On another subject, and I'd like answers from the astrologers out there:
He based all his calculations on my birth date and only my birth date (and maybe my sex, 'cause it's easy to guess...).
From just that, he was able to tell me how many brothers and sisters I had, when I lost my virginity (down to the year) and also a truly major and significant event in my life (even though, for this one, it could be just me seeing things the way I want to see them).
My question is, with the advance of big data, hasn't astrology been completely debunked yet ?
Because really, you can't expect everyone born the same day to have the same number of brothers and sisters (or even find a high correlation coefficient).
Read a few pages back in this thread, we had a discussion noting what scientific evidence there is. And note that the one man who did do a PhD in this (Gauquelin) committed suicide after the university he studied at threw out his work, despite the fact that others repeated it. It is still a very unpopular subject today because when you notice that astrology works (and I'd point you to the fact that
Arch Crawford, a financial astrologer, has won the market timer award more than almost anyone else), you start to question the materialist notions that are so key to convincing humans that they are meat computers, rather than spiritual beings. It's much easier to control someone who believes that they are a meat computer, than someone who believes that they might be a fractal shard of something infinite. Very similar to Leary's comments about judging a society on the drugs it criminalises and those that are legal to me - anything that opens the mind is illegal.