# OPEN CHALLENGE to Cecil about astrology by a (different sort of) fanatic. **URL:** \ **Category:** Cecil's Columns/Staff Reports\ **Created:** [August 11, 2000, 8:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/open-challenge-to-cecil-about-astrology-by-a-different-sort-of-fanatic/29015 "2000-08-11T20:27:28Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![JonF](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/cab0a1/32.png) [@JonF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JonF)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2000, 11:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/open-challenge-to-cecil-about-astrology-by-a-different-sort-of-fanatic/29015/41 "2000-08-14T11:12:57Z")
> [@](#): > > Whenever i hear a person say that astrologer are skilled at “reading human behaviour” i should say - “i’m from missouri - show me!” I did, in the links I posted, especially [My Education as an Astrologer](http://www.skeptictank.org/hs/sdastrol.htm). See also [Skeptical Studies in Astrology](http://www.psychicinvestigator.com/demo/AstroSkc.htm) > [@](#): > > show me one psychiatrist, just _one_, who by looking at me, and speaking to me for 10-15 mins can tell me things about myself that absolutely NOBODY has understood - EVER! So the deduction goes like this? 1. jabberwalki has been to three psychologists, one highly rated (by whom?). 2. These three psychologists did not show great depth of understanding by interviewing him. 3. Therefore, nobody can show great depth of understanding by interviewing him. > [@](#): > > i have been to all those links alredy Sorry, I misunderstood. A search for “cold reading” on Randi’s site turns up a lot of hits; did you look at those hits? > [@](#): > > No offense meant ; but please man, you guys sound so desperate to explain everything “rationally” (the definition of which differs from person to person), that you say something totally irrational!!! Well, different people are saying different things. I think that accusation is unjustified in general, and it’s definitely unjustified in my case. It is a demonstrated fact that many astrologers work solely by cold reading and/or vague generalizations. No successful scientific demonstration of astrology working has ever been performed, and it’s not for lack of trying. It is rational to consider that any particular astrologer may work in the same way. It is irrational to assume that, if one particular astrologer appears to be able to produce results, then astrological calculations are the source of those results. However, in spite of the vast evidence that astrological calculations do not work, science is always subject to revision based on new evidence. So I have no difficulty with new and further tests. The probability of those tests producing any change appears to be small, so I’m not willing to expend a lot of effort myself; but more power to you if you want to. But, in order to convince others, your test will have to be well-designed. Your original proposal was not well-designed, and a lot of the responses in this thread have attempted to point that out and help you design a better experiment. > [@](#): > > this is why i got confused when Samclem said Q.E.D. > was i wrong, or is this another interpretation of Q.E.D. ? Exactly. As I said, and apparently you missed: “It is also sometimes used to mean something like “from what has been given already, one can deduce the answer”. The latter is the sense in which samclem meant it.”. > [@](#): > > Well, then why dont i believe my friends, or relatives who think i am a great guy or very intelligent, to be fortune-tellers? Because they don’t claim to be fortune-tellers. The point is that they are not different from the majority of astrologers, except perhaps those astrologers are better at concealing their process from you and casting their responses in a form that leads you to believe. > [@](#): > > i dont agree with what the astrologer has said, but later have found it to be relevant/significant? i cannot give you details about this w/o talking about some very personal stuff, so you have to take my word on this! We do not have to, and will not, take your word on it. Anecdotes generated in uncontrolled conditions are almost always misleading and incompletely described. They are not accepted as sceintific evidence (and rightly so); they are only suitable as possible indications that something may exist that could be a subject of further investigation. Your descriptions so far sound as if your ancedotes are nothing new or particularly unusual. But, were you to provide those anecdotes in detail, I and most of the others here would not be convinced. Controlled, well-designed experiments are what woudl be required. Note the plural of experiments. One successful controlled well-designed experiment would be a major milestone along the road to convincing people and the “scientific establishment”. It would not be the end of the road. Replication and review would be required. ---
**Author:** ![C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/b2d939/32.png) [@C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/C_K_Dexter_Haven)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2000, 12:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/open-challenge-to-cecil-about-astrology-by-a-different-sort-of-fanatic/29015/42 "2000-08-14T12:14:32Z")
Just want to point out that the Boss does sometimes read these boards, but not every day, nor even every week. And he reads selectively. He is perfectly capable of looking at a thread called “OPEN CHALLENGE to Cecil” and simply snorting and not even bothering to open it. So don’t take offense that he hasn’t responded yet… or ever. ---
**Author:** ![JimOfAllTrades](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ba8739/32.png) [@JimOfAllTrades](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JimOfAllTrades)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2000, 5:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/open-challenge-to-cecil-about-astrology-by-a-different-sort-of-fanatic/29015/43 "2000-08-14T17:19:48Z")
> [@](#): > > UGLY - you really need to take a crash course in english comprehension! let me explain - My reading comprehension is just fine with intelligible material, thank you. But please, do try and explain. > [@](#): > > All of you are saying that astrology is bunk and that all astrologers are simply skilled readers of human behaviour. this implies that obviously the horoscope or chart that is drawn up is not needed or is simply a prop. So far, not much argument > [@](#): > > therefore any other qualified pychiatrist/psychologist should be able to do what i said. Not exactly. A skilled cold reader can give the impression that he knows many things that he couldn’t possibly know through ordinary means. Sometimes (depending on the individual and the things mentioned) these things may seem like a deep revelation to the person being read. However, my confusion stemmed from two statements you made: > [@](#): > > To be more honest, the clinching factor that makes me believe in astrology, besides the above, is that of all the people who have known me, even if just by acquaintance, astrologers have BY FAR been the only people who have come close to understanding me! > [@](#): > > show me one psychiatrist, just _one_, who by looking at me, and speaking to me for 10-15 mins can tell me things about myself that absolutely NOBODY has understood - EVER! In the first, you clearly say the astrologists understood you better then anyone ‘even if just by acquaintance’, and in the second you seem to be challenging Jon to show you a psychiatrist who can do as well as your astrologist acquaintances, and tell you amazing things after just ‘10-15 mins’. These statements give the impression that (at least one of) the astrologists who understood you better than anyone else ever did, did so with just a look and a brief visit, or with just casual contact. If this is not what you meant, I apologize. But don’t blame me if you post confusing statements. > [@](#): > > NOW do you get it? Sadly, yes, now I think I do. But let me know if you want to go through with the test I outlined previously. I have no objection to testing my beliefs under controlled conditions, and adjust them if needed. Ugly ---
**Author:** ![BigAl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/ea666f/32.png) [@BigAl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigAl)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2000, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/open-challenge-to-cecil-about-astrology-by-a-different-sort-of-fanatic/29015/44 "2000-08-14T18:45:20Z")
Jabberwalkie, You wrote > [@](#): > > even with an error margin of a few seconds(which can make all the ifference If this were the case then astrology would be entirely useless as I don’t know of too many births that are recorded to the second. Even if they were, how could you be sure that you are synchronized with the cosmic clock? What if the doctor’s watch is a little fast or slow? How about if I just pay him to put down a time that I liked? It all sounds rather arbitary to me. Then you wrote > [@](#): > > However, the biggest discrepancy in your reasoning is that there is no _perfect_ horoscope. each person is born with the chart that is best suitable for _him_ This would also negate the validity of astrology because if each person has a unique horoscope how do the location of the planets and stars figure in? If two people are born at the same time and place they should have the exact same horoscope. If each person has his own horoscope that has qualities independant of the location of the stars and planets what is the astrologer using to determine those qualities? Also, since horoscopes are based on known quantities (location of stars and planets) they should be predictive as well. If I give an astologer a birth date in the future, he should be able to provide a horoscope for someone born on that date. ---
**Author:** ![Arnold\_Winkelried](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Arnold\_Winkelried](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Arnold_Winkelried)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2000, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/open-challenge-to-cecil-about-astrology-by-a-different-sort-of-fanatic/29015/45 "2000-08-14T21:20:32Z")
I am willing to participate in the experiment as suggested by jabberwalkie and RJKUgly. jabberwalkie, to whom do I send my place, date and time of birth? ---
**Author:** ![Kyberneticist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/dc4da7/32.png) [@Kyberneticist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kyberneticist)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2000, 9:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/open-challenge-to-cecil-about-astrology-by-a-different-sort-of-fanatic/29015/46 "2000-08-14T21:33:10Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by jabberwalkie \* > \*\*BigAl : it is impossible to “force” a baby to be born at a particular time, even with an error margin of a few seconds(which can make all the ifference, albeit in extreme cases). ask any doctor who has expertise in this field. you may try your best, but something will go “wrong” and the time will change. pregnancies are difficult to handle by themselves, imagine how it would be when you try to control the “when” not just the “how” or even the “what” ! > Also, i dont know anything about maternity,etc. but i seriously doubt inducing labor can allow you to deicde the time. IMHO, it is simply done in borderline cases when the pregnancy is not progressing properly. i could be mistaken though. maybe some doctors here could enlighten us? > \*\* Drugs to induce labour are commonly used when a pregnancy is delayed, but they can be used at any time. One situation where they are more commonly used nowdays is when there are multiple children (as can sometimes happen with fertility drugs, and parents who object to terminating a few of the fetuses). It’s interesting, since I was reading a book on evolutionary strategies that mentions that elephants will occasionally induce labour by eating the leaves of a particular tree (also known to humans of that area). Here are some sites that mention inducing labour. No mention of time restrictions is given. It may be done when a baby is over-due, but also if there are complications in the pregnancy. The date is completely up to the doctor (in more ways then one. many doctors will induce labour to allow the baby to be born to fit their schedules - it would be interesting to see if this has resulted in a larger number of children born on weekdays). (_Kyber now waits for astrology rationalization that the doctor’s actiosn are controlled by the stars too_) Here’s a URL which discusses various methods of inducing labour. > **[Inducing labor: Why and how providers induce labor | BabyCenter](http://www.babycenter.com/refcap/173.html)** > > Learn about why it may be necessary to induce labor, techniques healthcare providers use when inducing labor, and how to prepare for labor induction. Here is a slightly overdramatic CNN article on how common induced labour is (mother saying she would do anything to avoid the feeling of losing control that inducing labour caused - there are more testimonials I’ve read where mothers advise others that induced labour can be far less painful). [http://www-cgi.cnn.com/2000/HEALTH/women/04/07/induction.health.wmd/](http://www-cgi.cnn.com/2000/HEALTH/women/04/07/induction.health.wmd/) So. Are the stars going to adjust themselves to our new Monday-Friday birthing schedule? ---
**Author:** ![samclem](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a9a28c/32.png) [@samclem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/samclem)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2000, 12:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/open-challenge-to-cecil-about-astrology-by-a-different-sort-of-fanatic/29015/47 "2000-08-15T00:43:03Z")
**Arnold** Wouldn’t it be ironic if they looked you up in the Swiss history books and told you who you _were_ ? ---
**Author:** ![jabberwalkie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ce7236/32.png) [@jabberwalkie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jabberwalkie)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2000, 4:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/open-challenge-to-cecil-about-astrology-by-a-different-sort-of-fanatic/29015/48 "2000-08-15T04:28:44Z")
1./ stop waiting **kyber** , and go read my post. I never said that labour cannot be induced at a particular time of day/week/year/month. I DID say that you cannot induce labour to determine the exact time of birth. And the [babycenter.com](http://babycenter.com) link you sent did implicitly agree with me.(well, it would be kind of dumb to have to spell it out…:)) > [@](#): > > (Kyber now waits for astrology rationalization that the doctor’s actiosn are controlled by the stars too) if that was a joke intended to piss me off, it almost worked. if it was a harmless joke, 😛 . if it was a somewhat serious comment, then i think you should read my post in this thread, in which i (unsuccessfully) attempt to explain how _i think_ astrology makes sense. i would like to draw your attention to the part where i said - > [@](#): > > However, I just dont buy the “planets control our destiny” theory. I think … like i said, if it was a joke, no problem. but if you _were_ serious when you passed that snide(IMHO) remark, you need to get some help. 2./ **BigAl** : i did not know selective reading is accepted prsctice on this board. thanks for demonstrating it to me. Seems to me, you people are jumping to conclusions… 3./ **Arnold** , i will have to take a raincheck. depending on how C.A. responds, i will think about what i should do. btw, what was samclem’s comment all about? i guess there is some background to that joke(?), could you let me know? i want in on the joke too! Finally, i must admit i goofed up(kind of). i should have chosen a less, how should i put it, sensationalistic heading for the thread. my reasoning, which in hindsight seems to be misinformed, was that the heading would entice Cecil to atleast the thread, and after reading what is going on here, he might decide to do something. Any suggestions on what i should do for damaga control? ---
**Author:** ![Kyberneticist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/dc4da7/32.png) [@Kyberneticist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kyberneticist)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2000, 4:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/open-challenge-to-cecil-about-astrology-by-a-different-sort-of-fanatic/29015/49 "2000-08-15T04:37:53Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by jabberwalkie \* > \*\*1./ stop waiting **kyber** , and go read my post. I never said that labour cannot be induced at a particular time of day/week/year/month. I DID say that you cannot induce labour to determine the exact time of birth. And the [babycenter.com](http://babycenter.com) link you sent did implicitly agree with me.(well, it would be kind of dumb to have to spell it out…:)) > \*\* Yes, I did read your post. You hedged your statement with a limit of a few seconds. To my knowledge, no astrologist uses an error margin of a few seconds in calculating horoscopes. In this case, such minute random noise variations in the time of birth will be completely overwhelmed by the drugs inducing birth. In other words. Yes, we can’t predict the exact second. However, we can guarantee that second will be, say, in February the 29th rather then March the 20th-30th. If I can pick an arbitrary day, by any random process (often, the doctor’s Monday-Friday schedule), and have the child be born on it, that seems to be a telling blow against astrology (not to mention the usual points about it being a load of bullhockey using vague terms which can apply to anyone to some degree, the errors in the calculations over time, the fact that the planets influencing us are limited to ones the ancients were aware of, the lack of any reasonable model for believing in it, etc.) ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2000, 4:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/open-challenge-to-cecil-about-astrology-by-a-different-sort-of-fanatic/29015/50 "2000-08-15T04:53:38Z")
Of course doctors can choose a time of birth to within a second… Haven’t you ever heard of a Cesarian section? Oh, wait, what’s that, it doesn’t count, because a Cesarian isn’t really a “birth”? Does that mean that Cesarian babies don’t ever have horoscopes? Meanwhile, I’ve got an idea for another experiment, but I don’t have the time for it just now (Mom’s visiting, and I’m behind on my work). If this thread is still near the top in a week or so, remind me to mention it to jabberwalkie. ---
**Author:** ![jabberwalkie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ce7236/32.png) [@jabberwalkie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jabberwalkie)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2000, 5:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/open-challenge-to-cecil-about-astrology-by-a-different-sort-of-fanatic/29015/51 "2000-08-15T05:27:52Z")
**chronos** > [@](#): > > Of course doctors can choose a time of birth to within a second… Haven’t you ever heard of a Cesarian section? Oh, wait, what’s that, it doesn’t count, because a Cesarian isn’t really a “birth”? Does that mean that Cesarian babies don’t ever have horoscopes? 1./ go to a doctor who performs caeserian sections, and ask him if what you said is possible, really is. 2./ > [@](#): > > _originally posted by Jabberwalkie_ > Time of day at birth ( said to be **time of baby’s first cry** for such purposes) ## is there any way you can _control_ the time of the baby’s first cry? if i am not mistaken, many times the doctor has to slap the baby’s bottom because he/she does not automatically start crying. (just had a thought, maybe some of you got slapped _too_ hard… :p) i suggest you do go to some maternity doctor and get these clarified. ## Frantic orthodoxy is rooted in doubt, not faith. ## What was orthodox a century or two ago is not orthodox today, and vice versa. ## I felt sorry that my sig was not smart enough, until I read a two-page e-mail that made no sense. ---
**Author:** ![Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/50afbb/32.png) [@Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duck_Duck_Goose)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2000, 1:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/open-challenge-to-cecil-about-astrology-by-a-different-sort-of-fanatic/29015/52 "2000-08-15T13:11:38Z")
I know I said I’d be quiet, but I can’t resist. Speaking not as a maternity doctor but as someone who has had three herself, I feel qualified to speak. Yes, presumably a doctor performing a C-section could certainly choose the precise moment at which to lift the baby from the womb. However, if what you’re looking for as a criterion for “time of birth” is the “time of the baby’s first cry”, that sometimes never even happens anymore, with modern medical procedures. As soon as the baby is born, its mouth is suctioned to remove mucus and assist in breathing, but AFAIK doctors don’t slap babies’ bottoms any more to “make” them breathe, and thus cry. We now know that newborns are hard-wired to breathe without being spanked or startled into it, all they need is a little help unclogging their mouths. Those screaming, squalling infants you see in the movies are no longer representative of 21st-century obstetrical practice. Nowadays babies are born in relative peace and quiet, at least, mine were. So if your only criterion for “time of birth” is going to be, “What time did the baby first cry?”, that actually might not happen until the first time the baby is hungry, maybe three hours after it’s born. ---
**Author:** ![Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/50afbb/32.png) [@Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duck_Duck_Goose)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2000, 1:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/open-challenge-to-cecil-about-astrology-by-a-different-sort-of-fanatic/29015/53 "2000-08-15T13:22:17Z")
I forgot to say, the reason why babies used to be spanked to make them cry was that the mothers were heavily anesthetised during the birth, which meant that the babies themselves were born half-drugged and really did need to be revived. Doctors found that a sharp smack to the bottom did the trick. But women, by and large, aren’t drugged out of their minds during labor and delivery anymore, so their babies are born fully conscious. (And let me say that’s it’s perfectly marvelous, too, to give the final “push!” and then to look down between your legs and see a surprised little face looking at you, upside-down, lying there football-carry-style on the doctor’s hand. If he had then turned her upside-down and spanked her, I probably would have punched him.) ---
**Author:** ![KeithB](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/48db29/32.png) [@KeithB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KeithB)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2000, 3:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/open-challenge-to-cecil-about-astrology-by-a-different-sort-of-fanatic/29015/54 "2000-08-15T15:09:13Z")
I believe that the James Randi demonstration on astrology is in the book “Flim Flam.” He also did it for his Nova TV special a few years ago. I do not think that jaberwakie(sp?) would accept this since it is a version of “pop” astrology. Randi simply took the same newspaper horoscope and passed it out to each person in a class telling each person that the horoscope was unique to him/her. Only after most said that it was spot on was it revealed that they were all reading the same horoscope. Though if Cecil won’t come out to play, why not go straight to James Randi and go for the million dollars? Thoat could buy a lot of horoscopes! jaberwakie, have you done a blind test with an astrologer? That is sent one _who does not know you_ your birth info and gave it the same test that you gave the psychologist? ---
**Author:** ![BigAl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/ea666f/32.png) [@BigAl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigAl)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2000, 4:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/open-challenge-to-cecil-about-astrology-by-a-different-sort-of-fanatic/29015/55 "2000-08-15T16:48:18Z")
Jabberwalkie, I don’t know what you mean by “selective reading” so I can’t address that issue. The point I am trying to make is that we are dealing with two unrelated events: the birth of a child at a particular time and the astrologer preparing a horoscope for that person later in life. For the sake of argument, let’s assume that you are correct and the stars somehow control our destiny at the time of birth, which you have defined as the baby’s first cry. If, as you say, a few seconds can make all the difference, how is the astrologer going to get the information that he needs to provide an accurate horoscope? I am in the information technology field so this is a question that I deal with frequently. The data has to be collected at the time it occurs. However, there are so many variables that the data cannot be accurate to the degree that you have stipulated. The time of birth in this country is not something that is computed with a great degree of accuracy. When my first child was born the doctor was busy when the nurse asked him what time to put down. He glanced at the clock and said “Oh, 11:25”. This is probably within 5 minutes of the actual time but totally worthless for the purpose of astrology. Not to mention any differences between that clock and the “real” time. If I were to give this to an astrologer he could produce a horoscope for someone born at this time but would it be me? This applies to your challenge to Cecil as well. He could give you a time, but it probably isn’t accurate to a few seconds so what would it prove? As far as everyone having a _unique_ horoscope, that may be true. Howver, the astrologer only has certain innformation to work with (the positions of the stars and planets) so he has no way to ascertain that. An astrologer must produce the same horoscope for two people born at the same time and place. Otherwise, he is using data from an unrevealed source. Most of us on the board agree that this is his knowledge of human nature and psychology and, in fact, is the biggest part of what he does. ---
**Author:** ![Arnold\_Winkelried](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Arnold\_Winkelried](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Arnold_Winkelried)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2000, 5:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/open-challenge-to-cecil-about-astrology-by-a-different-sort-of-fanatic/29015/56 "2000-08-15T17:30:07Z")
jabberwalkie, keep me in mind if ever you decide you want to do a “blind” astrology test! samclem’s joke (good one samclem! :D) refers to my username, which, as you may have guessed, is not my name in real life. Arnold Winkelried is a Swiss independence hero (I am from Switzerland originally.) You can read all about the historical Arnold Winkelried here: [Change of moderators in “Comments on Cecil’s Columns”–NEW MODERATOR](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=24643) ---
**Author:** ![BigAl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/ea666f/32.png) [@BigAl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigAl)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2000, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/open-challenge-to-cecil-about-astrology-by-a-different-sort-of-fanatic/29015/57 "2000-08-15T20:48:12Z")
Jbberwalkie, In rereading your post I see that you did say that a difference of a few seconds was only important in some cases. Perhaps you could explain what a normal margin of error is required to produce an accurate horoscope? However, this doesn’t effect my premise. The information that is given to an astrologer merely defines a point in fourth dimensional space, not a person. If there is no person born at that time and place, the astrologer will still be able to produce a horoscope, as long as he believes the information is real. ---
**Author:** ![samclem](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a9a28c/32.png) [@samclem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/samclem)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2000, 11:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/open-challenge-to-cecil-about-astrology-by-a-different-sort-of-fanatic/29015/58 "2000-08-15T23:36:41Z")
> [@](#): > > btw, what was samclem’s comment all about? i guess there is some background to that joke(?), could you let me know? i want in on the joke too! It really wasn’t a joke. I meant to insult you. Thought I did. Forgot about the language barrier. You are, quite possibly, one of the less than 1% of the people on this board who believe in astrology. Does that make you wrong? Not necessarily, but it’s a good percentage bet. You have a great idea, to test it, and I hope you do. But when you revealed a little more about yourself, > [@](#): > > of all the people who have known me, even if just by acquaintance, astrologers have BY FAR been the only people who have come close to understanding me! you proved to me and the other 99% of the board that DON’T believe in astrology that you are under the delusion that something is _REAL_ because the _PEOPLE_ associated with the subject agree with you. While that is flattering(and don’t we all LIVE for flattery), it may not be accurate. ---
**Author:** ![Loren\_Pechtel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/d2c977/32.png) [@Loren\_Pechtel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loren_Pechtel)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2000, 1:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/open-challenge-to-cecil-about-astrology-by-a-different-sort-of-fanatic/29015/59 "2000-08-16T01:07:26Z")
> [@](#): > > _Originally posted by Danielinthewolvesden \* > **I can “prove” astrology is a lot of bullhooky. OK, Jabber, get 2 horoscopes, for 2 persons of the same sex. Born in the same or nearly same year. Make them as opposite as possible ( Leo, Aquarius?). Have the 2 folks at a party, and then announce you have their horoscopes, and you are going to read them. Announce a name, then read the horoscope, but leave of the sign, birthdate, etc, just the personality section, ect. Listen as all say, “YES! that is him to a T” “exactly” “right on!”. Then do the same for the other person- listen to similar comments. Then, announce that you have (and you have, indeed", reversed them, you were reading As 'scope for B, and the reverse. Listen to stoney silence. All of a sudden, the “absolutely right on” horoscopes, are not so good, eh?**_ ``` Another good one along these lines I read about: A class was asked to provide the data needed for horoscopes. The next class, horoscopes were handed back to the students, they were asked to evaluate their accuracy. Most felt they were pretty good. They were then asked to pass the paper to the student behind. Surprise--they were all the same. To make matters worse, they were the horoscope of a notorious serial killer. ``` ---
**Author:** ![BigAl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/ea666f/32.png) [@BigAl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigAl)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2000, 5:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/open-challenge-to-cecil-about-astrology-by-a-different-sort-of-fanatic/29015/60 "2000-08-16T17:29:19Z")
Jabberwalkie, If you really want to do a test you might try the following: 1. Select 10 different astrologers. 2. Send 3 of them your correct information (date and place of birth). Send the other 7 completely incorrect information. In order to be a blind test, have a friend select which ones get which, without telling you. 3. Select the 3 horoscopes which you feel best describe you. Make sure your friend has removed any references to places and dates before you make your assessment. 4. Check with your friend if those 3 were using correct or incorrect information. If astrology is real they should all be from astrologers using correct information. However, I think you will be surprised at how close all of the horoscopes are. It may be an eye-opening experience for you. However, that assumes that you are interested in truth. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/open-challenge-to-cecil-about-astrology-by-a-different-sort-of-fanatic/29015.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/open-challenge-to-cecil-about-astrology-by-a-different-sort-of-fanatic/29015.md?page=4)