Re: Where is ahaha.... ahahahanson?


tdp1001@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
Mike wrote:
Tom Potter wrote:
"Sam Wormley" <swormley1@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:TeMig.26172$No1.18049@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Tom Potter wrote:

...and pseudoscience's like astrology, alchemy, etc.
have often paved the way to advancing the sciences.


Interesting conjecture on your part Potter. I'll bet
the correlation is negative. Got data?

Wikipedia
"..alchemy was one of the main precursors of modern sciences, and we owe to
the ancient alchemists the discovery of many substances and processes that
are the mainstay of modern chemical and metallurgical industries."

That is profoundly wrong. Newton spent the rest of his life after
publishing the Principia doing Alchemy. That had nothing to do with his
discoveries. It was the prevailing emotive approach to everyday life
mixed with high levels of superstition.

Wikipedia
"Kepler believed in astrology in the sense that he was convinced that
astrological aspects physically and really affected humans as well as the
weather on Earth. He strove to unravel how and why that was the case and
tried to put astrology on a surer footing,

So what? Newton also believed in astrology. Have you any idea how many
contemporary politicians, actors, public pesonalities resort to
astrology? There is not a single element in the geocentric or placidus
system used in astrology that relates to current dynamic theories of
planetary motion.

Kepler discovered the laws of planetary motion while trying to achieve the
Pythagorean purpose of finding the harmony of the celestial spheres. In his
cosmologic vision, it was not a coincidence that the number of perfect
polyhedra was one less than the number of known planets. Having embraced the
Copernican system, he set out to prove that the distances from the planets
to the sun were given by spheres inside perfect polyhedra, all of which were
nested inside each other."

No. That is wrong. Some contemporary metaphysicists and astrologers
insist on these stupid ideas in an effort to legitimize their
crackpottery. Kepler continues to work on existing observations (I
think Tycho's) and ancient work on heliocentric system primarily by
Aristarchos of Samos.

Only cranks insist that modern science has its roots in superstition.
It is exactly that what modern science tried to get away from and often
people were forced to present their work as evidence of superstition
just to avoid prosecution. Descartes did not publish his works after he
learned of Galileo's arrest and Newton inserted many paragraphs of
theological content to avoid condemnation.

Keep of cranking up Potter.

It is interesting to see that Mike asserts that he knows better
than the collective wisdom of Wikipedia.

I understand that Wiki is your only source of knowledge, like most
other crank's.

Of course folks with normal intelligence can plainly see that Mike's
thinking <sic> is not first class when he makes statements like:

"There is not a single element in the geocentric or placidus
system used in astrology that relates to current dynamic theories of
planetary motion."

1. First Mike creates a strawman out of his own mind.
(geocentric or placidus system)


Since you do not understand what I am talking about you prove your
total ignorance of the subject. Astrology is based on the Ptolemaic
geocentric model. heavy importance is given to retrogate motions, to
oppositions and conjuctions, etc. We know today that these are only
<apparent> motions asviwed by Earth. So the only straw man here is you.
A person with lack of serious knowledge about science who nevertheless
insist on posting his crap.


2. Mike then makes the unsubstantiated assertion that there is
no correlations between his strawman and "current dynamic theories of
planetary motion.", which may or may not be true.


You do not even know what it is, true or false?

3. And as can be seen,
Mike ignores the numerous links between astrology and astronomy.

The link is so weak as it is your knowledge of science and physics.

[snip rest of Potter's misconceptions and superstitions]

Mike

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: DebunkingCementig
    ... >> he regarded as pseudoscience from ... >> science ... > or scientifically unsupported as astrology. ... Freud's psycho-analysis, ...
    (sci.bio.evolution)
  • Re: To all advocates of science in this NG.
    ... >> the perceived image, and understanding of, science in this venue. ... >> creationism, intelligence design, and institutional religion. ... > stating that astrology is bunk is no signal of lack of intellectual ... > spot for astrology), it is a short-hand recognition that there is no ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: real theories vs imaginary tales such as natural selection
    ... science, ... and the failure of one or more of those predictions must ... Astrology makes ... Professional scientists debate over whether SETI is ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: In the News: One in four Swedes think Astrology is a science
    ... Astrology is a science. ... Astrology practictioners don't do any of that. ... to the properties of the planets, moon, and sun. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Vitamin C makes vaccination unecessary
    ... >>> Astrology is bunk because no one can prove it works as they can't win ... > The illuminati don't want this information in public hands which is why ... They push all this ... >> evolutionary science is far more useful than astrology. ...
    (misc.health.alternative)