Not for the negative arguer to disprove the theory either - until you prove it is correct, I will not take anyone who believes in it completely seriously.

There are plenty of things I'm sure you believe in that haven't been "proven" yet, but have a surmountable pile of evidence suggesting they're true. Then again correlation does not prove causation, right? There could always be another reason.

I'm not arguing for or against, I'm just saying you're contradicting yourself, General :P

Now as a Christian

A motherfucking christian lecturing people in scientific process, fuck. And please, please do not use the word science as if you are talking about a person, "science" does not do or say things. "Science" does not deny things or prove things. You wouldn't say "archaeology discovered a fossil". Or "meteorology said it would rain tomorrow". Idk maybe you would you fucking pseud.

Anyway, a posteriori evidence here falls into the realm of psychology, so at the very least you should say pseudo-science, thanks.

OP, if you are trying to prove it wrong you need to get your fucking methodology straight. First of all you need the experimental group where you actually do the numerology shit for them, according to ancient chinese secrets.

Then you need a control group where you give them a random one that isn't anything to do with them (probably best to use the same one for each person in the control group. I don't know if this is possible for people of different ages, maybe you could just make it up if you need to, or make a composite). Afterwards, you can let them know that it was made up and give them their real one if they would like, just don't include that in your results.

And obviously, before you gave them the random one, they must believe that it is genuine. So you probably wouldn't be able to get people from this thread now I've said this.

THEN, you need some sort of quantitative method to measure the accuracy. None of this fucking "yeah well my dad died the year before so I guess" or "oh I'd say there's a 29.3% chance of it being 79.1% somewhat accurate". You need a scale to rate it on, probably either 4-5 points from completely accurate to neither to completely inaccurate. Either get them to score it themselves or ask for qualitative responses and create a score for them.

You'd also need to define your terms, exactly how accurate is "somewhat accurate" and "completely accurate"? Additionally, some of these predictions are vague by nature, so you would generally be unable to describe those as completely accurate.

Then you compare avg accuracy between groups. Your hypothesis is a null hypothesis so the difference should approach zero as number of participants increases.

That's how you do pseudoscience, motherfuckers. If you aren't doing this then don't bother. And don't bother at all because there is obviously no connection between longitude of birthplace and life events anymore than there is between your personality and fucking Jupiter.

Unless you're just doing it for fun and don't believe in it a single tiny bit. I would be amused to see what I would get but I'm under 20 and don't know what time I was born.

Edited 3/23/2014 20:44:30

I also enjoy flow chart quizzes in kids magazines where it tells you which character you are, but people don't base their life on those, I guess because there are no ancient chinese secrets involved.

Oh yeah, there's equations you can use to work out if your result is statistically significant but I can't remember any of them. psychology is a pseudo-science so you can probably just make it up

A motherfucking christian lecturing people in scientific process, fuck.

I'm not lecturing anyone on science or scientific process. Also, what does being a Christian have to do wit being able to conduct a scientific study? We're not all Southern Baptists, mulvon.

I was saying based on my personal experience and I was admitting that some claims were "vague" or perhaps I should say "very vague" and sometimes they were "more precise" but not necessarily "very precise". 75% accuracy doesn't mean it got 75% of my life correct. It simply means that a paragraph or two of what was written seemed to apply to my life in a general sense.

And don't bother at all because there is obviously no connection between longitude of birthplace and life events anymore than there is between your personality and fucking Jupiter.

If you want to make that assertion, take the time to prove it following the proper scientific process you're taking the time to preach about. Having an effect is one thing, being able to accurately discern that effect and turn it into a numerology-type generalization is a whole other.

Go and earn some money with your 70%

http://www.skepdic.com/randi.html

but people don't base their life on those

Yeah, I've been so lost ever since the subscription to my horoscope ran out...>.>

fair enough, i would change it to a scale of 1 to 10. I will gather group of ppl to do that later on, right now it is pretty informal, I just really think that if i interpret for like 5 ppl here, and most of the interpretations are wrong, then i really dont need to go thr the troubles of setting up a large formal test

Once i interpret some of the fates here, lets discuss how to rate the accuracy

btw, x, asks your mother for ur time of birth, i will just see if there is anything fun enough to tell even you are still young. as i have said, dont treat the whole thing too seriously

Also, what does being a Christian have to do wit being able to conduct a scientific study?

Since you love a posteriori evidence so much, you should have realised by now that there is no god. Otherwise you're a pretty shit scientist. Let's tabulate:

You believe in god, and possibly some other christian bullshit like jesus was a real person and he is also god or whatever

You thought Emily was female

You either agreed with his absurd logic, or at least tolerated it

You're a men's rights activist

You are sympathetic to numerology

On that evidence, excuse me for saying that you wouldn't be amazing at scientific studies. Or logic generally. Give OP your birth date and location, and by the powers of ancient chinese secret, he will probably also tell you that you make a shitty logician. "2012-2022, this decade is all about being bad at logic :P"

I was saying based on my personal experience

cool, anecdotal evidence, fun times. love anecdotal evidence

Having an effect is one thing, being able to accurately discern that effect and turn it into a numerology-type generalization is a whole other.

dont understand this bit

i would change it to a scale of 1 to 10.

In this case you need ten definitions since you have to define what each point means, so that people will know the difference between a 7 and an 8. People who are responding, if they are scoring themselves, and people reading results have to actually know what each point on the scale means.

You don't need to actually gather a group, just put every first respondent in the experimental group and every second respondent in the control group.

or, could it test this way? each respondent give me a real solar time and date of birth, along with a fake time and date of birth, and not telling me which is which

i will interpret both

Edited 3/23/2014 21:31:02

If you want to make that assertion, take the time to prove it following the proper scientific process you're taking the time to preach about.

And the next thing you'll ask is for someone to falsify the tooth fairy for you?

Since you love a posteriori evidence so much, you should have realised by now that there is no god. Otherwise you're a pretty shit scientist. Let's tabulate:

We all walk in faith at one point in our life. This is the faith I chose, I didn't ask for your approval nor did I ask for your commentary or for you to even highlight it. Just because you have severe issues with people of faith doesn't give you the right to tromp on them at your leisure.

If you think you operate without faith at one point or another in your life, you're full of shit.

You believe in god, and possibly some other christian bullshit like jesus was a real person and he is also god or whatever

There's enough historical evidence that proves Jesus existed. Whether you believe in Christianity or not doesn't deny these facts.

You thought Emily was female

I thought you were a bitter old man at some point.

You either agreed with his absurd logic, or at least tolerated it

I tolerate you, that speaks volumes.

You're a men's rights activist

False, I've clearly stated I'm a humanist and I stand to that.

You are sympathetic to numerology

I'm sympathetic to a lot of things. Doesn't mean I believe in them or support them, I just acknowledge they serve their purpose, whatever it may be.

As do you, whatever it may be.

And the next thing you'll ask is for someone to falsify the tooth fairy for you?

No, I expect you to continuing dropping one-liners like the badass you are.

No, I expect you to continuing dropping one-liners like the badass you are.

Oh I can do that.

=)

or, could it test this way? each respondent give me a real solar time and date of birth, along with a fake time and date of birth, and not telling me which is which

i will interpret both

Don't really see how that would work. Instead you could give each person two reports, a real one and a fake one, and ask them which they think is more correct. Should be 50-50 whether they get it right or not.

But you don't get to trick people with that methodology so it's not as fun

hauptmann nonsense

yawn. haupty, reveal something new about yourself so I can laugh at you some more

Anyway, there's a difference between being 'a person of faith' and 'having a religion'. The former involves a life-long personal struggle with yourself (and "god"), the latter is just a collection of habits. You can guess which one deserves some respect and which one doesn't.

There's the same difference between 'having an open mind' and 'being gullible'. And also between 'having convictions' and 'being edgy'.

But I don't know you. I won't claim to be able to judge your person by reading these things you're writing here on this fine internet game forum. That would be insolent.

The whole problem with communicating over the internet is this: we only have each other's lazily written coffe-break comments to go by. So let me just say that sometimes it's better to stick to one-liners.

Edited 3/23/2014 22:24:31

Of course it's 70% accurate.

* It will mostly predict that at the age of 22, major changes happen in life (how old are most people when they graduate?)
* You'll earn some money at the age of 20 (who didn't earn any money yet at that age?)
* You have some trouble with your parents around the age of 14-16 (puberty anyone?)

Common knowledge combined with self-fulfilling prophecies will give you 70% accuracy indeed, I'm rather surprised it ain't higher.

I'm sure a well-informed statistician can achieve even higher accuracy based on the most recently released ESS data or any American or Chinese equivalent.

Math wolf, it is not how it works. Hand out ur time of birth before making completely false accusation :)

I mailed you my solar birthday, reveal my fate.

Thanks but you haven't sent me your date of birth, nich ;)