Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!nuchat!flatline!erict
From: erict@flatline.UUCP (eric townsend)
Newsgroups: sci.misc
Subject: Plantes & actions (was Re: Omni-Americans)
Message-ID: <465@flatline.UUCP>
Date: 20 Mar 88 16:34:08 GMT
References: <5017@uwmcsd1.UUCP> <2790@gryphon.CTS.COM> <1221@uop.edu> <1077@PT.CS.CMU.EDU>
Organization: ROM construct <flatline> (houston)
Lines: 36
Summary: Changing the subject...

I'm no fan of astrology, but I have a question or three...

In article <1077@PT.CS.CMU.EDU>, lindsay@K.GP.CS.CMU.EDU (Donald Lindsay) writes:
> In article <5143@uwmcsd1.UUCP> markh@csd4.milw.wisc.edu (Mark William Hopkins) writes:
> >And yet, despite the fact that this shows
> >there to be nothing inherently absurd about Astrology, many scientists will 
> >scoff just at hearing the very idea.  
> 
> The idea that planets influence you is subject to calculation, and hence can
> be proved (and has been proved) absurd.

Ok, first off, who's "proved" this, and how have they proved it?
It seems to me that since:

1.  Our brains are neurochemical devices that operate on a level somewhat
    close to molecular;
2.  Our personalities are affected by chemical (thus particle) reactions in
    our brains;
3.  Other plantes and solar bodies emit particles or affect particles that
    happen to be "in the neighborhood";

Then there is a possibility that planets and other objects floating around
could affect our actions.  Now we probably wouldn't be able to *predict*
any of these affects, so in effect they become nuisance varibs, but
hey...

I'm not willing to automatically reject all theories that would suggest
that "paranormal" events could be proved/explained with quantum physics,
neurochemistry or coin flipping.

> 	Don		lindsay@k.gp.cs.cmu.edu    CMU Computer Science

-- 
Just say NO to skate harassment.
Girls play with toys. Real women skate. -- Powell Peralta ad
J. Eric Townsend ->uunet!nuchat!flatline!erict smail:511Parker#2,Hstn,Tx,77007