A challenge: will the real astrologers please stand up?
PZ Myers
find astrology and astrologers to be painfully stupid. She seems to
think I am wrong, but doesn't want to confront my statement directly,
preferring to skirt about the edges and accuse me of bigotry, and of
driving a car (don't ask me what that latter bit has to do with much
of anything).
Unfortunately, she doesn't seem to want to talk about the specifics
of astrology, perhaps because then she'd have to face all of its flaws.
She could refute my blanket condemnation quite easily by pointing out
some contemporary astrologers who *are* quite smart, and who are using
astrology in rational and defensible ways. Why doesn't she? That's my
challenge. Let's see some argument for and against real, live, genuine
astrological practices.
Every time I mention some objectionable practice by astrologers, I get
a rather weaselly runaround -- that "isn't real astrology", or that
person "isn't an astrologer". There is a constant barrage of excuses
to back away from the most blatant and unambiguous statements: "it's
an anecdote", or there are "other factors". Once we've thrown out all
the claims that astrologers (and 'sceptical astrologers') refuse to
stand by, there doesn't seem to be anything left!
I did a quick search on alt.astrology, for an arbitrarily selected
astrological term: "capricorn". Here's the search URL:
<http://deja.com/=dnc/qs.xp?ST=PS&svcclass=dnyr&QRY=capricorn&defaultOp=AND&DBS=1&OP=dnquery.xp&LNG=ALL&subjects=&groups=alt.astrology&authors=&fromdate=oct+1+1999&todate=&showsort=score&maxhits=100>
There were 26 posts returned. Here are short excerpts from just the first 5:
<http://deja.com/=dnc/getdoc.xp?AN=534913250>
Also true about the self-sufficient and good with money stereo-type. Why a
stereotype?Because it seems so often true!
I have moon in capricorn in the 8th.And I am good with money.
<http://deja.com/=dnc/getdoc.xp?AN=535741750>
One thing I learned about earthquakes - is that you don't get any big
ones when Jupiter is transiting sidereal Capricorn.
<http://deja.com/=dnc/getdoc.xp?AN=534987803>
Capricorns are more than the stereotype allows for. They are charming
and smart, with a very dry sense of humor, and even lusty; the women are
especially social.
<http://deja.com/=dnc/getdoc.xp?AN=534907613>
Capricorn Sun & Rising? Whew.... Well, I'm not an expert (but I'm not a
novice either) and I don't completely believe in astrology. But this
person must be very Capricornish. I suppose s/he would be self
sufficiant, good with money, well desciplined, introverted... But of
course there are other astrological factors that must be taken into
consideration.
<http://deja.com/=dnc/getdoc.xp?AN=534644609>
Capricorn, of course represents the down to earth, cautious and
ambitious middle age professional. The father figure. the serious
"down to earth", money making worker: The backbone of the American
Industry.
We've got quite a range here -- general comments about personality, the
effect of Jupiter's position relative to distant stars influencing
earthquakes, and even a long post attempting to describe the general
properties of an entire country from its 'birthdate'.
Here's another challenge for Stella, or any astrologers. These are
pretty representative posts from alt.astrology. Which of these authors
are "real astrologers"? Any of them? All of them? Which of these claims
have any validity at all? Any of them? All of them?
If none of these statements are acceptable examples of astrology, can
any be found anywhere?
--
PZ Myers
Pedantus
my...@netaxs.com (PZ Myers) wrote:
> Stella objects to the fact that I have unequivocally stated that I
> find astrology and astrologers to be painfully stupid. She seems to
> think I am wrong, but doesn't want to confront my statement directly,
> preferring to skirt about the edges and accuse me of bigotry, and of
> driving a car (don't ask me what that latter bit has to do with much
> of anything).
>
> Unfortunately, she doesn't seem to want to talk about the specifics
> of astrology, perhaps because then she'd have to face all of its
flaws.
<snip>
>
> If none of these statements are acceptable examples of astrology, can
> any be found anywhere?
Well, PZ, it seems you are apparently imitating an intellectual
freeloader of sorts...you want to claim/possess an understanding of
astrology, but like my lazy teenager you won't really put any effort
into it. By the way, most of the "real astrologers" are (for one) on
the ACT (Astrological Conference on Techniques) mailist [
http://thenewage.com/cg/x.dll?p=stuff&sql=G ] . You may access that
list and pose your questions in a civilized manner...but you should
have a better handle on the topic, I would suspect. Your post only here
only examples how little you know and how little effort you are willing
to invest in the name of your *alledged* curiousity. I have nothing
further to say, and won't waste my time with your apparent insincere
approach to *astrological* research...I'm aware that you know full well
how the reasearch of the literture is to be conducted. Astrology does
have its literature; its not Science, but its really literature...and
thus time consumming and rewarding. Don't be such a lazy donkey...take
the course before you pretend to teach it in reverse..:)!
Rog
>
> --
> PZ Myers
>
--
Roger L. Satterlee
July 26, 1950 11:53PM EDT
Elmira, New York 076W49 42N06
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7406/rog_chrt.gif
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
PZ Myers
<peda...@geocities.com> wrote:
You are quite mistaken. I am putting some effort into this. However,
nobody seems to be willing to commit to any consistent stance on
exactly what astrology is, yourself included, and if one is to get a
"better handle on the topic", it certainly would be helpful to know
what the topic might be.
So...are you saying that the 5 posts I excerpted are NOT real
astrology? Or are you just saying that you are unwilling to stick
your neck out and say something that isn't a lot of weebly gobbledygook?
By the way, your conference for "real astrologers" looks just like
alt.astrology, less that gang with the inverted alimentary canals
and facial sphincters. Same ol' yammering over celebrity birth data,
same ol' morbid postdiction about disasters, like the recent London
train crash. Perhaps you could be more specific and say *which* of the
many soft-brained posts on that page is representative of serious,
sincere astrological chat?
--
PZ Myers
Avital Pilpel
> > If none of these statements are acceptable examples of astrology, can
> > any be found anywhere?
>
> Well, PZ, it seems you are apparently imitating an intellectual
> freeloader of sorts...you want to claim/possess an understanding of
> astrology, but like my lazy teenager you won't really put any effort
> into it.
Don't you love the astrologer's doubletalk?
First, the make all kinds of wonderful claims about how astrology is so
"insightful", "enlightening", etc.
When asked to give the *least* proof for their outlandish claims, all of a
sudden they refuse and tell you to "do your own work".
Evasion noted.
PZ Myers
<Pine.GSO.4.10.991012...@ciao.cc.columbia.edu>, Avital
Pilpel <ap...@columbia.edu> wrote:
I'm not even asking for proof. I'm just asking for examples of specific
claims that they would stand by as representing a reasonable astrological
viewpoint. Pedantus can't seem to manage even that much.
>
>Evasion noted.
--
PZ Myers
Pedantus
my...@netaxs.com (PZ Myers) wrote:
> In article <7tvpkk$1q5$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Pedantus
> <peda...@geocities.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <myers-12109...@ppp77.blackbox1-mfs.netaxs.com>,
> > my...@netaxs.com (PZ Myers) wrote:
> >> Stella objects to the fact that I have unequivocally stated that I
> >> find astrology and astrologers to be painfully stupid. She seems to
> >> think I am wrong, but doesn't want to confront my statement
directly,
> >> preferring to skirt about the edges and accuse me of bigotry, and
of
> >> driving a car (don't ask me what that latter bit has to do with
much
> >> of anything).
> >>
> >> Unfortunately, she doesn't seem to want to talk about the specifics
> >> of astrology, perhaps because then she'd have to face all of its
> >flaws.
> >
> ><snip>
> >
> >>
can
> >> any be found anywhere?
> >
> >
> >
> > Well, PZ, it seems you are apparently imitating an intellectual
> >freeloader of sorts...you want to claim/possess an understanding of
> >astrology, but like my lazy teenager you won't really put any effort
You can't find what you are not looking for; astrology is first an
art of appreciation, not a science of discrimination.
"I think that in a work of art there is a kind of merging between the
two things, between the precision of poetry and the excitement of pure
science.--Vladimir Nabokov
Rog
Andrew A. Skolnick
>
> Stella objects to the fact that I have unequivocally stated that I
> find astrology and astrologers to be painfully stupid. She seems to
> think I am wrong, but doesn't want to confront my statement directly,
> preferring to skirt about the edges and accuse me of bigotry, and of
> driving a car (don't ask me what that latter bit has to do with much
> of anything).
>
> Unfortunately, she doesn't seem to want to talk about the specifics
> of astrology, perhaps because then she'd have to face all of its flaws.
> some contemporary astrologers who *are* quite smart, and who are using
> astrology in rational and defensible ways. Why doesn't she? That's my
> challenge. Let's see some argument for and against real, live, genuine
> astrological practices.
>
> Every time I mention some objectionable practice by astrologers, I get
> a rather weaselly runaround -- that "isn't real astrology", or that
> person "isn't an astrologer". There is a constant barrage of excuses
> to back away from the most blatant and unambiguous statements: "it's
> an anecdote", or there are "other factors". Once we've thrown out all
> the claims that astrologers (and 'sceptical astrologers') refuse to
> stand by, there doesn't seem to be anything left!
>
> I did a quick search on alt.astrology, for an arbitrarily selected
> astrological term: "capricorn". Here's the search URL:
>
> We've got quite a range here -- general comments about personality, the
> effect of Jupiter's position relative to distant stars influencing
> earthquakes, and even a long post attempting to describe the general
> properties of an entire country from its 'birthdate'.
>
> Here's another challenge for Stella, or any astrologers. These are
> pretty representative posts from alt.astrology. Which of these authors
> are "real astrologers"? Any of them? All of them? Which of these claims
> have any validity at all? Any of them? All of them?
>
> any be found anywhere?
>
Sorry, PZ, it's just not in the stars.
-- Andrew Skolnick
http://nasw.org/users/ASkolnick
Samuel Powell
/bullshit
I implore each person who even studies astrology to ignore this troll.
Myers will do nothing but rehash and attack upon the astrologers that
respond.
We all know that he is blind and cannot recognise that astrology works
from the INSIDE of a person. It's all a matter of one's own reason for
study... be it for prediction, entertainment, tracing a personality,
weather patterns, relationship problems, whatever, and how one person
interprets it him/herself.
Also, why didn't you post this to a.a.mod? You actually may get some
good play out of this. But I think that the moderators over there have
better taste than to let someone who wears jizznut on their face to
troll around.
Or is it that you are too scared Heather would rip your balls off?
(I know not to mess with her.. she's no fun to fight. she plays rough ;)
roachclip-
studying astrologer
I see things that work with astrology.
And some things that didn't work.
So it's even. Time will help me decide upon it's ultimate conclusion.
All in due time.
--
The requirements on the box said Windows 95 or better.. So I bought a
Macintosh.
PZ Myers
Skolnick" <asko...@blockspam.mindspring.com> wrote:
[snip]
>> If none of these statements are acceptable examples of astrology, can
>> any be found anywhere?
>>
>Sorry, PZ, it's just not in the stars.
Was that an example of a legitimate astrological claim?
--
PZ Myers
PZ Myers
(Samuel Powell) wrote:
[snip]
>I implore each person who even studies astrology to ignore this troll.
>Myers will do nothing but rehash and attack upon the astrologers that
>respond.
Yep. It's a simple question, requiring only simple answers. I've made no
request for evidence, proof, or anecdote...just an unambiguous statement
of your opinion. That lack of ambiguity has you astrologers trembling in
fear, I guess.
>
>We all know that he is blind and cannot recognise that astrology works
>from the INSIDE of a person. It's all a matter of one's own reason for
>study... be it for prediction, entertainment, tracing a personality,
>weather patterns, relationship problems, whatever, and how one person
>interprets it him/herself.
That's two evasive weasels from two 'astrologers' so far.
I've excerpted 5 representative posts from alt.astrology, and asked a
very simple question: is this astrology? No one seems to have the guts
to say a simple "yes" or "no" yet.
[snip]
--
PZ Myers
Billy Preston
snip
shouldn't you be in class, myers?
Oh, that's right. you got dusted.
my bad.
roachie-
/me raises kilt and flashes pz
OH SHIT!!!!!!!! AHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The Monsterous Mouth of PZ
starts sucking like a fish!!!!! He wants what he saw!!!!! <runs and
dives in river headfirst and skulls himself on rocks>
--
Smoke a bone, cut a fish
post from a school account and get yo ass dissed
come home where your old lady kicks your ass
to sit in front of your computer to associate with people with no class
We are so boring and stupid and such
so you decide to go get a dick to suck
and you drink cherry coke and scotch
while your kids dye their heads purple and pierce parts in their crotch.
-Ode to Myers.
Kevin Burnett
blathered:
>PZ Myers <my...@netaxs.com> wrote:
>
>snip
>
>shouldn't you be in class, myers?
>
>Oh, that's right. you got dusted.
>
>my bad.
>
>roachie-
>/me raises kilt and flashes pz
Back into the killfile, morpher.
*PLONK*
--
k...@catnip.org http://www.catnip.org/
"This (besides the fact that as many awards as possible were attempted to
"increase the labling" effect) proves beyond a SHADOW of a doubt that I
am the most powerful intellectual giant to ever grace usenet."
- Edmond Heinz Wollmann, in message <37B292...@bigfoot.com>
Paul Schlyter
PZ Myers <my...@netaxs.com> wrote:
> Stella objects to the fact that I have unequivocally stated that I
> find astrology and astrologers to be painfully stupid. She seems to
> think I am wrong, but doesn't want to confront my statement directly,
> preferring to skirt about the edges and accuse me of bigotry, and of
> driving a car (don't ask me what that latter bit has to do with much
> of anything).
>
> Unfortunately, she doesn't seem to want to talk about the specifics
> of astrology, perhaps because then she'd have to face all of its flaws.
claims to be an astrology skeptic, but she seems to enjoy astrology
far too much for being a genuine skeptic.
> She could refute my blanket condemnation quite easily by pointing out
> some contemporary astrologers who *are* quite smart, and who are using
> astrology in rational and defensible ways. Why doesn't she?
cynical: they'd run astrological practices, telling their customers
what they want to hear, and charging a lot from it. However, one
reason there aren't that many cynical smart astrologers is probably
because most of them turn to other, more profitable, businesses, like
e.g. hard drug dealing or prostitution...
> That's my challenge. Let's see some argument for and against real,
> live, genuine astrological practices.
rational and smart uses of astrology. Since you're a cynic, there's
no need to try to defend these uses... :-)))
> Every time I mention some objectionable practice by astrologers, I get
> a rather weaselly runaround -- that "isn't real astrology", or that
> person "isn't an astrologer". There is a constant barrage of excuses
> to back away from the most blatant and unambiguous statements: "it's
> an anecdote", or there are "other factors". Once we've thrown out all
> the claims that astrologers (and 'sceptical astrologers') refuse to
> stand by, there doesn't seem to be anything left!
>
> I did a quick search on alt.astrology, for an arbitrarily selected
> astrological term: "capricorn". Here's the search URL:
> effect of Jupiter's position relative to distant stars influencing
> earthquakes, and even a long post attempting to describe the general
> properties of an entire country from its 'birthdate'.
>
> Here's another challenge for Stella, or any astrologers. These are
> pretty representative posts from alt.astrology. Which of these authors
> are "real astrologers"? Any of them? All of them? Which of these claims
> have any validity at all? Any of them? All of them?
> If none of these statements are acceptable examples of astrology, can
> any be found anywhere?
think you'll get them. You cna expect one of two things: either
silence, or still more evasions.
Remember that since astrology has been shown to be invalid centuries
ago, people who want to believe in astrology today do it for
irrational reasons. It's not surprising that they do whatever they
can to avoid getting into a rational argument, because they know very
well they'll lose any such argument.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Schlyter, Swedish Amateur Astronomer's Society (SAAF)
Grev Turegatan 40, S-114 38 Stockholm, SWEDEN
e-mail: pau...@saaf.se paul.s...@ausys.se pa...@inorbit.com
WWW: http://hotel04.ausys.se/pausch http://welcome.to/pausch
Andrew A. Skolnick
>
> In article <38037C29...@blockspam.mindspring.com>, "Andrew A.
> Skolnick" <asko...@blockspam.mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> >> any be found anywhere?
> >>
>
>
> Was that an example of a legitimate astrological claim?
>
> --
> PZ Myers
My astrological sign is Orion. So what do you think? :-)
PZ Myers
Schlyter) wrote:
[snip]
>Do you really expect to get any serious responses to this? I don't
>think you'll get them. You cna expect one of two things: either
>silence, or still more evasions.
Exactly.
>
>Remember that since astrology has been shown to be invalid centuries
>ago, people who want to believe in astrology today do it for
>irrational reasons. It's not surprising that they do whatever they
>can to avoid getting into a rational argument, because they know very
>well they'll lose any such argument.
>
Yes. So if they won't defend their beliefs, I can at least highlight
their cowardice.
--
PZ Myers
astrology
>Yep. It's a simple question, requiring only simple answers. I've made
no
>request for evidence, proof, or anecdote...just an unambiguous
statement
>of your opinion. That lack of ambiguity has you astrologers trembling
in
>fear, I guess.
Myers actually said this:
Here's another challenge for Stella, or any astrologers. These are
pretty representative posts from alt.astrology. Which of these authors
are "real astrologers"? Any of them? All of them?
Doesn't matter. Astrologer or not. Same thing in your eyes (other than
nut): "Idiot."
Which of these claims
have any validity at all? Any of them? All of them?
^^^^^^^
Nailed your lying ass again, motherfucker! That is a request for
validity.
No one seems to have the guts
> to say a simple "yes" or "no" yet.
Yes, you are an asshole.
Yes, that is astrology. Are you that dense?
roachie-
damn, this is fun.
astrology
> That's two evasive weasels from two 'astrologers' so far.
And one from you:
Why did you weasel away when I asked you why you didn't ask in a.a.mod?
I think Heather has bigger balls than you DO have.
roachie-
damn, I have to go to work, unlike this jobless prick Myers.
"we are not kooks, regardless of what this biologist says"
PZ Myers
(astrology) wrote:
>PZ Myers <my...@netaxs.com> wrote:
>
>
>> That's two evasive weasels from two 'astrologers' so far.
>
>And one from you:
>
>Why did you weasel away when I asked you why you didn't ask in a.a.mod?
I think this is further confirmation by example (or dare I say "anecdote"?)
that astrologers just aren't very bright.
alt.astrology.MODERATED. It's already been made eminently clear that posts
that question astrology in the slightest will not get past the moderators.
By the way -- what kind of twit feels the need to constantly change his
posting headers? Answer: one who has been killfiled by numerous people
because he is such an ignorant, obnoxious ass, and who can't stand the
fact that people find his opinions worthless.
[snip]
--
PZ Myers
anonym™
Yawn.
Break out the caffeine.
--
"Why am I an asshole?" -Edmond Wollmann
anonym™
>
SNIP a buch of shit where he finally came up with some DejaNews URL's.
Funny how he's failed to do that in order to support some of his more
vicious and recent unsupported acusations.
Still waiting for him to produce the ones where Rhianna called herself
an airhead.
Where Stella called him a Nazi.
Where a "gang" thought revealing Marsha Kalfsbeek's info was "hilarious".
anonym™
>
> In article
> Pilpel <ap...@columbia.edu> wrote:
>
> >On Tue, 12 Oct 1999, Pedantus wrote:
> >
> >> > any be found anywhere?
> >>
> >> freeloader of sorts...you want to claim/possess an understanding of
> >> astrology, but like my lazy teenager you won't really put any effort
> >> into it.
> >
> >
> >First, the make all kinds of wonderful claims about how astrology is so
> >"insightful", "enlightening", etc.
> >
> >When asked to give the *least* proof for their outlandish claims, all of a
> >sudden they refuse and tell you to "do your own work".
>
> I'm not even asking for proof. I'm just asking for examples of specific
> claims that they would stand by as representing a reasonable astrological
> viewpoint. Pedantus can't seem to manage even that much.
Funny.
We've asked for examples of evidence to support specific
claims you have stood by as representing a reasonable person's
viewpoint. You can't seem to manage even that much.
anonym™
>
> In article <38037C29...@blockspam.mindspring.com>, "Andrew A.
> Skolnick" <asko...@blockspam.mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> >> any be found anywhere?
> >>
>
>
> Was that an example of a legitimate astrological claim?
>
sucking" a cock?
Paul Schlyter
Pedantus <peda...@geocities.com> wrote:
> In article <myers-12109...@ppp77.blackbox1-mfs.netaxs.com>,
>> Stella objects to the fact that I have unequivocally stated that I
>> find astrology and astrologers to be painfully stupid. She seems to
>> think I am wrong, but doesn't want to confront my statement directly,
>> preferring to skirt about the edges and accuse me of bigotry, and of
>> driving a car (don't ask me what that latter bit has to do with much
>> of anything).
>>
>> Unfortunately, she doesn't seem to want to talk about the specifics
>> of astrology, perhaps because then she'd have to face all of its
>> flaws.
>
>
>> If none of these statements are acceptable examples of astrology, can
>> any be found anywhere?
>
>
> freeloader of sorts...you want to claim/possess an understanding of
> astrology, but like my lazy teenager you won't really put any effort
> the ACT (Astrological Conference on Techniques) mailist [
> http://thenewage.com/cg/x.dll?p=stuff&sql=G ] . You may access that
> list and pose your questions in a civilized manner...but you should
> have a better handle on the topic, I would suspect. Your post only here
> only examples how little you know and how little effort you are willing
> to invest in the name of your *alledged* curiousity. I have nothing
> further to say, and won't waste my time with your apparent insincere
> approach to *astrological* research...I'm aware that you know full well
> how the reasearch of the literture is to be conducted. Astrology does
> have its literature; its not Science, but its really literature...and
> thus time consumming and rewarding. Don't be such a lazy donkey...take
> the course before you pretend to teach it in reverse..:)!
>
PZ Meyers was quite right -- all you presented here was still more
evasions...
Paul Schlyter
> nobody seems to be willing to commit to any consistent stance on
> exactly what astrology is, yourself included, and if one is to get a
> "better handle on the topic", it certainly would be helpful to know
> what the topic might be.
>
> So...are you saying that the 5 posts I excerpted are NOT real
> astrology?
> Or are you just saying that you are unwilling to stick
> your neck out and say something that isn't a lot of weebly gobbledygook?
> By the way, your conference for "real astrologers" looks just like
> alt.astrology, less that gang with the inverted alimentary canals
> and facial sphincters. Same ol' yammering over celebrity birth data,
> same ol' morbid postdiction about disasters, like the recent London
> train crash. Perhaps you could be more specific and say *which* of the
> many soft-brained posts on that page is representative of serious,
> sincere astrological chat?
Paul Schlyter
> Skolnick" <asko...@blockspam.mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>
>>> If none of these statements are acceptable examples of astrology, can
>>> any be found anywhere?
>
>
> Was that an example of a legitimate astrological claim?
provide information about your person, or about mundane events.
jfred
> PZ Myers wrote:
> >
> SNIP a buch of shit where he finally came up with some DejaNews URL's.
>
> Funny how he's failed to do that in order to support some of his more
> vicious and recent unsupported acusations.
>
> Still waiting for him to produce the ones where Rhianna called herself
> an airhead.
>
> Where Stella called him a Nazi.
>
> Where a "gang" thought revealing Marsha Kalfsbeek's info was "hilarious".
I'll quote Paul Schlyter <pau...@merope.saaf.se> here:
> Do you really expect to get any serious responses to this? I don't
> think you'll get them. You cna expect one of two things: either
> silence, or still more evasions.
I daresay he's right. Lately, PZ has been coming up pretty dry in the
evidence department.
--
jfred... Cahooter #14, WWAS member #4, http://www.smbtech.com/ed/
[Edmo] is the first person ever to use "integrity" to mean "delusional
person without a work ethic." -- A.P. "Why am I an asshole?" -Edmo
Everybody's got something to hide except for me and my monkey
Loren A. King
> You can't find what you are not looking for; astrology is first an
> art of appreciation, not a science of discrimination.
Appreciation of what? And doesn't appreciation often demand
discrimination?
L.
--------------------------------------
Loren King lk...@mit.edu
http://web.mit.edu/lking/www/home.html
Kevin Burnett
[snip]
>> By the way -- what kind of twit feels the need to constantly change his
>> posting headers?
>
>Twit? Fuck you.
>
>>Answer: one who has been killfiled by numerous people
>
>Yeah about a tenth the amount of people who have your idiot ass
>killfiled, cocksuck.
roachclip the stupid twit's morph number 65536 into the killfile.
*plonk*
Kevin Burnett
>
>By the way -- what kind of twit feels the need to constantly change his
>because he is such an ignorant, obnoxious ass, and who can't stand the
>fact that people find his opinions worthless.
Bingo.
PZ Myers
Burnett) wrote:
>On Tue, 12 Oct 1999 16:09:31 -0500, astroachieogy <roach...@databasix.com>
> blathered:
>>PZ Myers <my...@netaxs.com> wrote:
>>
>
>[snip]
>
>>> By the way -- what kind of twit feels the need to constantly change his
>>> posting headers?
>>
>>Twit? Fuck you.
>>
>>>Answer: one who has been killfiled by numerous people
>>
>>Yeah about a tenth the amount of people who have your idiot ass
>>killfiled, cocksuck.
>
>roachclip the stupid twit's morph number 65536 into the killfile.
>
>*plonk*
Hey, he's not doing it to circumvent killfiles. He just does it because
he likes to, he says.
Likes to *what*, I wonder.
--
PZ Myers
Geneva 12 pt
> >
> >Yeah about a tenth the amount of people who have your idiot ass
> >killfiled, cocksuck.
>
> roachclip the stupid twit's morph number 65536 into the killfile.
>
> *plonk*
oooh cool. yet another plonkie for me. I'm so hurt.
Before you and myers start sucking each other's dicks, be sure to take
it out of here, kevvie.
roachie-
don't like me changing my name?
Tough shit. I like it. Go fuck yourself.
PZ Myers
Schlyter) wrote:
>In article <myers-12109...@ppp79.blackbox1-mfs.netaxs.com>,
>PZ Myers <my...@netaxs.com> wrote:
>
>> In article <38037C29...@blockspam.mindspring.com>, "Andrew A.
>> Skolnick" <asko...@blockspam.mindspring.com> wrote:
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>>> If none of these statements are acceptable examples of astrology, can
>>>> any be found anywhere?
>>
>>> Sorry, PZ, it's just not in the stars.
>>
>> Was that an example of a legitimate astrological claim?
>
>No - it was a legitimate non-astrological claim. Astrology just cannot
>provide information about your person, or about mundane events.
Dang. All the legitimate claims seem to be non-astrological. And only
non-astrologers seem to be making intelligent replies to my challenge.
I wonder what that could mean?
--
PZ Myers
Kevin Burnett
<dontlike....@toughshit.tittybaby> blathered:
[nothing worth repeating]
Ninny.
Kevin Burnett
>In article <3803...@newsfeed.sexzilla.net>, k...@catnip.org (Kevin
>Burnett) wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 12 Oct 1999 16:09:31 -0500, astroachieogy <roach...@databasix.com>
>> blathered:
>>>PZ Myers <my...@netaxs.com> wrote:
>>>
>>
>>[snip]
>>
>>>> By the way -- what kind of twit feels the need to constantly change his
>>>> posting headers?
>>>
>>>Twit? Fuck you.
>>>
>>>>Answer: one who has been killfiled by numerous people
>>>
>>>killfiled, cocksuck.
>>
>>roachclip the stupid twit's morph number 65536 into the killfile.
>>
>>*plonk*
>
>he likes to, he says.
>
>Likes to *what*, I wonder.
He likes to look like a complete fuck-knuckle.
anonym™
>
> In article <3803...@newsfeed.sexzilla.net>, k...@catnip.org (Kevin
> Burnett) wrote:
>
> >On Tue, 12 Oct 1999 16:09:31 -0500, astroachieogy <roach...@databasix.com>
> > blathered:
> >>PZ Myers <my...@netaxs.com> wrote:
> >>
> >
> >[snip]
> >
> >>> By the way -- what kind of twit feels the need to constantly change his
> >>> posting headers?
> >>
> >>Twit? Fuck you.
> >>
> >>>Answer: one who has been killfiled by numerous people
> >>
> >>Yeah about a tenth the amount of people who have your idiot ass
> >>killfiled, cocksuck.
> >
> >roachclip the stupid twit's morph number 65536 into the killfile.
> >
> >*plonk*
>
> Hey, he's not doing it to circumvent killfiles. He just does it because
> he likes to, he says.
>
> Likes to *what*, I wonder.
Kick you in the ass while you're blowing a horse.
anonym™
That you have the overwehlming urge to chow down on another man's load?
anonym™
>
> Kevin Burnett <k...@catnip.org> wrote:
>
> > >
> > >Yeah about a tenth the amount of people who have your idiot ass
> > >killfiled, cocksuck.
> >
> > roachclip the stupid twit's morph number 65536 into the killfile.
> >
> > *plonk*
>
>
> Before you and myers start sucking each other's dicks, be sure to take
> it out of here, kevvie.
>
> roachie-
> don't like me changing my name?
>
> Tough shit. I like it. Go fuck yourself.
Kevvie's just pissed because nobody ever pays attention to his boring bullshit.
He got so fucking tedious even I plonked his well-used ass.
Christ, he's so desperate for attention he even shows up on IRC channels
where everone hates his chapped ass.
No one in a.u.k responds or appreciates his crap so now he's looking for
pats on the head here in a.a.
Either that or he and PZ plan to do some 69 action.
Lou Minatti™
>
> Stella objects to the fact that I have unequivocally stated that I
> find astrology and astrologers to be painfully stupid.
I disagree with this. I see no validity in astrology, but I don't think
that people who believe in it are necessarily stupid. Billions of people
around the world believe in things that have no scientific validity, but
I wouldn't call them all stupid. However, I think that there are a
handful of alt.astrology regulars who are not only stupid, but clearly
insane.
--
WebTV FAQ:
http://www.watchingyou.com/webtv.html
Kevin Burnett
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
I remember anonym complaining loudly about PZ Myers sniping at people
from behind his killfile. Now he's doing the *exact* same thing.
What a surprise.
PZ Myers
>PZ Myers wrote:
>>
>> Stella objects to the fact that I have unequivocally stated that I
>> find astrology and astrologers to be painfully stupid.
>
>I disagree with this. I see no validity in astrology, but I don't think
>that people who believe in it are necessarily stupid. Billions of people
>around the world believe in things that have no scientific validity, but
>I wouldn't call them all stupid.
Believing in things that do not have scientific validity doesn't bother
me in the least; accepting something that is so plainly contrary to simple
common sense, and that attempts to cloak itself in the trappings of a science,
is another thing altogether.
>However, I think that there are a
>handful of alt.astrology regulars who are not only stupid, but clearly
>insane.
Uh-oh. You didn't specify who, and give lots and lots of references to
prove your case. Now you're in trouble.
--
PZ Myers
Kevin Burnett
>Kevin Burnett <k...@catnip.org> wrote:
>>
>> He likes to look like a complete fuck-knuckle.
>
>of person you are fucking with.
>
Oh, I know exactly what kind of person I'md dealing with. A complete
fuck-knuckle, someone who has no idea of how to argue anything, someone
who reaches for fag-lames immediately, who can't resist childish
name-calling. You sound like a clone of that other Usenet busted urinal,
anonym. You drone on, and on, and on, ad nauseum, who drones on, and on,
and on, back at you, PZ Myers. You, anonym, Myers, and your whole crew
deserve each other.
>I know that there are more people here that gives a shit more about how
>I appear to be compared to what you say. And they would correct me in an
>instant if I appeared to be a "fuck-knuckle." I had two e-mails since
>noon. Both of them were about your stupid ass, lame flame stealer.
Aha, the "people support me in email" defense. Sorry, twit, that
doesn't wash. Do you realize that Wollmann, and other kooks,
use that same lame tactic? It should be called the "Nixon" defense.
>
>And like I said before I am in about 1/10 of the killfiles compared to
>myers.
So what?
>
>So take your bitch switch ass and go somewhere where your whining is
>important.
>
>Most everyone else around alt.astrology is sick of you and pz mutually
>oral sexing each other. Especially sick of pz'z stupid fucking changing
>words and dead horse beating.
I'm not reading your horseshit in alt.astrology, pube. If you haven't
noticed, your Usenet solid waste is crossposted to other groups.
And another thing. Do you use your fag-lames due to some latent
homosexuality, or are you a bigot?
Paul Schlyter
Pedantus <peda...@geocities.com> wrote:
> In article <myers-12109...@ppp79.blackbox1-mfs.netaxs.com>,
>
>> So...are you saying that the 5 posts I excerpted are NOT real
>> your neck out and say something that isn't a lot of weebly
>> gobbledygook?
>>
>> alt.astrology, less that gang with the inverted alimentary canals
>> and facial sphincters. Same ol' yammering over celebrity birth data,
>> same ol' morbid postdiction about disasters, like the recent London
>> train crash. Perhaps you could be more specific and say *which* of the
>> many soft-brained posts on that page is representative of serious,
>> sincere astrological chat?
>>
>> PZ Myers
>
> You can't find what you are not looking for; astrology is first an
> art of appreciation, not a science of discrimination.
art", and quite often they add e.g. "just like music - do you object
to music?".
If this really was the case, all would be fine and well, since art
forms do not make any verifyable claims. Music certainly doesn't do
that: you can like or dislike some particular piece of music, but
you cannot disagree with it, because music make no such claims.
Astrology, however, make verifyable claims. All astrologers I've
encountered so far, agree on at least one thing: it's important
to use accurate natal data, otherwise the chart will be "invalid".
What is an "invalid chart" in an astrological context? Is it any
less enjoyable as an art form? Certainly not, since even if the
natal data was inaccurate for some person, another person could have
been born with these natal data, and claiming the "invalid chart" for
the first person was unenjoyable as art would imply that the "valid
chart" for that other person would be just as unenjoyable. And then
we have a "valid chart" which isn't enjoyable even though it's valid.
Thus "validity" has nothing whatever to do with enjoyability as an
art form.
However, the most important question is: are we able to distinguish a
"valid chart" from an "invalid chart" ? This has been tested many
times in blind tests, and always with the same result: neither
astrologers, nor subjects are able to distinguish "valid" charts from
"invalid" ones with any greater success rate than if they'd guessed
randomly.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The bottom line is: if you want to enjoy astrology as an art, fine!
Even astronomers do that (e.g. when listening to Gustav Holst's "The
Planets", which is so popular among astronomers that they even named
an asteroid after Holst). But then you'd also have to drop the
requirement of accurate natal data: even if grossly inaccurate natal
data is used, the chart and its interpretation will still be just as
enjoyable as an art form. If you claim any "validity", you've left
the realm of art and entered the realm of science -- and then you'd
better be able to back up your claim with evidence.
Paul Schlyter
PZ Myers <my...@netaxs.com> wrote:
> In article <7tvsrl$sik$1...@merope.saaf.se>, pau...@merope.saaf.se (Paul
> Schlyter) wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>> Do you really expect to get any serious responses to this? I don't
>> silence, or still more evasions.
>
>
>> Remember that since astrology has been shown to be invalid centuries
>> ago, people who want to believe in astrology today do it for
>> irrational reasons. It's not surprising that they do whatever they
>> can to avoid getting into a rational argument, because they know very
>> well they'll lose any such argument.
>
> Yes. So if they won't defend their beliefs, I can at least highlight
> their cowardice.
And that's about all you can do. They'll ignore you, and will happily
go on with their business. Validity and verification is of no concern
to them: they believe in astrology for emotional reasons, and close
their eyes and ears to rational arguments.
I noted an additional evasion in this thread: "Astrology is an art",
which would imply "there's nothing to verify". All would be fine if
astrology really was just an art -- however astrologers still claim
it's important to use accurate natal data. And when they claim this,
they've left the realm of art and entered the realm of science.
I enjoy astrology as an art too -- when I listen to Gustav Holst's
symphonic music piece "The Planets", which was inspired by astorlogy.
It's just as enjoyable, no matter when I was born, and no matter if I
would think I was born on some other date than I actually was born.
anonym™
>
> PZ Myers wrote:
> >
> > Stella objects to the fact that I have unequivocally stated that I
> > find astrology and astrologers to be painfully stupid.
>
> I disagree with this. I see no validity in astrology, but I don't think
> that people who believe in it are necessarily stupid. Billions of people
> around the world believe in things that have no scientific validity, but
> handful of alt.astrology regulars who are not only stupid, but clearly
> insane.
>
As in: "BOOGA BOOGA!"?
J. White
> I'm not even asking for proof. [...]
No you're being a troll.
J. White
...and a dull one
anonym™
>
> In article <3803D1...@yahoo.com>, loumi...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> >PZ Myers wrote:
> >>
> >> Stella objects to the fact that I have unequivocally stated that I
> >> find astrology and astrologers to be painfully stupid.
> >
> >I disagree with this. I see no validity in astrology, but I don't think
> >that people who believe in it are necessarily stupid. Billions of people
> >around the world believe in things that have no scientific validity, but
> >I wouldn't call them all stupid.
>
> me in the least; accepting something that is so plainly contrary to simple
> common sense, and that attempts to cloak itself in the trappings of a science,
> is another thing altogether.
>
> >handful of alt.astrology regulars who are not only stupid, but clearly
> >insane.
>
Maybe he meant you, Peezers.
. and give lots and lots of references to
> prove your case.
Uh, where was that done, bonesmoker?
>Now you're in trouble.
Nah.
Lou's so many lightyears away from being an asshole like you there's no
comparison, so stop trying.