What I hate more than the horoscopes themselves, is the people who are totally obsessed with them.
I have heard that personality can be affected by the month in which a person is born based on the amount of sunlight the mother was exposed to during pregnancy. Perhaps that explains some of it.
You may have heard that about mothers and sunlight but it is not true. Sometimes researchers play with the statistic using month of birth or star sign to demonstrate the unreliability of multiple statistical tests. Examples of this are in Ben Goldacre’s book Bad Science. If amount of sunlight on the mother influences personality we (by we I mean humanity) are not sophisticated or advanced enough to know this yet. If it were to be true then I would have thought that the country or year born would have had a much greater effect on personality. So horoscopes would still be no more predictive of personality of behaviour at a given time than a the urine flow of a syphilitic monkey.
I saw a comedian (I’ve forgotten what her name is) talking about losing her faith. When she talked about how she used to believe in God she also talked about how she used to believe in horoscopes. She said that when she was a little girl she was always amazed how her horoscope always fit her so extremely well every day.
Then she found out that her parents had lied about when her birthday was to get her into school one year earlier, so she was actually another sign than she thought that she was. So she started reading the horoscope for her actual sign instead. And lo and behold, it still fit her perfectly every day.
She said that it was years before she understood the implications of this though – before she figured out that all horoscopes are written so they’ll be good for just about anyone and it doesn’t matter what sign you are. I thought it was funny.
Me too!
Hah! I agree entirely. Nice one!
What I hate more than the horoscopes themselves, is the people who are totally obsessed with them.
I have heard that personality can be affected by the month in which a person is born based on the amount of sunlight the mother was exposed to during pregnancy. Perhaps that explains some of it.
You may have heard that about mothers and sunlight but it is not true. Sometimes researchers play with the statistic using month of birth or star sign to demonstrate the unreliability of multiple statistical tests. Examples of this are in Ben Goldacre’s book Bad Science. If amount of sunlight on the mother influences personality we (by we I mean humanity) are not sophisticated or advanced enough to know this yet. If it were to be true then I would have thought that the country or year born would have had a much greater effect on personality. So horoscopes would still be no more predictive of personality of behaviour at a given time than a the urine flow of a syphilitic monkey.
So, you’re saying that we need to start studying syphilitic monkeys? Hmmm, interesting theory
Im not great at english but doesnt the tense change in the lower part of the joke. Starts with ‘You…’ and ends with ‘Themselves’….?
Yes, I believe that you’re right.
The word should in fact say ‘yourself’.
Well spotted.
Very true
I saw a comedian (I’ve forgotten what her name is) talking about losing her faith. When she talked about how she used to believe in God she also talked about how she used to believe in horoscopes. She said that when she was a little girl she was always amazed how her horoscope always fit her so extremely well every day.
Then she found out that her parents had lied about when her birthday was to get her into school one year earlier, so she was actually another sign than she thought that she was. So she started reading the horoscope for her actual sign instead. And lo and behold, it still fit her perfectly every day.
She said that it was years before she understood the implications of this though – before she figured out that all horoscopes are written so they’ll be good for just about anyone and it doesn’t matter what sign you are. I thought it was funny.