• Tavarin@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    No, that’s all astrology is. Whenever it’s been put to the test it has been found to have no supernatural or real predictive power. Just vague statements, and reader bias.

    • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Testing is the important part. Imo, the reason astrology persists is because of the lottery effect. One person out of 12 gets the perfect reading so promotes astrology as working when they were just lucky.

        • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          9
          ·
          1 year ago

          Certainty is unscientific and illogical. The scientific method cannot prove anything. It simply tests hypotheses to develop models. Every model is wrong, but some are more useful than others. Conflating the discovery of a useful model with absolute certainty isn’t science, it’s scientific fundamentalism, a cancer that eats your brain.

          Nothing can be said scientifically about the truth or falsity of any claim. Science can only day that the evidence gathered in a particular experimental setup is consistent or inconsistent with a hypothesis.

          • Tavarin@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Man, you do not understand science.

            I’m a research chemist, and have been in the sciences for the last 15 years.

            And science can test the hypothesis that astrology is accurate in various ways, and has shown time and time again that astrology is no better than random chance in its accuracy.

            People have been trying to prove evolution is wrong since it was first posited, yet all evidence just further demonstrates it is the correct explanation for life.

            Models aren’t wrong by definition. Incomplete perhaps, but if a theory is able to accurately predict the world around us then it is still a good theory. Our theory of gravity can let us calculate the exact position of stellar bodies for millennia ahead, and has been consistently shown to be accurate.

            • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              science can test the hypothesis that astrology is accurate in various ways

              This is true

              theory is able to accurately predict the world around us then it is still a good theory

              This is also true

              The moment you start making absolute statements based on the above, no matter how unanimous the evidence, you have left the realm of science and your brain begins to succumb to the rot. If we treated well supported models as gospel, we’d still be using the Newtonian gravitational model.

              The entire point of science is to admit the fundamental uncertainty of all human knowledge, and develop the tools to develop better models. Yes, every model is wrong. Some allow us to make very accurate predictions, but they are all imperfect approximations.

              No scientific model justifies absolute certainty

              • 20hzservers@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Yeah but you dismiss things without providing any counter evidence, science is always willing to change but that has to be backed up by empirical evidence, which there isn’t much of to back up astrology. “SCIENCE IS NEVER CERTAIN.” Is a cop out dismissal used by people who don’t understand science but think because they half listened in science class during the part about scientific method they don’t need to provide evidence to back up claims they make. Edit: If you have empirical non anecdotal evidence to back up your claims I’m all ears btw.

                • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Yeah but you dismiss things without providing any counter evidence

                  When did I do that?

                  “SCIENCE IS NEVER CERTAIN.” Is a cop out dismissal used by people who don’t understand science but think because they half listened in science class during the part about scientific method they don’t need to provide evidence to back up claims they make.

                  It is also a factual statement by people who do understand science and are tired of seeing scientific fundamentalism instill a smug sense of certainty in people who claim to be scientific.

                  I never claimed that astrology is true. All I said was that absolute statements are unscientific.

                  • Tavarin@lemmy.ca
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    5
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    You did say astrology could be true:

                    but like I said I wouldn’t be surprised if it turns out to have some actual correspondence to some unknown tangible cause unrelated to the stars

                    But really you just fell for the Barnum effect.

              • Tavarin@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Yet every time astrology is tested it has failed.

                Evolution is basically a scientific certainty at this point because every single test has shown it to be true, and no one has every been able to disprove it. We don;t understand every single nuance and mechanism of evolution, but the fact evolution is occurring and has occurred in the past is a certainty.

                Gravity is a certainty at this point. Again we don’t fully understand the exact causes of gravity, but the fact it exists is certain.

                And every test to try and show any validity to astrology has failed, astrology is nothing but a scam.

                • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  Again, I tested it, I found some evidence of success. You can say that that test isn’t statistically significant, you can question my methodologies, but you cannot say that every test has failed.

                  This conversation isn’t about astrology, I don’t believe in astrology. This conversation is about mental hygiene, and the creeping fundamentalism that stifles scientific progress. Certainty is unscientific.

                  • Tavarin@lemmy.ca
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    That is not a scientific test. I’ve already told you, you fell prey to the Barnum effect.

                    And no, the only unscientific thing in this conversation is you insisting a data point of 1 with no controls is you somehow testing it.