U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Unexplained Mysteries and Paranormal
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-31-2009, 11:29 PM
 
Location: Victoria TX
42,663 posts, read 74,212,583 times
Reputation: 36087

Advertisements

The work of Gauquelin is very persuasive Michel Gauquelin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I have not fact checked anything in his work, but it seems to follow logic and common sense.

However, I seriously doubt that enough of the effect remains in humans to yield any measurable influence, so as a practical matter, I would not place any stock in astrology's capacity to predict human behavior.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-01-2009, 08:52 AM
 
Location: West Palm Beach, FL
580 posts, read 861,786 times
Reputation: 892
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asheville Native View Post
Zero, nada, zip, zilch

And if someone asks 'what is your sign' I automatically deduct 10 - 20 points off of the perceived average IQ
I'll second that!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-01-2009, 10:48 AM
 
Location: Albuquerque
244 posts, read 253,869 times
Reputation: 170
I used to dismiss Astrology out of hand in the same way I dismiss fortune tellers. Then many years later I had cause to study it. The comment that the changing position of the canopy of stars cannot be ignored is undeniable. No one anymore is the sign that they think they are, so believing in the qualities of one sign may be a testament to the pervasiveness of astrology in our world. Do not forget that ancient psuedo-sciences like astrology and alchemy were the precursors to Astronomy and Chemistry. Arabic astrologers created our concept of time (the 24-hour day and calendars). Looking up at the night sky and wondering if there is some deeper meaning in it is perfectly natural.

Another aspect to debunk about astrology is the horoscope we see in the newspaper. These "readings" are usually taken only from the sun's position in relation to the particular atrological sign, which would be incomplete in a true chart. A full reading takes into account all the major influences of large bodies in the near universe, even a couple of large asteroids very close by.

It is the idea that large bodies have influence on smaller bodies that makes astrology interesting to me, however not for the purposes of predicting the future. Science has shown us that our own bodies are made up of more "space" than actual mass, and that what we think to be a static, solid mass is actually an enormous conglomeration of atoms with very active electrons orbiting nuclei of different size. In other words, we are energy and mass at the same time, open to the influences that commonly affect those things, like gravity.

So saying that someone born under a heavy influence of Mercury, which is a hot, fiery planet, and therefore liable to impart similar energetic and explosive qualities in a smaller body is not totally unreasonable to think about.

Think about who you are. You are what you think, your mind, yet there is no distinct location of the mind in our bodies. Mind is energy and our actions are the results of some directed force acting on those energies. Most of the time it is us who is the directed force creating our actions - energy directing energy causing action in a larger world.

Another interesting aspect of astrology is the fact that it deals with the fundamental behaviors of human existence. And if you think about a given behavior, say rationality, a major principle of Gemini, then imagine that the single behavior is like a magnet with two polarities. On one 'pole' you have a skillful application of rationality, intelliegence. And on the other pole you have an unskillful application of the rational behavior, superficiality, or the misuse of real intelligence.

From the understanding that behaviors are directed forms of energy, then it is much easier to understand how outside influences can affect the application, or polarity, of the resultant actions. And because the universe and the major influences in proximity are not static, nor do they ever cease to have an influence (gravity is constant), then it is much easier to see how different times will have different influential energies. I find this fascinating because I really enjoy science myself.

The final thing to understand about any human endeavor is that we as people are fallible, especially when it comes to understanding or creating very complex systems. Humans are also egocentric, how could we not be? We see the universe from our own perspective and apply what little we know to the things around us. Over time, with multiple trials and an ability to remember data (the nature of science) we can improve on our hypotheses. However, astrology is not science, nor do most of its practioners treat it as such. Besides, its subject is way too complex and the variables that affect it are infinite.

It is sad to think that there will probably never be any substantial financial backing to delve deeper into what could become hard science by better understanding the fundamental aspects of astrology that border on fact. The problem seems to me that people want to use it the wrong way. Instead of people wanting to understand themselves and possibly use real information to keep themselves from using unskillful applications of behaviors when there are under direct influences leaning them toward that, people want an outside entity to make decisions for them or tell them about a future that is predestined. We go back to mysticism and all the silly superstitions that come from human insecurity.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-02-2009, 01:10 PM
 
5,090 posts, read 8,062,897 times
Reputation: 3066
Quote:
Originally Posted by manquaman View Post
I used to dismiss Astrology out of hand in the same way I dismiss fortune tellers. Then many years later I had cause to study it. The comment that the changing position of the canopy of stars cannot be ignored is undeniable. No one anymore is the sign that they think they are, so believing in the qualities of one sign may be a testament to the pervasiveness of astrology in our world. Do not forget that ancient psuedo-sciences like astrology and alchemy were the precursors to Astronomy and Chemistry. Arabic astrologers created our concept of time (the 24-hour day and calendars). Looking up at the night sky and wondering if there is some deeper meaning in it is perfectly natural.

Another aspect to debunk about astrology is the horoscope we see in the newspaper. These "readings" are usually taken only from the sun's position in relation to the particular atrological sign, which would be incomplete in a true chart. A full reading takes into account all the major influences of large bodies in the near universe, even a couple of large asteroids very close by.

It is the idea that large bodies have influence on smaller bodies that makes astrology interesting to me, however not for the purposes of predicting the future. Science has shown us that our own bodies are made up of more "space" than actual mass, and that what we think to be a static, solid mass is actually an enormous conglomeration of atoms with very active electrons orbiting nuclei of different size. In other words, we are energy and mass at the same time, open to the influences that commonly affect those things, like gravity.

So saying that someone born under a heavy influence of Mercury, which is a hot, fiery planet, and therefore liable to impart similar energetic and explosive qualities in a smaller body is not totally unreasonable to think about.

Think about who you are. You are what you think, your mind, yet there is no distinct location of the mind in our bodies. Mind is energy and our actions are the results of some directed force acting on those energies. Most of the time it is us who is the directed force creating our actions - energy directing energy causing action in a larger world.

Another interesting aspect of astrology is the fact that it deals with the fundamental behaviors of human existence. And if you think about a given behavior, say rationality, a major principle of Gemini, then imagine that the single behavior is like a magnet with two polarities. On one 'pole' you have a skillful application of rationality, intelliegence. And on the other pole you have an unskillful application of the rational behavior, superficiality, or the misuse of real intelligence.

From the understanding that behaviors are directed forms of energy, then it is much easier to understand how outside influences can affect the application, or polarity, of the resultant actions. And because the universe and the major influences in proximity are not static, nor do they ever cease to have an influence (gravity is constant), then it is much easier to see how different times will have different influential energies. I find this fascinating because I really enjoy science myself.

The final thing to understand about any human endeavor is that we as people are fallible, especially when it comes to understanding or creating very complex systems. Humans are also egocentric, how could we not be? We see the universe from our own perspective and apply what little we know to the things around us. Over time, with multiple trials and an ability to remember data (the nature of science) we can improve on our hypotheses. However, astrology is not science, nor do most of its practioners treat it as such. Besides, its subject is way too complex and the variables that affect it are infinite.

It is sad to think that there will probably never be any substantial financial backing to delve deeper into what could become hard science by better understanding the fundamental aspects of astrology that border on fact. The problem seems to me that people want to use it the wrong way. Instead of people wanting to understand themselves and possibly use real information to keep themselves from using unskillful applications of behaviors when there are under direct influences leaning them toward that, people want an outside entity to make decisions for them or tell them about a future that is predestined. We go back to mysticism and all the silly superstitions that come from human insecurity.

There are a few points that might have not been taken into consideration and some that might not be valid at all. I'm not completely disagreeing with you, but rather clarifying and sharing some points of view with a few spots here and there.

For example, it is indeed unreasonable to think that Mercury imparts explosive qualities to people because it's a hot firey planet. It's only hot on the side that faces the sun. On the dark side of the planet though, it's also incredibly cold.

That's not to say that there is no influence from celestial bodies. We get energy from the sun, and there are certain tidal effects on us from the moon as well. But I agree that none of these celestial bodies are going to enable the ability to make an accurate prediction about the future of a given individual.

Another problem associated with how certain celestial bodies effect us is that if they have such an effect on one person, then they would have the exact same effect on everyone. A planetary or stellar body makes no distinction between one person and another. We all live under the same sun, moon, planets and stars.

There's a lot more to the universe, which happens to include various scales, from the incredible large at the macro scale to the incredibly small at the quantum scale. When we consider the activity of either scale, things take on a whole different meaning, so to speak. At the quantum scale or lower, we might as well throw out the books of what reality is. That's not even mentioning the Planck scale. The thing is that even though we are entirely composed of quantum particles, we don't exist as that scale. We're somewhere in between the macro and quantum scales. Our scale of existence in the universe enables us to have the ability to perceive what we consider to be reality.

The question then boils down to what is reality? IMO, reality is what a person perceives based on the quality of information taken in by our senses. The process of how we are able to have a perception like reality is a whole different matter. The bottom line for us is the end result. And in this case, the end result for us at our scale of existence in the universe is that what we perceive as reality in indeed very real. If you stick your hand on a red hot stove, chances are that it's really gonna hurt or do some damage to you. That's reality. There are other kinds of reality we may perceive that can change though, but again, it's based on the quality of information (or data) we take in.

The point is that on the one hand, we're an integrated part of the universe, but at the same time we're only a very tiny part it, not the entire universe. All people form what we collectively call humanity. But each person is still a distinct and separate individual with their own unique set of experiences that influences their perception.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-02-2009, 01:53 PM
 
Location: Albuquerque
244 posts, read 253,869 times
Reputation: 170
Quote:
Originally Posted by NightBazaar View Post

For example, it is indeed unreasonable to think that Mercury imparts explosive qualities to people because it's a hot firey planet. It's only hot on the side that faces the sun. On the dark side of the planet though, it's also incredibly cold..
Good point, but is the hot side going to have more influence than the cold, or vice-versa? I'm not concerned with the side of a stick someone is holding when the fiery end is near me. Not to mention that Mercury's hot is way hotter than our hot, or any other planet further out.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NightBazaar View Post
Another problem associated with how certain celestial bodies effect us is that if they have such an effect on one person, then they would have the exact same effect on everyone. A planetary or stellar body makes no distinction between one person and another. We all live under the same sun, moon, planets and stars..
This involves another problem I have with astrology, but does nothing to make it less interesting for me. I am talking about the point of inception where someone is supposed to be "influenced", or "become under the influence of whatever is out there."

This aside, with your appreciation of the variety of scales, no two people would be the same because of the flux within and without. Nothing in the universe is static, so the amount of available influences is wonderfully infinite.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NightBazaar View Post
There's a lot more to the universe, which happens to include various scales, from the incredible large at the macro scale to the incredibly small at the quantum scale. .
Therein lies the rub... I have yet to undertake a serious study of quantum mechanics, but I will. The little I do know of it is very exciting. To think that the very same electrons orbiting a singular body can exist simultaneously in separate realities or space/time is very cool.

My simple example was to use gravity as a form of influence. Celestial bodies like distant stars or galaxies will have very minor influence, if any. I'm not arguing in favor of astrology, just trying to wrap my mind around some of its tenets that border hard science. The influence on one body from another is one of those tenets.

I don't have the information or the time right now to quote or look for the information, but I have heard some very interesting material about how flowers have an "intelligence" (for lack of a better word) of their own and serve a larger good in relation to sunlight and conservation of energy.

I fully admit that all of this is beyond the pale of an aspiring writer like myself, but there is no lack of good material in it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NightBazaar View Post
The question then boils down to what is reality? .
You are frying fish of a different color. What? Exactly. Philosophy is a subject that I consider out of the purview of science. It's mental masturbation without the 'happy ending.'

Quote:
Originally Posted by NightBazaar View Post
The point is that on the one hand, we're an integrated part of the universe, but at the same time we're only a very tiny part it, not the entire universe. All people form what we collectively call humanity. But each person is still a distinct and separate individual with their own unique set of experiences that influences their perception.
I don't think it matters what scale you talk about; influence is the name of the game. In fact, additional levels of scale only serve to complicate the issue, not negate it. There are tides within ourselves that ebb and flow to influences we may not even be aware of, especially if Michio Kaku is right about his multiple planes of existence. (I used to think that this was the guy I would study when it came to quantum physics, but his science strikes me as too "pop", and Roger Penrose doesn't have the prose that Steven Hawkings does)

And someone else said that, "Perception is reality." I agree with that. There is no absolutism and people are who they are for many various reasons all competing to become the 2,000 bits of information per second that make it through the filter that is our nervous system, itself created to only allow in what we already know.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-02-2009, 07:01 PM
 
5,090 posts, read 8,062,897 times
Reputation: 3066
Quote:
Originally Posted by manquaman View Post
Good point, but is the hot side going to have more influence than the cold, or vice-versa? I'm not concerned with the side of a stick someone is holding when the fiery end is near me. Not to mention that Mercury's hot is way hotter than our hot, or any other planet further out.
Mercury, like Venus, being closer to the Sun than the Earth is can never give us a full view of its sunlit surface. The only exposure its partial sunlit surface gives us is when we can see it as it comes from around the sun or before it circles out of view around the sun. In other words, most of the time the sunlit side of Mercury is either behind the sun, directly in front of of the sun, or partially seen from Earth. Even when Mercury is viewable from the Earth, it's the dark shadowed area, like phases of the moon that faces the Earth, which means it's mostly Mercury's dark shadowed areas that are more exposed to the Earth than its sunlit side.


Quote:
Originally Posted by manquaman View Post

This involves another problem I have with astrology, but does nothing to make it less interesting for me. I am talking about the point of inception where someone is supposed to be "influenced", or "become under the influence of whatever is out there."

This aside, with your appreciation of the variety of scales, no two people would be the same because of the flux within and without. Nothing in the universe is static, so the amount of available influences is wonderfully infinite.
An inception point would make no difference at all. The reason being that the Earth is still rotating on its axis. Let's use Mars as an example since it faces us in full when it's in view because its farther away from the sun than the Earth is. Let's say Jack is born Aug. 2, at a certain latitude. A short while later, Jill is born in the next time zone but at the same latitude. In both cases, Mars will be facing both at the same latitude. Is Jill going to have the same characteristics as Jack?

There would be some variations because both Mars and Earth are still moving in their orbits around the sun, and the Earth will in the process of seasonal tilting one way or the other, but the variations would be so slight that it would be nearly imperceivable from our perspective. To be truly accurate for an astrologer to claim a prediction, close doesn't doesn't count. Everything including time, would have to be exact, not just to the second, or the millisecond, but exact.

You're quite right that no two persons would be identical because there are too many variations from person to person.


Quote:
Originally Posted by manquaman View Post

Therein lies the rub... I have yet to undertake a serious study of quantum mechanics, but I will. The little I do know of it is very exciting. To think that the very same electrons orbiting a singular body can exist simultaneously in separate realities or space/time is very cool.

My simple example was to use gravity as a form of influence. Celestial bodies like distant stars or galaxies will have very minor influence, if any. I'm not arguing in favor of astrology, just trying to wrap my mind around some of its tenets that border hard science. The influence on one body from another is one of those tenets.

I don't have the information or the time right now to quote or look for the information, but I have heard some very interesting material about how flowers have an "intelligence" (for lack of a better word) of their own and serve a larger good in relation to sunlight and conservation of energy.

I fully admit that all of this is beyond the pale of an aspiring writer like myself, but there is no lack of good material in it.
While an electron, which is subject to quantum mechanics, can seemingly be in two different places at the same time doesn't mean it has a direct effect on us. Obviously it doesn't since if the electron is still with you. Again, the realm of quantum physics is vastly different than general physics. It should be noted that while we are made of quantum particles, we don't exist at the scale of quantum particles. I'm certainly no expert on the subject of quantum physics, but I agree it's pretty weird.

As for intelligent flowers, they are living things, and they are an important part of the ecosystem of the Earth. But I don't know that they necessarily possess a certain kind of botanical intelligence. What about rocks? Could stars be intelligent. I'm inclined to think these things are more likely a part of the environment we live in. Because something is alive doesn't mean has to have intelligence. I guess if you take it down to the quantum scale, then they're somewhat the same as well are. The difference is in how it's arranged. We're arranged in a way that makes us quite different than plants, rocks and stars.


Quote:
Originally Posted by manquaman View Post

You are frying fish of a different color. What? Exactly. Philosophy is a subject that I consider out of the purview of science. It's mental masturbation without the 'happy ending.'
No, I wasn't trying to fry fish of a different color. The point I was making is that every thought, idea, etc., you have is the result of electo-chemical stimulation taking place in the neural network of your brain.

What's going on when you look at something like a tree? Photons bounce off the tree which reach your the optic nerve. From there, it's all electrical impulses traveling through the nerves which releases certain chemicals in a pattern that your brain interprets as a tree. Nor do you see it in real time. The image is what the tree looked like in the past, although the process it very fast. The reason is because it takes time for the photons to travel from the tree to your optic nerve and it takes time to for the brain to process the information.

So do you actually see the tree? It depends on how you look at it (pun intended). On the one hand, no. You're seeing the result of what all the electro-chemical activity racing through the neurons in your brain produces. But from a practical side, yes, you really do see a tree. It seems like crazy contradictions to have it as both yes and no. But that's the way it works for us.

So, no it's not just philosophical or mental masterbation. It's the physically weird way the brain works. If you think about just how the brain works, it does raise the question about the nature of reality. Is it real? Or is it Memorex? Personally, I'll stick with what I see as real, but also marvel at what's involved. If someone spends too much time wondering what's real and what's not, they might end up calmly contemplating it under sedation at the funny farm. LOL!


Quote:
Originally Posted by manquaman View Post

I don't think it matters what scale you talk about; influence is the name of the game. In fact, additional levels of scale only serve to complicate the issue, not negate it. There are tides within ourselves that ebb and flow to influences we may not even be aware of, especially if Michio Kaku is right about his multiple planes of existence. (I used to think that this was the guy I would study when it came to quantum physics, but his science strikes me as too "pop", and Roger Penrose doesn't have the prose that Steven Hawkings does)

And someone else said that, "Perception is reality." I agree with that. There is no absolutism and people are who they are for many various reasons all competing to become the 2,000 bits of information per second that make it through the filter that is our nervous system, itself created to only allow in what we already know.
Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying there are no influences from other scales. I'm saying that you can't make any accurate predictions about a given person's life based on how the planets and stars were arranged at the time and place that person was born or any time after. The reason is that there are too many variations of probability involved.

I agree that Michio Kaku does seem to lean a bit too much on pop science. Nothing wrong with that. He's a bright guy and some of his views are worth considering. But it does seem more of a public relations thing. I can't say, nor can anyone else, that there aren't multiple planes of existence in the way he envisions it. It sort of goes along the idea of branching time lines, etc., involving an 11th dimension, with a parallel universe that's slightly out of sync so it remains invisible to us, and all based on infinite probabilities. The problem is that it's something that can't be proved or disproved. In the same sense, I could say there's an alternate universe where cartoon Beatles are actually alive and sailing the Sea of Green in a yellow submarine.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-02-2009, 07:06 PM
 
48,516 posts, read 83,880,155 times
Reputation: 18049
About as much as the fortune cook;none at all.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-02-2009, 07:10 PM
 
257 posts, read 318,398 times
Reputation: 114
As with any claim that couldn't be tested repeatedly I'm skeptical of it. But as a mere human, I'm not gonna say it's real or isn't, I don't know for sure.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-02-2009, 09:31 PM
 
Location: Tucson/Nogales
17,370 posts, read 21,213,499 times
Reputation: 24192
Default Leo and leadership

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady Ice View Post

There are twelve signs of the zodiac.

Lets take one of these sample groups. The group called Leo have a DOB from late July to late August. A typical Leonine trait would be leadership, we ask this sample group to answer the question..."do you think you would be a good leader?"...


As for predicting events, I'm not sure but I do wonder how far the number of accurate predictions deviate from what would occur by chance.
In my eyes, there's 4: Fire, Air, Earth, Water. Since those belonging to these elements behave similarly, one can do an analysis elementally. And it makes for great meditation, the mixing of the elements within all of us, which goes back to the Greeks. The two elements that are the most difficult to mix are air and water.

Leo is the sign of the president, king, dictator. This is the sign of starpower, and it's amazing, even to the disbelievers of astrology, how they fall for starpower and charisma in their election choices.

Both Leonine Obama and Clinton and George Bush have it. Bush is no Leo sun sign, but has a number of placements in Leo. So does Hillary Clinton and McCain (both with Mars in Leo). And Chavez, the leader of Iran (Moon in Leo), Castro. Leo is noted for charisma, and we voters suck it up, time after time, and is charisma a necessary quality for a good leader? Obviously so, as voters continually ask: Where's the charisma? In other words, where's the Leo, the starpower?

Pity the potential leader who is much more qualified to be president who's dull and boring, with no starpower? What chance does this man have?

If the voters were a bit more astrologically aware, perhaps we might elect greater leaders.

I've never been into the predictive aspects of Astrology, never have, never will. Nor have I ever read my daily horoscope.

Since I have a lot of earth in my chart (Capricorn, Virgo, Tauraus) which demands reason and logic and facts, I've had to overcome all that to finally see the merits of astrology, the metaphysical value.

For those who are dead set against it, let's pray and hope that someone doesn't gain access to your birth data (birth time not necessary) some day and uses it to your disadvantage and their advantage.

Astrology is far more widely used than anyone will ever know, at every level of government and industry. The reason it's not aired publicly, because it's too alienating to the public (i.e. Nancy Reagan). It's best that it always remains a deep secret, as far as it usage. Ignorance is bliss!

Last edited by tijlover; 09-02-2009 at 10:24 PM.. Reason: rephrase
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-03-2009, 04:11 PM
 
Location: Albuquerque
244 posts, read 253,869 times
Reputation: 170
Quote:
Originally Posted by NightBazaar View Post
Mercury, like Venus, being closer to the Sun than the Earth is can never give us a full view of its sunlit surface. The only exposure its partial sunlit surface gives us is when we can see it as it comes from around the sun or before it circles out of view around the sun.
The temperature of Mercury's sunlight side is 950 degrees. The temperature of the dark side is 210 degrees, substantially hotter than ours.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NightBazaar View Post
An inception point would make no difference at all. Let's say Jack is born Aug. 2, at a certain latitude. A short while later, Jill is born in the next time zone but at the same latitude. In both cases, Mars will be facing both at the same latitude. Is Jill going to have the same characteristics as Jack?
Jack and Jill do not become people, whatever constitutes that (tangential to your positing "what is reality?"), at the same time, even within physical proximity. Jack and Jill becoming who they are does not happen at birth. It happens some time in the womb.

And inside or outside of the womb, there will be people who are similar regarding some aspects (their particular flavor of humanness) of human behavior. Twins can be vastly different, as can identical twins, but succumb to similar influences that affect behavior.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NightBazaar View Post
To be truly accurate for an astrologer to claim a prediction, close doesn't doesn't count. Everything including time, would have to be exact, not just to the second, or the millisecond, but exact.
You seem to be caught up on astrology predicting the future. Whether it can or can't does not concern me. I don't believe that it can. But what I am talking about that I find interesting about astrology is that it may be able to explain why a certain human behavior is more likely to occur for some people over others at a given time in correllation to the position of known, exospheric influences. I seem to remember something called biorhythms being a popular catch-phrase a few years back that reminds me of what I am thinking about.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NightBazaar View Post
While an electron, which is subject to quantum mechanics, can seemingly be in two different places at the same time doesn't mean it has a direct effect on us. Obviously it doesn't since if the electron is still with you. Again, the realm of quantum physics is vastly different than general physics.
Which is exactly why we have no idea how certain influences can change the "polarity" of an electrochemical reaction to it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NightBazaar View Post
It should be noted that while we are made of quantum particles, we don't exist at the scale of quantum particles.
Part of us must exist on a quantum level if we are made partly of that, right? Just playing the advocate...

Quote:
Originally Posted by NightBazaar View Post
As for intelligent flowers, they are living things, and they are an important part of the ecosystem of the Earth. But I don't know that they necessarily possess a certain kind of botanical intelligence.
A man named Maeterlink wrote a book where he postulated that flowers absorb energy from the sun and have the ability to transfer tiny bits of that energy to heat the earth when needed and at the most benefial moment. He argued that the ability to withold or control the conservation of energy that it was a crude type of intelligence. Sorry I don't have a page number.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NightBazaar View Post
Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying there are no influences from other scales. I'm saying that you can't make any accurate predictions about a given person's life based on how the planets and stars were arranged at the time and place that person was born or any time after.
I cannot define the moment myself, but I am talking about when a person becomes a person, when mitosis stops and the body is as whole as it is going to get. Imagine the human genome project and amount of material there is in DNA. And then imagine the flux within just before there are no more changes. That snapshot would be a picture of what one person is and what would differentiate them from somebody else. Then you can imagine what influences are ambient and how they would in make a grouping of people who become whole at that time are susceptible to similar influences, and other people would not be.[/quote]

Quote:
Originally Posted by NightBazaar View Post
The reason is that there are too many variations of probability involved.
Aye! The rub again.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Unexplained Mysteries and Paranormal
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top