Page

  Archives.

  

 Good morning.

    

4th March 2007.

While browsing YouTube I came across a video produced by James Randi, that well known skeptic and devout opponent of Astrology, in which he tries to demonstrate that Astrology is seriously flawed and and that people can be fooled into believing just about anything. So I replied with a video of my own pointing out the flaws in Randi's techniques and showing that it was easy to construct tests that appeared to be valid but were in fact not so. 

 

Now one thing I am learning is that is you ever dare to point out that people like Randi are wrong, certain individuals with a chip on their shoulder will immediately try to shout you down, accuse you of getting your facts wrong, tell you your reasoning is flawed, and throw in taunts and insults for good measure. One even suggested I take up Randi's $1,000,000 challenge. The main problem is that it is set up in such a way as to make it impossible for anyone to win. Randi is pleased to tell us all that no one has ever passed the preliminary tests - which is hardly surprising. See the truth about his challenge here. 

 

Critics suffer from two problems; having no working knowledge of Astrology, and only being interested in their own opinions, so discussion is pointless. In my case it only encourages me to spend more time presenting Astrology as it really is.

 

5th March 2007.  Lunar eclipse.

You may have come across Astrologers making predictions for this phenomenon. I have to tell you that such predictions are highly speculative and are not supported by Astrological evidence. 

  

When dealing with transits, the rules are simple: Firstly, the quicker a planet moves, the less effect it has, so only transits of the outer planets should be considered. Secondly, unless a transit [or a new Moon or eclipse] forms an aspect with a planet or Angle in your own chart the effects will be negligible. 

 

8th March 2007. Critics.

My experiences in making videos for YouTube explaining the case for Astrology and pointing out where the critics have made serious errors has been both rewarding and illuminating. I would particularly like to thank the more vociferous critics for demonstrating to every sensible person that they have no working knowledge of the subject yet make 'informed' opinions such as: 'All Astrologers are frauds' or, Astrology is a load of B*******'. Isn't it nice to live in a world with such enlightened people? 

 

12th mar 2007.  Need for better communication.

If there is a failing in Astrology it is one of lack of communication. All around there are fakes and frauds taking money and giving little in return, and they do this by latching on to the popular face of Astrology epitomised by the Sun Sign brigade. Yet do I see any evidence that the genuine Astrological community are doing anything about it? No! So innocent people are continually being ripped off and, just as importantly, that vociferous minority known as critics are have lots of ammunition to fire at us as they shout 'fraud', 'charlatan' etc. I have little time for critics with their attendant closed minds, but in this case they have a point, at least as far as the fakes go. The pity is that genuine Astrologers are being unfairly accused.

  

So little is done to explain to ordinary people not only what Astrology is but what it can do for them, despite the fact that it can do a great deal. Less time exploring theories and holding meetings and more time addressing the people who really matter - the general public - would be time well spent. I shall try in my own way to do this. 

   

17th March 2007. James Randi's $1.000.000 challenge.

For those of you who are not familiar with this so-called challenge, James Randi - that self elected 'psychic investigator' - has issued a challenge to anyone who can prove the existence of paranormal activity and includes Astrology in his list of targeted professions. I have never said that Astrology is paranormal in nature and have gone on record many times over the years stating quite plainly that any connection between the paranormal and Astrology is false. Yes, of course there are those who give the impression that this is the case, but I say they are wrong and that Astrology is based on observation and logical deduction, requiring no paranormal abilities whatsoever. 

  

This raises an issue. On the one hand Randi claims that Astrology is paranormal, I do not. Now the critics constantly shout 'Take Randi's challenge and prove you are genuine', yet there are insurmountable problems, not the least being the way in which the rules are applied, rules that are anything other than transparent. However, the main problem is the insistence by the Randi organisation that Astrology is classified as paranormal. I have exchanged many emails with them requesting clarification of the following issue:

 

If I were to accept their offer of the challenge it would be on the basis that I am not claiming to demonstrate paranormal activity, instead I would be attempting to demonstrate that I can do what I say I can do by using normal interpretation methods of a birth chart. As their rules clearly state that any challenge must demonstrate paranormal activity, my question to them is how can I take a this challenge when their own rules prevent me from doing so. To date, no satisfactory reply has been forthcoming, and I have serious doubts that I will ever get the clarification I need.  

 

18th March 2007.

James Randi's $1.000.000 challenge. - the continuing story. [Updated 22nd March].

I am at present seeking clarification from the James Randi Foundation with respect to an anomaly in their challenge. Briefly, they classify Astrology as paranormal - I don't. As a traditional Astrologer I have never claimed to use the paranormal and have many times gone on record stating that any link between the paranormal and Astrology is false,. You can see my some of my comments on this web site. Furthermore, since the earliest writers, such as Ptolemy, to the present day, authors of traditional Astrology books have never made this connection and in many cases have actively rejected it, yet despite this the Randi organisation claims it is paranormal. Why? 

  

I maintain this rule effectively blocks Astrologers such as myself from taking his $1.000.000 challenge on the grounds that it is impossible to comply with the rule stating quite clearly that evidence of the paranormal must be demonstrated. How can I, or others, possibly demonstrate something we do not use? Faced with this I sought clarification from them and here are the exchanges we have had so far.

  

12th March 2007. 

As an Astrologer, I use no paranormal methods, relying entirely on interpretation and deduction. If I took up your challenge and successfully demonstrated I can do what I claim to do, would my claim be subsequently rejected on the grounds that I failed to provide evidence of the paranormal?

No reply.
13th March 2007.
 
I am a traditional Astrologer and although I claim to be able to prove my abilities I do not claim to use the paranormal methods. My question is; does this mean that I am unable to take your challenge?
No reply
13th March 2007.

I am puzzled.

 
According to your rules, Astrology is classified as paranormal. I am an Astrologer who does not claim to use any paranormal methods yet I am quite prepared to demonstrate my claims. If did so would I then be accused of using paranormal methods [thus proving your claim that the paranormal does not exist] or would my application be rejected simply because my methods do not use the paranormal? As you can see we have a problem here.
Reply:

Since we define astrology as paranormal, any claims concerning the effectiveness of astrology do count for the challenge.
13 March 2007.

I take your point, however what I am saying is that I do not claim to be using paranormal methods, only logical observation and interpretation of what I see in chart. This does raise the possibility that even if I did succeed in proving I could do what I claim it would finally be rejected on the grounds that paranormal methods had not been used, therefore this was not a legitimate claim under your rules. Catch 22?

No reply.
14th March 2007.

 I would like to repeat my original query in case it has been overlooked.

 
According to your rules, Astrology is classified as paranormal. I am an Astrologer who does not claim to use any paranormal methods yet I am quite prepared to demonstrate my claims. Where does this leave me with respect to your challenge? As I am not claiming paranormal methods would my application be rejected? If my application was accepted and I eventually did prove my claim would it then be rejected on the grounds that I have not shown the existence of paranormal phenomena?
 
I would like clarification on this.
Reply.

I've replied a few times. Did you receive this e-mail?
15th March 2007.

Yes I have received this - obviously, but I have had no others.

 
Reply:

Yes, I think mail was bouncing to the other address.

We define astrology as paranormal, so you don't have to. If we agree to a protocol, we're in a contract and can't simply say "Oh, well you didn't do it in a paranormal way.. so you lose." If you do what the protocol says, you win.
15th March 2007.

Yes, but your challenge clearly states that this must be a demonstration of paranormal activity, yet I am saying that I will demonstrate my Astrological skills without using any paranormal methods or means. In this case, how can we possibly agree a protocol, especially in view of the fact that your rules state that if protocol cannot be agreed [which is highly likely] then I would be deemed to have failed the challenge? Are you saying that you would agree terms knowing full well that I am not claiming to demonstrate paranormal activities in any way, shape, or form?

 
Reply:

Astrology is paranormal, whether you say it is or not.
18th March 2007.

Yes, but with respect my question still remains unanswered and I would like clarification before accepting your challenge.

 
I am a traditional Astrologer who by definition uses rational deduction and interpretation and does not use, or claim to use, paranormal methods in any way, shape, or form. As your rules clearly state, I the applicant must show evidence of the paranormal so how can I comply with this rule and proceed with my application if the basis of my claim is that I am not claiming or demonstrating paranormal methods?
No reply.

Comment: As you can see they are refusing to answer my question by sticking to the unfounded claim that ALL Astrology is paranormal - take it or leave it. But my question remains: how can I possibly demonstrate the existence of paranormal activity when I am not claiming to use it? 
22nd March 2007.
As you have so far failed to answer my question perhaps I could put it another way? Could you tell me what evidence you have to support your assertion that Astrology is paranormal?
 
Reply. 

I've answered your question repeatedly, you just won't accept it.

If astrology worked, it would be in violation of the laws of physics. That makes it paranormal.

And since it's our challenge, we get to decide what's paranormal. If we say it is, for the purposes of the challenge, it is. It's quite simple.
22nd Mar 2007.
No you haven't answered my question, you just keep insisting that you are right.
 
Then perhaps you would be good enough to explain exactly why it is, as you say, in violation of the laws of physics. It doesn't violate any laws as you would surely know if you bothered to study the subject.
Reply.

You are the claimant. What is your claim? 
22nd March 2007.
Don't dodge the issue.
 
Tell me exactly which laws of physics Astrology is supposed to violate.
Reply.

Predicting the future for example? How about the claim that the position of stars has an influence over our lives?

What are you playing at?
22nd March 2007. 
I am a traditional Astrologer, as indeed are many others, and none of us subscribe to the ridiculous notion that the 'stars' or indeed any other body in space has 'influence' over our lives. You need to study the subject to get your facts right.
 
'What are you playing at' suggests that you think I am some sort of idiot - I assure you I am not.
Reply.

Do you have a claim?
You are dodging the issue again...
 
I have explained that as a traditional Astrologer I do not believe in planetary 'influences'. Now do tell me what other laws of physics Astrology is supposed to violate?
Reply.

Stop wasting my time. Either make a claim or don't.
22nd Mar 2007.
I have rarely come across anyone so rude and evasive. Why don't you answer the questions instead of being abusive, or haven't you got an intelligent answer? You have no proof that Astrology is paranormal, you have never bothered to study the subject and yet you set yourself up as judge and jury.
 
Yes, I will make a claim. I claim that this challenge is a farce.

I was told that the Randi organisation was offhanded and rude to claimants or enquirers and this exchange shows it to be the case. Faced with this kind of arrogance how can anyone believe that this challenge is fair and that the methods used against claimants are not intimidating and one-sided? 

 

22nd March 2007. Astrology didn't 'work' prior to the discovery of Pluto?

While trying to present the true face of Astrology I often come up against critics who fire off criticisms without bothering to check their facts. The latest assertion is that prior to the discovery of Uranus, Neptune and Pluto Astrology didn't work. How ridiculous!

 

Before the discovery of Uranus in 1781, Neptune in 1846, and Pluto in 1930, astronomers were perfectly happy with their model of the solar system. As each new planet was discovered they changed that model and allowed for each new planet. Astrologers did exactly the same. Are we to imply that prior to these discoveries astronomy didn't work because its knowledge was incomplete?   Again, are we to say that aeronautics didn't work prior to the discovery of jet propulsion, or that the entire medical profession was a failure prior to the discovery of anesthetics? Of course not! Any body of knowledge works with the information it has at a given point in time but does evolve when given new information. Astronomy evolved and so did Astrology. 

 

28th March 2007.

Since launching a series of videos on YouTube I have been amazed at the response - nearly 6,000 people have viewed them in just three weeks. Of course there have been many attempts by critics to belittle what I am trying to say, but that is to be expected from this minority, none of whom have ever even bothered to study the subject! More videos are planned and will be released as soon as they are complete. Thanks to everyone for your encouragement.

  

31 March 2007.

People who take a genuine interest in Astrology are often faced with two opposing forces. On the one hand we have the critics and sceptics who try very hard to ridicule Astrology using whatever means comes to mind - usually hearsay, assumptions, Sun Sign Astrology, or those highly dubious scientific tests. On the opposite side we have the Astrology of the marketplace making outrageous claims and pouring out predictions on a day to day basis. Among these are to be found the out and out fakes and scammers. It is very easy to be confused or taken in. 

 

I maintain, and have always maintained, that there is genuine Astrology to be found, and I try to present it through this web site and by posting videos on YouTube. Critics have gone out of their way to be as obnoxious and scathing as they can, and I am forced to wonder just what motivates these people other than a loathing of Astrology - a loathing they cannot explain. Nevertheless, I will not be deterred from stating the case for traditional Astrology and will carry on doing so despite their attempts to ridicule me. 

   

  

     

  

Copyright ©  2003 First Stop Astrology.com. All rights reserved.