Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b89429c566825f6ab32bcafbada449c9.jpg

Grrrrr..... Interview on R2 today

Tim

By Tim
in The Astro Lounge

Recommended Posts

sbooder

sbooder

Posted
Posted
I bet ordinary folks must be wondering what scientists actually did before the current vogue for "Bashing the Irrational" (If not the Bishop?) - Ah yes, boring old stuff... like research. :icon_salut:

I sense this is a reflection of today's society? Everything has to be hyped up - Confrontational, now. Former "opponents in debate" now become "Enemies of reason" etc. Molehills... mountains? There are endless LAWS to protect us from new/old age "charlatans". Not to mention the BBC's full quota of beer-bellied, bald-headed, belligerent... "Batmen", to save us... from ourselves? :D

There are problems re. the influence of the irrational on important [world-stage] stuff! But I worry about this modern appetite for... almost vigilantism - Over trivia. Do folk REALLY want to see others sent to jail for merely doing / believing "weird stuff"? Think it can't happen (again):

Helen Duncan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Aside: I'm with W.C. re. the "obsolete tomfoolery" charge.

Let's get scientific publicists back to promoting Science. Let's leave the "theological debate" to the BBC's (endless!) supply of "Arts / Humanities" graduates. [teasing] Science was ever for the patient and dedicated. Hard work - rewarding certainly! But sometimes dull too. Realistically, the "X-factor", it ain't... :)

Sorry mate, but no. I will not leave the theological debate to everyone else. I have no beef with anything people want to believe in, be it Astrology or palm reading. But when it is promoted as a form of Science rather than pseudo Science, I and many like me will shout.

Part of Science is dispelling myth and the way to do that is get out there and say all this rubbish is in fact rubbish!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 95
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Space Bat

Space Bat

Posted
Posted

Hmmmmm

I thought Astrology and Astronomy were very closely intertwined :D

Both have a scientific approach :)

However seems many associate Astrology to tabloid extracts or a fat imbecilic dancer :icon_salut:

These people are charlatans and worse still prey on the weak of mind....perhaps that is why so many people have reacted on this thread???

Man's understanding of the heavens first came from astrologers rather than astronomer's and astronomy evolved from astrology...as a by product

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Space Bat

Space Bat

Posted
Posted
Astrology was never Scientific; just because the more serious subject of Astronomy came from it, dose not give it any legitimacy in today’s enlightened world.

Beg to differ :icon_salut:

Sadly it was hijacked for people to manipulate for their own self satisfaction or gain....which comes through horoscope astrology which is a complete *censored*

However original astrology was the first grasps of a scientific approach to understand the mechanics of the universe...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Macavity

Macavity

Posted
Posted

Well, here's the program in question:

BBC - BBC Radio 2 Programmes - The Chris Evans Breakfast Show, 28/10/2011, Russell Grant talks to Chris Evans on The Breakfast Show

99% about dancing? In truth, Grant compares Astrology to "(Trans-personal!) Psychology". He adds in the canonical gubbins about gravity, water-lunar-emotion associations etc. etc. - Mentions "10 Planets" too. But nothing truly extraordinary or new for the ilk? All over in 30 seconds? SHOUT by all means, but truly, given that last ripost, I was expecting at least some in-depth advocacy of an intimate relationship between astrology and science. <G> Were I of a less generous nature, I might feel slightly ill used (mate). :D

Anyway, as above (so below?) and since this is supposed to be at the level of BANTER. I well understand others' perspectives, but sense my "Energies" have rendered me unlikely to get over excited over this sort of stuff. Aside: There is IMO no evidence that I was trying to restrict "debate" in any way. Perhaps, since the are few/no other dissenters, I was turning it INTO one... Over and out though. :icon_salut:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cantab

cantab

Posted
Posted

It can only be the case that astronomy predates astrology. You cannot make predictions based on the heavens unless you have first observed those heavens. In order to start attributing influences on the people to the movements of the planets, first the ancients had to notice said movements.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sbooder

sbooder

Posted
Posted
Beg to differ :icon_salut:

Sadly it was hijacked for people to manipulate for their own self satisfaction or gain....which comes through horoscope astrology which is a complete *censored*

However original astrology was the first grasps of a scientific approach to understand the mechanics of the universe...

Please explain the Science to me? I really would like to know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Macavity

Macavity

Posted
Posted

Astrology, Reiki, Tarot Reading - Divination (whatever!) seem to provide SOMETHING, for the "Bereft of hope"... in the NHS... in the "powers that be" etc. Especially for those without the support of (a BBC East Enders style?) "Famerlee". :)

The challenge for "science" is to provide REAL succour for the ordinary person "in crisis"? Of course, it CAN'T... Yet... Perhaps it never will? What right do "scientists" have to deprive people of residual hope - however "stupid" it may be / seem. :icon_salut:

My thought for the affluent, BBC party-going, "Atheist Lobby": Stop SHOUTING (mostly!) LOL. Stop lecturing people on the "error of their ways". Stop seeing people as "stupid victims" of New Age predators etc. Provide some tangible alternative... :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites
michael.h.f.wilkinson

michael.h.f.wilkinson

Posted
Posted

There was case in the Netherlands where a prominent TV presenter and actress refused to believe that she had breast cancer, and was supported in this belief by a number of diviners and "healers." She was effectively denied access to proper medicine and died a painful, unnecessary death. Criminal charges were brought against the healers and medium involved in this case, and rightly so. Science could have provided a remedy in this case. This has nothing to do with religion, or atheism, this has to do with scientific fact.

I once had a man (not highly educated and not a high earner if I am any judge) in a queue in front of me, who had been told by an iriscopist that he had weak kidneys and needed to get something to improve kidney function. These people actively dissuaded him from using regular medicine, on the grounds it was all "chemical". Instead he asked some untrained, teenage girl at a local store what he should take, and she trotted out some expensive homeopathic concoction (see my article in Annals of Improbable Research on Quantum Homeopathy for my opinion on that :icon_salut:).

Even if you accept you can determine kidney function from looking into an iris (see John Daugmann's excellent work on iris scans to identify individuals, which shows that only diseases directly affecting the iris change the iris patterns), this man is being fobbed off with a concoction which has been diluted so far it contains no active molecule anymore, AND he has to pay something like 20 euros for it. I saw it as my duty to inform him that if his kidney function was really not good, he should get a doctor to check properly (free under the Dutch healthcare system for low-income families). In the mean time, drink sufficient water, and avoid vegetables containing large amounts of oxalic acid (spinach, rhubarb), just to be safe. Again, this position has nothing to do with religion or atheism, just with scientific fact.

There are people exploiting ignorance, and they can be a genuine danger. There are of course many things science cannot solve (yet in some cases, maybe never in others). I have no problem with many forms of alternatives to regular medicine, or with people finding solace in other world views, religious or otherwise. However, if people actively discourage others to consult doctors, based on bogus science, they are on very thin ice indeed, ethically speaking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sbooder

sbooder

Posted
Posted
Astrology, Reiki, Tarot Reading - Divination (whatever!) seem to provide SOMETHING, for the "Bereft of hope"... in the NHS... in the "powers that be" etc. Especially for those without the support of (a BBC East Enders style?) "Famerlee". :)

The challenge for "science" is to provide REAL succour for the ordinary person "in crisis"? Of course, it CAN'T... Yet... Perhaps it never will? What right do "scientists" have to deprive people of residual hope - however "stupid" it may be / seem. :icon_salut:

My thought for the affluent, BBC party-going, "Atheist Lobby": Stop SHOUTING (mostly!) LOL. Stop lecturing people on the "error of their ways". Stop seeing people as "stupid victims" of New Age predators etc. Provide some tangible alternative... :D

As soon as you bring the supernatural into any argument on Science, you are no longer talking about Science. Science is only concerned with the Natural World.

What alternative would people like? I could make something up for them? Or they could take their fingers out of their ears and stop going La la la over the top of reason.

No one has said stupid victims, all we ask is that when people are bereft that they know there is real help out there is the form of counselling on how to deal with loss and not some conman or woman who play on their grief to lighten them of some cash.

Or, that Science has progressed enough to probably treat an illness with medicine and not magic water.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cantab

cantab

Posted
Posted
The challenge for "science" is to provide REAL succour for the ordinary person "in crisis"?
No, the challenge for science is to describe and predict the behaviour of the Universe. Helping people "in crisis" is not a task for science. It may, however, be something that can be done by the technology that is built with the scientific knowledge. To give just one example: technology has made it possible to learn that your loved one is dying when you are on the other side of the world, and to get to their bedside before they pass away.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Macavity

Macavity

Posted
Posted
To give just one example: technology has made it possible to learn that your loved one is dying when you are on the other side of the world, and to get to their bedside before they pass away.
Yep, I was but two hundred miles away... The police broke in, the following morning... my mother was discovered dead in bed (a suicide) with a plastic bag over her head. Of course, I was very grateful to modern technology... :)

This thread begins to truly UPSET me. I am sure you are "right" in the literal sense. I am sure my thoughts appear "stupid" to you... Richard Dawkins, Brian Cox, - The "New Rationalists"? I thought I'd give it another go, but your "logic" defeats me... :)

Oddly I see little disagreement, except in the wording! But I had intended to quit this "online" stuff. Just as I developed a fatigue of "professional science", idem online amateur astronomy? Now seems as good a moment as any to bid everyone (a somewhat overdue) Adieu... :icon_salut:

Cheers, SGL Guys and Gals! :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kniclander

kniclander

Posted
Posted
Oddly I see little disagreement, except in the wording! But I had intended to quit this "online" stuff. Just as I developed a fatigue of "professional science", idem online amateur astronomy? Now seems as good a moment as any to bid everyone (a somewhat overdue) Adieu... :D

Cheers, SGL Guys and Gals! :)

but you can't quit when you're just one day away from your 5 year anniversary :icon_salut:; (and who would use all the smileys and the punctuation ....? )

Link to comment
Share on other sites
michael.h.f.wilkinson

michael.h.f.wilkinson

Posted
Posted
Yep, I was but two hundred miles away... The police broke in, the following morning... my mother was discovered dead in bed (a suicide) with a plastic bag over her head. Of course, I was very grateful to modern technology... :)

This thread begins to truly UPSET me. I am sure you are "right" in the literal sense. I am sure my thoughts appear "stupid" to you... Richard Dawkins, Brian Cox, - The "New Rationalists"? I thought I'd give it another go, but your "logic" defeats me... :)

Oddly I see little disagreement, except in the wording! But I had intended to quit this "online" stuff. Just as I developed a fatigue of "professional science", idem online amateur astronomy? Now seems as good a moment as any to bid everyone (a somewhat overdue) Adieu... :icon_salut:

Cheers, SGL Guys and Gals! :D

I am sorry if my posts upset you. If there is little disagreement except over wording, should we not simply agree to disagree over wording? I would suggest SGL has many threads to offer which cause no upset whatsoever (just look at the POW threads). Isn't abandoning that kind of stuff, just because a couple of obnoxious yahoos like me put things rather too bluntly, like throwing out the child with the bathwater perhaps?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.