I sometimes think that about this forum.
The science of astrology.
Re: The science of astrology.
Mum had our charts done at birth, the horoscope provided in booklets, full of quasi technical terms about the Moon in conjunction with Saturn and the like. The predictions, a number of them read after the fact, were astonishingly accurate, and with very little inaccurate "fishing" and cold reading.
I have no explanation for it because its particularity extends beyond Atla's points about the seasonal effects during gestation (which I thought was a valid point worth exploring more). The accuracy of our charts would seem to be either an impressive coincidence or as uwot speculated, that the ancients noticed patterning with misattributed causation, or both.
I have no explanation for it because its particularity extends beyond Atla's points about the seasonal effects during gestation (which I thought was a valid point worth exploring more). The accuracy of our charts would seem to be either an impressive coincidence or as uwot speculated, that the ancients noticed patterning with misattributed causation, or both.
Re: The science of astrology.
Most forums are not unlike this one and of no concern; the world however is a different story. Determining that the the universe is an illusion by an illusion is what I would call the ultimate in reverse engineering.
Re: The science of astrology.
A little more context to what I wrote. Why are we so sensitive to the four seasons, especially to the changes in the day-night cycle? Well because it's quite unnatural to us.
Humans evolved in Africa, near the Equator for millions of years. No four seasons there, just more or less constant warm, and little variations in the day-night cycle. A few ten thousand or a few thousand years were just not enough for us to fully adjust to the new conditions.