Astrology proven to be scientific (according to M. Adams)
May 3, 2013 at 4:41 pm
(This post was last modified: May 3, 2013 at 4:44 pm by L.A.F..)
Mike Adams states in an article on Natural News:
"Skeptics must be further bewildered by the new research (...) which unintentionally provides scientific support for the fundamental principle of astrology -- namely, that the position of the planets at the birth month impact personality; it also resulted in measurable functional changes in the brain. (...)
Once again, such an idea sounds preposterous to the scientifically trained, unless of course they discover it for themselves, at which point it's all suddenly very "scientific." Instead of calling it "astrology," they're now referring to it as "seasonal biology.""
The study Mr. Adams is referring to (without a link), states in the abstract:
"we found that the perinatal photoperiod [i.e. duration of an organism's daily exposure to light, considered especially with regard to the effect of the exposure on growth and development] has lasting effects on the circadian rhythms [i.e. physical, mental and behavioral changes that follow a roughly 24-hour cycle, responding primarily to light and darkness] expressed by clock neurons as well as on mouse behavior, and sets the responsiveness of the biological clock to subsequent changes in photoperiod. These developmental gene × environment interactions tune circadian clock responses to subsequent seasonal photoperiods and may contribute to the influence of season on neurobehavioral disorders in humans."
(Ciarleglio, C.M., J.C. Axley, B.R. Strauss et al. (2010), "Perinatal photoperiod imprints the circadian clock", Nature Neuroscience 14, pp. 25 - 27)
He then shows how to discredit 'real science' (whilst using a scientific study in the second paragraph, quoting Carl Sagan and mentioning quantum physics in the last paragraph), in order to conclude:
"The relationship between the Earth, Moon and Sun naturally alter light exposure, temperature, gravitational pull and other conditions that may be sensed by living organisms. To believe in astrology, all that's really required is to grasp the basic concepts of the interrelationships between all living things [the study does only talk about mice]. (...)
And finally, modern science is beginning to catch up to this greater truth that astrologers have known since the dawn of human existence on our tiny planet."
(Adams, M. (12/11/2013), "Principle of astrology proven to be scientific: planetary position imprints biological clocks of mammals", http://www.naturalnews.com/030698_astrol...z2SDhBZV00)
Well, it seems that astrologers have finally found a legitimate basis for their practice, don't you think?
PS: The text between square brackets is added by me.
"Skeptics must be further bewildered by the new research (...) which unintentionally provides scientific support for the fundamental principle of astrology -- namely, that the position of the planets at the birth month impact personality; it also resulted in measurable functional changes in the brain. (...)
Once again, such an idea sounds preposterous to the scientifically trained, unless of course they discover it for themselves, at which point it's all suddenly very "scientific." Instead of calling it "astrology," they're now referring to it as "seasonal biology.""
The study Mr. Adams is referring to (without a link), states in the abstract:
"we found that the perinatal photoperiod [i.e. duration of an organism's daily exposure to light, considered especially with regard to the effect of the exposure on growth and development] has lasting effects on the circadian rhythms [i.e. physical, mental and behavioral changes that follow a roughly 24-hour cycle, responding primarily to light and darkness] expressed by clock neurons as well as on mouse behavior, and sets the responsiveness of the biological clock to subsequent changes in photoperiod. These developmental gene × environment interactions tune circadian clock responses to subsequent seasonal photoperiods and may contribute to the influence of season on neurobehavioral disorders in humans."
(Ciarleglio, C.M., J.C. Axley, B.R. Strauss et al. (2010), "Perinatal photoperiod imprints the circadian clock", Nature Neuroscience 14, pp. 25 - 27)
He then shows how to discredit 'real science' (whilst using a scientific study in the second paragraph, quoting Carl Sagan and mentioning quantum physics in the last paragraph), in order to conclude:
"The relationship between the Earth, Moon and Sun naturally alter light exposure, temperature, gravitational pull and other conditions that may be sensed by living organisms. To believe in astrology, all that's really required is to grasp the basic concepts of the interrelationships between all living things [the study does only talk about mice]. (...)
And finally, modern science is beginning to catch up to this greater truth that astrologers have known since the dawn of human existence on our tiny planet."
(Adams, M. (12/11/2013), "Principle of astrology proven to be scientific: planetary position imprints biological clocks of mammals", http://www.naturalnews.com/030698_astrol...z2SDhBZV00)
Well, it seems that astrologers have finally found a legitimate basis for their practice, don't you think?
PS: The text between square brackets is added by me.
![[Image: extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg]](https://i.postimg.cc/zf86M5L7/extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg)
