I think we now know how you are going to treat any and all evidence we come up with-“porno for Randi wannabes”, indeed. You were never serious about examining the evidence, and this is just one big stalling game to you.
As far as I’m concerned, this game is over. You may now declare yourself the “winner” if you wish.
What a waste of time.
Well, hells belles, Czar! If you weren’t going to accept my analysis of the cites as being offered in good faith, why did you insist that I deal with them? Which I was doing, yes? And before I’m even half-way into it, you pull out the rug from under and say I was going to be dishonest anyway! I mean, really, is that fair?
Well, back to the subject at hand. Here is a comprehensive survey on the different types of astrology and the theories behind them. It has a bit of history in it.
This shows how the evidence for astrology has evolved over the last century.
Well, just one thing. Why is this such a big hairy ass deal to some of you guys? I see things differently than you do, and its like I set fire to your cat! I’ve got some experience here, and I think a fervent belief in astrology is silly, it can’t support anything so grandiose. But a fervent disbelief? Even less.
What, you think if you don’t kill it, it will multiply? Rip the fabric of space-time? What’s the BHAD?
Scroll up to the top of the page and read what it says right under THE STRAIGHT DOPE.
Sort of says it all, doesn’t it?
Oh, its a noble endeavor! That quite explains it. Yes. No doubt you get equally distraught over…well, lots of stuff, huh?
Are you quite sure that’s good for you?
Here is more extensive history of astrology by Robert Hand.
This appears to be a very interesting history, and I look forward to a more careful reading. But I’m fairly sure the Hindu tradition and a Chinese tradition have existed quite independently from the “Western” tradition. Perhaps not as long, but certainly not “…only once in time and in one place…”
Still, if his Mesopotamian history chops are solid, could be an interesting read. But he’s way off base, right out of the gate. Could still be a solid Mesopotamian scholar, I suppose, or a bounder and Akkad.
There have been double-blind studies done of astrologers. This tells of one published in the peer reviewed scientific journal Nature, in 1985, in which 28 professional astrologers, recommended by National Council for Geocosmic Research, took part. In both parts of the test the astrologers failed miserably.
You know, these cites keep repeating the same set of stuff over and over. This one you just offered, for instance, has a list of references almost identical to the set that Waenara posted above. Quite the coincidence.
And several of those are “sun sign” approaches, which is about as bogus as you get, its a strawman’s strawman. You take what someone would tell you is bogus, and prove that it is bogus in order to prove that the guy who told you so is wrong? Huh?
Anybody with even a smattering of information about astrology could have told these guys that sun sign stuff is lame. Didn’t they ask? If not, why not? If they already have such pervasive disdain, what is the liklihood they will perform an unbiased investigation?
The OP makes no mention of discounting the accounts of sun-sign astrologers.
Personally, based on the total lack of evidence and the fact that it defies science, I find all types of astrology to be bogus, but I am willing to be swayed by solid evidence to the contrary.
Mars in Scorpio can be deadly! 
Seriously, for fun, I’ll do a birthchart for someone. Just send me a message
No, but the OP did invite an opinion by someone willing to admit to, ah, “preaching” astrology. Do you propose to fight ignorance by insisting on the most retarded version of the other guy’s position? When you play poker, do you insist that the other guys cards are all face up?
Well, Czarcasm, here’s your chance. Gotta play nice, though.
Actually, I guess you can play any way Pix will put up with. Just sayin’, is all.
Actually, I’d be really interested in reading some of the pro-astrology studies that are out there. I’m very curious what sort of methodology would lead to positive results.
You’re in a cleft stick, 'luci. You didn’t respond to my last post on the point and **Lem’s ** neither. If it would take impossibly massive studies to show that astrology works you can’t possibly know that it does and the converse is equally true. You’re completely jammed, and ignoring posts that point this out isn’t going to win the debate.
Will this birthchart point out things that apply to me only, or could most of it apply to the populace in general? How will you rule out applying knowledge and insight about me that you’ve gleaned from the SDMB?
And since elucidator is bothered by studies supposedly done by “Randi wannabes”, would it be possible to get a pro-astrology scientific study not done by astrologers or done by a pro-astrology concern? Thank you.