpii@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>I don't give a ****...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Uh....Then why did you post a reply to a message subject
that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>don't care about.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Seems kinda silly.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He believes in astrology...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that sort of fits the mold
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Which He has built for himself
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>Do you think astrology doesn't work?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I know it doesn't work. just like magic doesn't work, the
bread
>>>>>>>>>>>> doesn't
>>>>>>>>>>>> really turn into meat, and the wine doesn't really turn into
>>>>>>>>>>>> blood in
>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>> rite of ritual canabilism/vampirism practiced in most
christian
>>>>>>>>>>>> churches.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Magic doesn't exist, their are no fairies, aliens in UFOs,
>>>>>>>>>>>> LGMs,
>>>>>>>>>>>> gods
>>>>>>>>>>>> or
>>>>>>>>>>>> goddesses.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Astrology, the superstition is based on Apophenia... It is an
>>>>>>>>>>>> artifact
>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>>> the way the human brain works. The human brain tries to make
>>>>>>>>>>>> patterned
>>>>>>>>>>>> where
>>>>>>>>>>>> they are no pattern. Also if you are into ready, study what a
>>>>>>>>>>>> type one
>>>>>>>>>>>> statistical error is. The best pro astrology arguments to
come
>>>>>>>>>>>> up in
>>>>>>>>>>>> years
>>>>>>>>>>>> was based upon the so called mars effect, which was
>>>>>>>>>>>> accomplished
>>>>>>>>>>>> by
>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>> cherry picking of data. When the so called mars effect is
>>>>>>>>>>>> looked
>>>>>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>> general population, the tendency disappears. Just as every
over
>>>>>>>>>>>> so called
>>>>>>>>>>>> astrological trait, disappears or appears uniformally in
every
>>>>>>>>>>>> sign,
>>>>>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>>>>> an
>>>>>>>>>>>> equal or nearly equal distribution.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> In others words, astrology is a superstition, based on the
>>>>>>>>>>>> ancient art
>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>>> calendar keeping by a small religious body, based in the
middle
>>>>>>>>>>>> east
>>>>>>>>>>>> about
>>>>>>>>>>>> or before 3400 BC., a modern belief not based in facts or
>>>>>>>>>>>> science, but
>>>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>>>> disproved facts and a belief in idle speculation.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>Why do people exhibit patterns that are consistent with their
>>>>>>>>>>>astrological
>>>>>>>>>>>signs. For example, virgo are mostly liar/inflaters, and all
>>>>>>>>>>>aires
>>>>>>>>>>>are
>>>>>>>>>>>managerial and calculating?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I don't know...
>>>>>>>>>> I find there are liar/inflaters in all groups , just as there
are
>>>>>>>>>> excellent
>>>>>>>>>> managers in all groups, they are not concentrated in any one
>>>>>>>>>> sign...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Each sign has a set of predictable behavior patterns.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No they don't... the is a myth.
>>>>>>>> Science and Math shows us those traits are equally distributed in
>>>>>>>> all the
>>>>>>>> signs.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Do you have proof?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, I do...
>>>>>> It get posted about once or twice a year to alt.astrology. see the
>>>>>> links I have provided below.
>>>>>
>>>>>Is that how you prove anything mathematically?
>>>>
>>>> The math is shown the links. I not going to tie up bandwidth with
>>>> copies
>>>> of
>>>> other articles. Follow the links below. Did you even look at them.
>>>> Several of them follow Dean's twin study, the study of birthday
twins.
>>>
>>> Mathematically, you only need one example to prove that something
>>> exists.
>>> There is never enough evidence to prove that something doesn't exit.
>>
>>Hey, fish, don't talk math if you even arn't able to count:
>>
>>"There is no number that is bigger than any other number". This is a
>>statement that explicitely states something doesn't exist. Yet the proof
>>of this statment is elementary, except for fish, of course, because they
>>can't count.
>
> Howabout this one. Ying asks for evidence. when I post URLs which
sup****t
> my
> claim, the ying says in message:Message-ID: <dk46a4$bh8$0@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> "I don't click on links that are potentially malicious."
>
> From know on when Ying asks for evidence, she will get that quote given
> back
> to her.
I am not arguing with URLs. Don't you feel obligated to consume the
knowledge first before you sell it on alt.astrology? Why not paste the
text
in quotes?
>
>>> Assuming your links are all correct, that doesn't mean astrology
doesn't
>>> exist. Do you follow?
>>>
>>Of course it exists. In the mind of people who substitute their wishful
>>thinking for where their clear critical mind would be.
>
> Astrology is basically wishful thinking and cold read. Did you know she
> wanted to give a reading on me... :) And my data and history is
scattered
> around on the net were she could read it.
Practically speaking, if astrology doesn't exist, why would you worry?
>
>
> <snip of stuff ying neither read nor responded to>
|
