…the future is a mystery, but today…
today is a gift.
That’s why we call it the present.
Oogway (Randall Duk Kim), Kung Fu Panda
One thing I hear a lot—one thing I’m sure all astrologers hear a lot—is that astrology is fake. The trouble is that the “evidence” they use to draw these conclusions isn’t very sound in itself.
“Astrology isn’t (and/or can’t be) scientifically proven!”
Sorry, but how many people on this planet believe in some deity (any deity) whose existence can’t be scientifically proven, yet churches, mosques and temples still dot the world…? (Also, can I find a calculator that can count that high? •chuckle•)
Based on Wikipedia (and I’m referencing that because of too many individual citations), and excluding secular and those that don’t believe in a specific deity or group of deities (such as UUs, who emphasize knowledge), that number is something in the nature of 6.9 billion people. And that doesn’t even include agnostics, who generally believe there’s some sort of deity, but not much beyond that.
That’s more than ninety percent of the planet that believes in something you can’t replicate scientifically.
And you laugh at me for believing in astrology, the numbers of whom are probably a great deal smaller?
‘Scuse me while I laugh right back!
Astrology can’t predict shit!
Isn’t it interesting…
❧ …how a meteorologist can make a prediction based on available evidence and it’s called “a weather forecast”;
❧ …how a scientist can make a prediction based on available evidence (and sometimes not, depending on what they’re studying) and it’s called “a hypothesis”;
❧ …but an astrologer can make a prediction based on available evidence and it’s called “fake”?
So who died and made skeptics the authority on the difference between a hypothesis and bullshit?
(I was going to write at least a medium-length rant on how the future is malleable and no one gets it right and so forth, but I think I’ve said quite enough.) (Except I forgot about pointing out that there was a time where generals and kings never went to war without consulting an astrologer, and even saints practiced it once upon a time—check out Saint Augustine.)
The stuff in the newspaper/magazines…
…is pretty much junk and I wonder why they even bother publishing it?
I think most people get the idea that astrology is fake from these alone, and—to be quite honest—I don’t blame them.
What you see in periodicals is your sun sign (that I refer to by the Greek name of Helios), which most say describes your inner self. The reason that it never feels like the whole you is because it has never. Once. DEPICTED THE WHOLE YOU!
Even by itself, it doesn’t tell you enough, because where Helios is in the sky (or not, in the case of night births) also factors into your personality. If you’re lucky enough to meet two people who were born hours apart, you can see dramatic differences even without their charts. I went to school with a guy who was born approximately three hours earlier and we were as different as night and day! (Bit of a pun there, since being born in January means there was a literal difference of night and day.)
Depending on what the astrologer puts into their charts, we’re looking at steadily decreasing percentages of the whole picture:
❧ The luminaries are always present – the sun (Helios) and Earth’s moon (Selene)
❧ Modern and Hellenistic (ancient Greek) include the original planets (and exclude us): Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn
❧ The former also includes Uranus, Neptune and Pluto (unlike NDT, we actually consider Pluto viable!)
❧ Western astrologers usually include the ascendant [eastern horizon], the midheaven [zenith], the descendant [western horizon] and the lower heaven [nadir]. (I’ll be referring to these as the four vertices below.)
❧ Not to mention asteroids, Arabic lots (including the Part of Fortune and the Part of Spirit), the North/South Node and whatever else they want to throw up there
The average Hellenistic chart uses 2 luminaries + 5 planets + Part of Fortune + 4 vertices, which equals 1/12 (8.3%).
Even though I’ve been working on that form lately, I use 2 luminaries + 8 planets + 4 vertices in my basic charts, which equals 1/14 (7.14%).
At the most extreme is everything I mentioned above: 2 luminaries + 8 planets + 2 nodes + 2 basic lots (Spirit and Fortune) + the 4 “most important asteroids” (Ceres, Juno, Pallas and Vesta, who I guess were all planets for thirty-seven years) + 4 vertices = 1/22 (4.54%)
If you could only read 4.54% of a book, watch 7.14% of a movie or 8.3% of a television show, wouldn’t you think it’s absolute crap too?
Let’s break that down (and round up) using popular media:
❧ 5% of The Hunger Games is 19.3 pages of the print version. (I don’t know about you, but I make my decision within the first fifty pages, if not sooner.) In my digital copy (with the font and margins set how I like), that doesn’t even get you to Effie drawing Prim’s name.
❧ A New Hope (Star Wars IV) is 121 minutes long. 7% of the movie is 8.47 minutes. Shockingly, that actually gets far enough to introduce you to Vader, Leia and the droids! But not Luke or Han. And no lightsabers, either. (I skimmed through this video to the 8.5 minute mark to get an idea.)
❧ My new favorite competition show is Crime Scene Kitchen, which is an hour long. That’s only 4.8 minutes—barely longer than one of the commercial breaks!
If you can’t make a decision on something to read or watch with that small of a percentage, how is trying to adjudicate your future that way considered sane?
I could go on about how astrology isn’t fake because there is no such thing as a coincidence (but I’m too lazy to look up the calculations) and there’s often more than one significator in the sky when something big happens (Mercury rules transportation and was in retrograde during the Miracle on the Hudson, but not during the Challenger disaster, which means something else was going on), but I don’t have the patience.
And none of that would convince the skeptics, anyway.