A skeptic's shockingly accurate star chart interpretation.

[Vith]

First off I want to say, I am about as skeptic a person as they come. I, in no way, believe in or am making the claim that human personalities are somehow linked to the motion of the planets or the position of very distant stars. I have always viewed this claim as completely absurd in all regards.

However, today a close friend of mine asked me if I would be willing to have my star chart read by an astrologer whom she knew, and asked for the information about my birth date and location. Keeping an open mind, I decided to indulge her, but not after exhaustively explaining exactly why I viewed Astrology as such an absurd topic and how it was very far down on the list of things I could be convinced of.

After a short time, I received a star chart from the Astrologer with a bunch of apparent nonsensical lines, symbols, and values printed on it.


Star Chart: http://rapidshare.com/files/251371059/Ricky-starchart.pdf.html


Now I want to say that I am not exactly in the habit of believing things without solid evidence. While what I'm going to post next does not constitute what I would consider valid and concrete evidence for Astrology, I have to admit that I am completely shocked and awe-struck at the level of accuracy of this interpretation. So much so that I am unable to explain away the results as mere chance or as vague mumbo-jumbo that could apply to anyone as I was expecting it to be.


Interpretation: http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b125/O_M_N_I_x/scan0001.jpg


While I think some of the items listed may indeed apply to a greater number of people, not one of them was something I do not view as essential to my personality. For me at least, it is strikingly accurate and seemingly touches on some of if not most of the more important issues of my life and who I am as a person.


I would like some input as to what the hell I am seeing here, as well as how each one of the items on this list may compare to how anyone else sees themselves. I would like to make note that I feel I have ruled out the possibility of foul play. Indeed, I did not agree to do this until such was made certain:

1) The astrologer does not and has never known me, nor has ever met me.
2) The friend who insisted on me doing this (and indeed, almost anyone else) does not know many of these things about me, or does not know them in as great detail as they are presented here.


Despite the obvious load of bullshit, lies, and deception out there, is it possible that some astrologers out there are actually genuine? Has something with a grain of truth or accuracy been buried under said lies and deceit to such a degree that it has been completely overlooked? Such does not strike me as convincing, but yet here I stand with no way to explain this away.

 

[stuart]

1) Vague and could relate to a lot of people
2) Passionate about humanity - I guess most people will say they are. Apart from maybe some sociopaths
3) Compassionate and wants to improve things on a grand scale - Playing up to saying how great you are, you are hardly going to say no to this.
4) This made me laugh, if you put a lot of your life into science i fail to see how you could believe this tripe.
5) This doesn't make much sense. How are you interpreting it ? You're into computers, no great leap there considering you are posting on the internet.
6) You want a soulmate you cant speak to - who doesnt.
7) You want a career and want to change the world - again playing up to bigging you up. Most people will say yes to this.
8) Creative, but overlooked - Great. Most people think they are creative, but if they arent they tie this up by saying well you are creative but other people dont see it. Win win.
9) Your home and surroundings in your life affect your mood - Yes, that applies to EVERYONE.
10) Saying you are wise - again talking you up and being complimentary. You aren't going to say no to this.
11) Meh over this one.
12) Saying you dont have a huge circle of friends but you put effort into the friends you have - Well yes, thats why they are your friends, friends you dont make an effort to meet, talk to, do things with aren't friends.
12) It says you are sweet and generous - again, you aren't going to say no to this.

I'm sorry, I think what you have is nonsense. It's a letter explaining how amazing, compassionate, wise, friendly, intelligent you are.

Someone who read that and said it didn't apply would probably be clinically depressed!

Big you up and tell you how amazing you are and shock horror, you agree with it.

 

[ImprobableJoe]

I don't see anything specific enough in there that your friend couldn't know, or is ridiculously general... and, more importantly much of it sounds like exactly the sort of thing that would relate to someone who is proudly skeptical and analytical. You know, the things you specifically told your friend when you gave an exhaustive explanation of why astrology is bunk.

Let's break it down:

1) Vague, and could have been gotten from your friend VERY easily
2)Vague, and flattering to you. You would want this to be true even if it wasn't
3)Same as #2
4)Same as #2 and #3
5 & 6) Exactly what you would tell someone who is an avowed skeptic
7 & 8)Applies to everyone
9) This one is smooth, and has it both ways: "You are hugely creative in really tiny ways!" Guaranteed to be a partial hit for everyone
10) Applies to everyone
11) Flattering, applies to just about everyone
12) You MIGHT get divorced... and since over 50% of marriages end in divorce the idea that YOU will get divorced is a statistical likelihood..
13) Could have got it from your friend, and is vague enough to cover most people.

If an astrologer could tell you the name of the person you are going to marry, your food allergies, and which flavor of Jello you prefer, that would be impressive. All you got was someone telling you that you're smart, funny, compassionate, creative, and a great friend. Does anyone NOT want to see themselves that way?

 

[SchrodingersFinch]

I highly recommend you watch this.

 

[ImprobableJoe]

BTW, this was the subject of last night's episode of BULLSHIT!

 

[Pulsar]

does not constitute what I would consider valid and concrete evidence for Astronomy

Astrology, never confuse the terms! Remember, astroLogy contains the L of lies

Now, I would score about the same percentage as you. The statements are a typical example of the Forer effect. Plus, they are flattering: you want them to be true, like everybody else. Even seemingly negative statements (problems with marriage, doesn't have a huge social circle) are intentional, to give the whole reading a false sense of being balanced and honest (you're thinking, "yeah, it's true, I'm not perfect"). It's all psychology, my friend.

 

[ExeFBM]

A lot of these points seem to cover both, or all bases in a given instance.

1. Sense of humor, and serious
Very few people are one or the other exclusively

2. Passionate about individuals and/or everyone and/or the world
Everyone cares about something

3. Again helping people and/or the world

4. Again helping individuals and/or the general state of things
Congrats you're not the next Hitler!

5. This could be fairly specific, until it mentions philosophy (which just about covers everything)

6. Find any male aged less than 60 that doesn't like technology, electricity, computers or fantasy.

7. Wouldn't the definition of soulmate be; someone who you can talk to about anything?

8. Basicly says that you're passionate about things you like
Kinda self-fulfilling

9. Creative and mundane
Incidently using this type of thing as a chat-up line is pretty good.
Never met a chick who didn't think she should write a book/novel.

10. You like things that you own, and choose to surround yourself with.
Self-fulfilling again

11. People only learn through giant-life-lessons in movies and tv specials

12. Think this is the statement that appears to be the big leap.
Although basicly saying that young guys are scared of commitment. (I'm guessing you're a young guy)
The astrologer would have that information, if my guess is right.

13. This is a classic Barnham statement
Saying that you know many people, but have a close circle that you really care about.

 

[Ozymandyus]

These are all completely general and could be applied to anyone. As everyone else said, it's just cold reading at its finest - has nothing to do with your date of birth.

 

[Vith]

Hi all, and thanks for the replies. I'll do my best to respond.

1) Vague and could relate to a lot of people
1) Vague, and could have been gotten from your friend VERY easily
1) Sense of humor, and serious. Very few people are one or the other exclusively.

While I agree this would be a very obvious thing about me to anyone who knew me, in context this item in particular does not seem the least bit vague. I nearly always come across as a -very- serious person, even though that is not quite the case. I do have a very 'dry' sense of humor, and what I find funny is largely and almost without exception different from most other people. This statement is perhaps one of the most accurate on the list.

2) Passionate about humanity - I guess most people will say they are. Apart from maybe some sociopaths.
2) Vague, and flattering to you. You would want this to be true even if it wasn't
2) Passionate about individuals and/or everyone and/or the world.Everyone cares about something

I agree this one is very vague and would apply to anyone that views themselves as a fundamentally good person.

3) Compassionate and wants to improve things on a grand scale - Playing up to saying how great you are, you are hardly going to say no to this.
3) Same as #2 (Vague, could apply to many)
3) Again helping people and/or the world

Again, agreed.

4) Same as #2 and #3
4) Again helping individuals and/or the general state of things. Congrats you're not the next Hitler!

Agreed.

5) This made me laugh, if you put a lot of your life into science i fail to see how you could believe this tripe.
5 & 6) Exactly what you would tell someone who is an avowed skeptic
5. This could be fairly specific, until it mentions philosophy (which just about covers everything).

I never said I believed it. In fact, I explicitly stated otherwise. I am indeed very scientifically literate and take a skeptical approach to things. However, I view it as great folly to not accept anything that may sound absurd a priori and without exception. I find it best to both take a critical approach, and yet still leave the door open should new facts present themselves.

As for being what you would tell an 'avowed skeptic,' keep in mind that the astrologer has never met me. I have not come into contact with them once. They have never seen me, nor heard of me, besides perhaps in passing.

While philosophy does indeed cover just about anything humans can think of, that's not quite what this is saying.

The statement being made here is that my emotions are wrapped up in science, philosophy, ect. This is absolutely true for me, and I believe you would be hard pressed to find many others for which this is true. Emotional issues for me are few and far between, and the ones that are, are based on my knowledge of how things work or deeper philosophical truths that I have come to over the course of my life.

This is another one I view as more accurate than is comfortable to admit.

6) This doesn't make much sense. How are you interpreting it ? You're into computers, no great leap there considering you are posting on the internet.
6. Find any male aged less than 60 that doesn't like technology, electricity, computers or fantasy.'

I agree this one is vague and probably intentionally so as to be left up to interpretation.

7) You want a soulmate you cant speak to - who doesnt.
7 & 8) Applies to everyone
7. Wouldn't the definition of soulmate be; someone who you can talk to about anything?

Agreed. This one is very general.

8) You want a career and want to change the world - again playing up to bigging you up. Most people will say yes to this.
8. Basicly says that you're passionate about things you like. Kinda self-fulfilling.

This one is general for the most part, and could apply to many people--excepting the the statement about me being very deliberate. This is another one of those statements that, while seemingly general, I feel describe me more specifically. I take an avid interest in understanding why it is I do things and my motivations for them. This may potentially apply to many people, but it certainly would not apply to everyone.

9) Creative, but overlooked - Great. Most people think they are creative, but if they arent they tie this up by saying well you are creative but other people dont see it. Win win.
9) This one is smooth, and has it both ways: "You are hugely creative in really tiny ways!" Guaranteed to be a partial hit for everyone
9) Creative and mundane. Incidently using this type of thing as a chat-up line is pretty good. Never met a chick who didn't think she should write a book/novel.

Agreed. Many people would relate to this, and it is worded in such a way that it would be hard for anyone to not see this as an accurate statement.

10) Your home and surroundings in your life affect your mood - Yes, that applies to EVERYONE.
10) Applies to everyone
10) You like things that you own, and choose to surround yourself with. Self-fulfilling again.

Agreed.

11) Saying you are wise - again talking you up and being complimentary. You aren't going to say no to this.
11) Flattering, applies to just about everyone
11) People only learn through giant-life-lessons in movies and tv specials.

I would not agree that people do not learn from 'giant-life-lessons' in reality. I have seen and know of exceedingly many people that have lead rough lives, made bad choices, and have had to suffer because of them.

I would also argue that because many people would like to view themselves as wise does not necessarily make it true.

The way this is worded I feel is describing an intuitive person who is rarely wrong in matters of intuition. This is indeed accurate, and I do not feel it would describe the general population.

12) Meh over this one.
12) You MIGHT get divorced... and since over 50% of marriages end in divorce the idea that YOU will get divorced is a statistical likelihood..
12) Think this is the statement that appears to be the big leap. Although basicly saying that young guys are scared of commitment. (I'm guessing you're a young guy). The astrologer would have that information, if my guess is right.

No, the astrologer has never met me. Never seen me, not even once. Also, this does not mention divorce, but a problem with marriage. It is another that I am hesitant to explain away as something that could apply to anyone. Generally speaking, people do not view marriage as something to be avoided or something they would not be happy with, but is instead a goal in some way--to eventually 'settle down' or 'raise a family.' For me, this is specifically not true. I am of the opinion that any sufficiently deep relationship should not have an artificial or predetermined framework imposed upon it. That is a particularily rare standpoint, and is in full agreement with this statement.

13) Saying you don't have a huge circle of friends but you put effort into the friends you have - Well yes, that's why they are your friends, friends you don't make an effort to meet, talk to, do things with aren't friends. It says you are sweet and generous - again, you aren't going to say no to this.
13) Could have got it from your friend, and is vague enough to cover most people.
13. This is a classic Barnham statement. Saying that you know many people, but have a close circle that you really care about.

This statement does not say I know many people. It says that I do not have a huge social circle. This is true for me, and would not be true for most people.

It also says I put importance into interaction with the people I consider friends, which is accurate, but more general. Being sweet and generous and taking good care of friends would definitely be something more general that few would disagree with, but it specifically mentions not being possessive or restricting, of which the same would not be true (although could still apply to a number of people).


-----


What I see here is a collection of statements, some of which are vague and left up to interpretation, some that could apply to some people but not others, and a handful that are just a little too specific and accurate than is comfortable. Overall I would have to agree that a great many of the statements are vague or worded as to apply to more people; however, I am still hesitant to just blow this away--given the facts that the astronomer has never met me and knows nothing about me, yet none of the more specific statements are inaccurate.

There was no contact between myself and them, so cold reading is not a possibility. In addition, it's not as if they made a ton of questionably accurate statements, got some sort of feedback from me (or anyone else) and then focused on more specific things.

All-in-all, I am still left with some sense of shock. Some these statements are accurate and specific enough that I do not feel they would apply to a great many people, and when looked at together I would be hesitant to dismiss as sheer luck, as they all touch on things that I feel are perhaps the most important things about my personality. This is certainly not a particularly strong case for astrology, but at the same time I am left without explanation.

 

[Vith]

Astrology, never confuse the terms! Remember, astroLogy contains the L of lies

Now, I would score about the same percentage as you. The statements are a typical example of the Forer effect. Plus, they are flattering: you want them to be true, like everybody else. Even seemingly negative statements (problems with marriage, doesn't have a huge social circle) are intentional, to give the whole reading a false sense of being balanced and honest (you're thinking, "yeah, it's true, I'm not perfect"). It's all psychology, my friend.

I certainly did not intend that mistake. Thanks for pointing it out.


I have to say that I agree with most of what you said, although making the blanket statement that it would all apply to you too and that it is explained by psychology is not convincing.

If you wouldn't mind, could you tell me exactly how accurate you view each statement in regards to your own personality that I addressed in my previous post as not being exceedingly vague, or general?

 

[Ozymandyus]

So, in short, you believe that all but 4 of them are obviously general enough to apply to anyone. Let's go over the ones you think are specifically about you.

1.) While I agree this would be a very obvious thing about me to anyone who knew me, in context this item in particular does not seem the least bit vague. I nearly always come across as a -very- serious person, even though that is not quite the case. I do have a very 'dry' sense of humor, and what I find funny is largely and almost without exception different from most other people. This statement is perhaps one of the most accurate on the list.

Come on... How could this possibly be any more catch-all - everyone feels that people just don't get their jokes. Everyone your age that is at all skeptical has what would be considered a dry sense of humor. Because you are the sort of person that rejects common standards, you are bound to be the sort of person that doesn't find stupid stuff funny just because other people do.

5.) While philosophy does indeed cover just about anything humans can think of, that's not quite what this is saying.

The statement being made here is that my emotions are wrapped up in science, philosophy, ect. This is absolutely true for me, and I believe you would be hard pressed to find many others for which this is true. Emotional issues for me are few and far between, and the ones that are, are based on my knowledge of how things work or deeper philosophical truths that I have come to over the course of my life.

This is another one I view as more accurate than is comfortable to admit.

Every single person here feels this way about science. It is true of any skeptic really. That is something this person almost undoubtedly knew about you (also, you are Reading that specific meaning into it). Even if it said this to someone that WASN'T a skeptic, all its really saying that your emotions are connected to what you think. How could this statement NOT apply to anyone? Are there people who's emotions are not at all connected to their philosophy?

Hell, you could even HATE science and higher learning and this statement could still directly apply to you.

11) I would not agree that people do not learn from 'giant-life-lessons' in reality. I have seen and know of exceedingly many people that have lead rough lives, made bad choices, and have had to suffer because of them.

Even those people will say that they knew what was right and knew they were making bad choices. Trust me, almost everyone would agree with this statement - it specifically builds you up as someone wise and knowing with wisdom beyond your years. Everyone thinks of themselves this way, especially younger people. Even people with crazy life stories that have made big mistakes think they are wise beyond their years and that other people wouldn't have survived their decisions or whatever.

12)Generally speaking, people do not view marriage as something to be avoided or something they would not be happy with, but is instead a goal in some way--to eventually 'settle down' or 'raise a family.' For me, this is specifically not true. I am of the opinion that any sufficiently deep relationship should not have an artificial or predetermined framework imposed upon it. That is a particularily rare standpoint, and is in full agreement with this statement.

This is again just a misunderstanding on your part on how most people of your age view marriage. Even people who feel that it is something they SHOULD do are hesitant about it and worry about it. It is not at all a rare point of view. Most people don't TALK about this in relationships or with their friends because its not socially acceptable, but it is how most people your age feel.

Besides which, in this same reading she was talking about your soulmate. How can you label the soulmate statement as just vague and not label it inaccurate and this one, where it says you don't want to stick with one person at all as 100% accurate?

 

[Vith]

@Ozymandyus

The fact that a statement could apply to multiple people would be the case for any statement made for any person. I do not agree with some things you said, and I do with others, both to varying degrees. However, your arguments against how I view these statements in regard to my personality are of little importance to the discussion.


My question is this:

Do you feel any of these statements apply to you? Do they touch on what you view as the most important aspects of your personality?

For me they do. Any one of or even a few of these are not in the least bit convincing and would totally be something I would shrug off normally. But the fact that few of them (if any, including the more general or vague ones) do NOT talk about something that I do not view as essential to my personality is very uncomfortable to say the least.

 

[Ozymandyus]

The reason they do not seem to have Nothing to do with you is the same way in which they are vague - you have labelled some of the ones as vague that have no clear meaning for you but the truth is they are ALL vague and the ones that were hits only SEEM to have specific meaning to you.

Yes, I would say that reading could as easily be for me as you. I find different ones more applicable than you do - for example, 2 and 3 that you found vague, are very applicable to me and important aspect of my personality. The soulmate one that you find vague i find applicable, and the marriage one that you found accurate, I find vague and not particularly about me. None of them don't apply to me, except for the space/home being important to my well being and contentment - though that is certainly vague and should apply to just about everyone.

Distilled, the whole reading says:
You are funny but not everyone thinks so.
You care about people.
You will be successful.
You like technology.
You like people that can talk about the things you care about.
You care about your life and career.
You are creative.
You like stuff.
You are wise.
You might have trouble with marriage.
You have friends that you care about.

That last one about friends is so incredibly vague I just love that you think it applies to you specifically at all, and think its 100% accurate. It specifically is saying you may or may not have a large social circle, but of that circle you care about the people you care about, and you take care of them.

 

[Vith]

The reason they do not seem to have Nothing to do with you is the same way in which they are vague - you have labelled some of the ones as vague that have no clear meaning for you but the truth is they are ALL vague and the ones that were hits only SEEM to have specific meaning to you.

Yes, I would say that reading could as easily be for me as you. I find different ones more applicable than you do - for example, 2 and 3 that you found vague, are very applicable to me and important aspect of my personality. The soulmate one that you find vague i find applicable, and the marriage one that you found accurate, I find vague and not particularly about me. None of them don't apply to me, except for the space/home being important to my well being and contentment - though that is certainly vague and should apply to just about everyone.

That is what I had assumed originally. I will have to consider this more.

Does anyone else find similar things?

 

[ImprobableJoe]

My wife read it, and said it could apply to both of us with at least 85% accuracy, and almost everyone we know to a similar degree.

 

[Artsysiridean]

Astrology, never confuse the terms! Remember, astroLogy contains the L of lies

Oh, shit. No wonder people are pissed at me.

Contributing to the thread:

Something else to consider. I love Bill Nye.

 

[Gnug215]

Oh wow!

I'm shocked, too!

This sooo applies to me also!

Ahem, sorry, don't mean to make fun of you, but it does apply to me to a great extent.

Well. if I were you, I'd sit down, think long and hard about yourself and write down, in detail and at length the many traits that (you feel) characterize you as a person. Then, get some perspective from friends. And if possible, from neutral or even "hostile" people, since, well, friends will usually say nice things.
Notice, btw, how the astrologer mostly says positive things, and notice how it's the kind of things that your friends might say. Wonder why that is?

Remember, even while you may think some of these points fit you, others might not share that view. I mean, are you really generous? Like, extremely generous? Or are you just normally generous like most people are towards their friends? Remember that characters traits don't really exist as two opposing points of either or, but more a broad scale.
Notice how exactly this note has a lot of vague and general terms. Study how that manifests itself in terms of word-choice and terminology. Factor in human psychology in terms of interpersonal communication, like how we by default tend to accept that what someone is communicating to us is the truth. We're not skeptics from birth, quite the opposite, so keep that in mind.

There are very few negative points, one of them being #12, regarding marriage. If the astrologer knew you were male, then this isn't amazing at all. I mean, a guy having problems with committment? Call the press!

I say remain skeptical and get other perspectives on this.

 

[Aught3]

Despite the obvious load of bullshit, lies, and deception out there, is it possible that some astrologers out there are actually genuine? Has something with a grain of truth or accuracy been buried under said lies and deceit to such a degree that it has been completely overlooked? Such does not strike me as convincing, but yet here I stand with no way to explain this away.

Naw, what's the mechanism. If all you gave was your birth date and location then presumably every other person born on that day and time would have the exact same personality as you. If it is to do with the position of the stars overhead then presumably the same personality traits would exist in new-borns for several days over a wide area. There aren't a ton of Vith personality clones running around are there? Or are they all here commenting on the astrology reading that seems to describe them all with 80% accuracy (hum the x-files theme).

 

[Xulld]

Man that horoscope fits me too perfectly to not be mine. I think they made a mistake its not yours ITS MINE!

 

[Digitised]

I read the statements and found EVERY single one to be applicable to my life and personality.
I would have rated the accuracy at around 95%+


Knowing your age allowed that person to make guesses toward the technological aspect and fantasy angles in the reading.
Knowing that you were 50 years old would have lead to very different statments regarding those factors.