Conversation

Been getting a lot of "how can you criticize astrology if you haven't studied it?" Well, I similarly think flat earth theory is ridiculous without knowing all their complicated arguments. If a theory violates extremely basic scientific knowledge, the details don't matter.

995

Bernardo Subercaseaux

@b_subercaseaux

Dec 24, 2021

Replying to

@Aella_Girl

I think reading the first few paragraphs of its Wikipedia page should be enough. Whoever is willing to defend astrology can propose serious edits...

This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more

Replying to

and

got a link to the most rigorous study you know of?

10:35 PM · Dec 24, 2021

Bernardo Subercaseaux

Replying to

and

Of course he doesn't. He also claims in his bio to have solved Polignac's conjecture, an important open problem in mathematics. A two minutes read of the paper is enough to tell that this person does not understand how math works...

Replying to

and

The Mars effect by Gauquelin is the most rigorous study with a sample size of 20,000 and has been repeated time after time, with results consistently showing a statistical significance (see this psychologists recreation of it)

The following media includes potentially sensitive content. Change settings

researchgate.net(PDF) Update on the "Mars EffectPDF | On Jan 1, 1992, SUITBERT ERTEL published Update on the "Mars Effect | Find, read and cite all the research you need on ResearchGate

View