It's the followers of astrology who are challenging the current scientific orthodoxy, one which has proven itself to be extremely effective and which rejects astrology. You may be right, and I wrong, but the burden of proof is on you, not me. Science doesn't have to prove astrology wrong (although it has), astrology has to show where science is mistaken.
As for all the ancient civilizations that used astrology, that is evidence enough for me. They all used DIFFERENT, contradictory systems of astrology. Like religions, they can't all be right, but they certainly could all be wrong.
Yes, the Universe has many connections to us, through matter and energy, but they are very subtle, and our most clever physicists and mathematicians haven't begun to sort them out. I don't think some Bronze Age Babylonian or Chinese could have done so with the tools at his disposal.
Ron and Nancy Ray-gun? You picked the wrong testimonial to impress this pagan. I don't believe anything they did was right.
Flame » in reply to Ancient nonsense?
re: Ancient nonsense?
The whole thread (77 posts)
- Just for Fun, and to say "thanks, carbon units".
- You missed the elitist background of the lyrics...
- Music, heritage, etc
- The 60's
- re: The 60's
- Kumbaya? 1962?
- Vance Packard
- Never read him
- re: Never read him
- "Any more questions? "
- My sign is "Yield"
- pretending to care about astrology can get you laid
- Whoa, boy, here we go. (n/t)
- Scuse me?
- re: Scuse me?
- re: Scuse me?
- Ancient nonsense?
- "Ever had your chart done with a thorough interpretation from an accomplished astrologer? "
- Lindy's using Reagan as a reference? Hell has frozen over. (n/t)
- re: Ancient nonsense?
- Ancient Garbage
- Ancient nonsense?
- My sign is "Yield"
- "Any more questions? "
- re: Never read him
- Never read him
- Vance Packard
- Kumbaya? 1962?
- re: The 60's
- re: The 60's
- re: The 60's
