I never pay attention to Astrology but I would have to put my hand up and admit to being a typical Torus . You may need to convince us , but if you do we concede happily.
Nice video, but I think I have to take issue with the claim that the Earth's precession (or wobble) has caused the Sun to enter Ophiuchus only recently. The ecliptic - the apparent path of the Sun over the course of a year - is defined by the Earth's orbit. In the last couple of thousand years, Earth's orbit has hardly changed much. Precession itself won't change the path of the ecliptic, only what time of year that the Sun is passing through a constellation. For example, a couple of thousand years ago, the (northern hemisphere) Summer Solstice occured in the constellation of Cancer, and winter solstice in the constellation Capricorn(us) - hence why the Earth has a Tropic of Cancer and Tropic of Capricorn. Due to precession, these points now occur in Taurus and Sagittarius respectively. I think the real reason why Ophiuchus is now included when it wasn't in the past is likely to be due to the International Astronomical Union fixing the constellation boundaries such that the ecliptic was included within it.
I would have liked you to talk more about axial precession with time and how it makes astrology look even more bunkers if possible! It's so much fun! For example I am a gemini but the sun was actually in the constellation Taurus on the day of my birth!
I believe there are also more people born around this time of year, thanks to new years parties etc. so even if the constellations were of equal size, the number of people in born each would not be.
+Petros Adamopoulos But the fact that they used Ophiuchus implied that this insurance company actually looked at the real constellations instead of the traditional ones
A correction... If we could "turn the sun off" during your birthday, we would not see the stars of your birth constellation according to the modern system. It is based off of the times of year established thousands of years ago. Due to the earths axis changing orientation the sun actually points almost an entire sign away from the sign you are told you are. (clockwise when looking down from north to south) So if you are a cancer (according to the common system) you were really born when the sun and earth were in line with gemini ect...
In Carl Sagan's "Cosmos" series, he showed how the Egyptians believed the constellation "the plough" actually depicted a man with his head up a bull's arse. What a perfect and poetic illustration for what Astrology is.
firegoggles What's "wrong"? That Carl Sagan didn't show how the ancient Egyptians thought that the constellation "the plough" actually depicted a man with his head up a bull's arse? I can assure you he did - and you can even find the video of it on RU-vid. Or that this isn't a perfect and poetic illustration for what Astrology is? In which case, are you seriously trying to claim that there is something to astrology? If so, wow.
I just don't have the time to educate you. Here is a tidbit.. The sun has different phases as it rotates and tilts.. those particles that are released at incredible rates of speed at our planet govern things like the female menstrual cycle for instance. That's one off the top of of my head that is more in the facts realm and less in the "woo-woo" that you think it is..There is more... the same phases in fact do seem to effect much much more and that's just the sun all the other celestial bodies have an effect on our planet and ultimately life on the planet. it's just really just hidden science and the people have placed the "woo-woo" factor on it..
I thought it could have been something about the season too - and that they were talking about the "standard" western astrology signs, not the "real" astronomical ones.
By the illustrations, I think we can presume that the range of Scorpio + Ophiuchus (present) is = Scorpio (past). So, the insurance data may be converted to: 26,833 + 83,234 = 110,067 Which means that what we think Scorpio is should be around Libra stats (110,592). Still very distant from Virgo (211,650).
Dr. Gray slightly misspoke at 4:00. She said: "If you actually want to see that constellation (Gemini) at night you have to wait six months." Gemini is visible from around August in the Eastern mornings to May in the Western evenings, It's only obscured by the Sun during most of June and July.
Light pollution in cities prevents first-hand experience of identifying and observing stars in a practical manner. I've lived in a city all of my life and can only see around 12 stars at night.
i would imagine it's because they have more important things to do than memorising arbitrary groups of little dots and the historical names associated with them.
Because they don't use constellations to find their way around the night sky. They use the celestial coordinate system of Right Ascenscion and Declination. Think of it as a projection of Longitude and Latitude onto the night sky. This allows a very precise way to find objects, and has no need, or relationship to the constellations other than a point of origin, as does Longitude have a point of origin as the prime meridian.
I imagine because most professional astronomers spend most of their time studying one small section of the night sky. Unless they have a hobby for night viewing then they are unlikely to know where everything is.
Many do. Not to the same degree as amateur astronomers, for whom skygazing is usually the centre of their hobby (with sometimes incredibly 'professional' setups). But most do have a firm grasp of the basics. But their professional time is usually spen reading articles, writing articles, teaching, writing computer programs or scripts of various sorts, mining through data, etc. A lot of the work (both in teaching and research) isn't really related to looking at the sky (some of it still is).
There was a momentary thrill of smugness on seeing Scorpios at the bottom of that bad drivers list. Then the crushing disappointment when reason dashed the fantasy. Darn you, Science!
Only one fact is required here. MANY virgos were conceived in the week of christmas to new years. Also more babies are born in the summer, conceived in the winter. I was conceived on New Years Eve (so says the baby doc at the time.)
No wonder my insurance rates are so high! I have Allstate and they probably think I'm a higher risk because of when I was born even though I haven't had any traffic infraction in 11 years. Wouldn't doubt it!
The precession of the equinoxes does not alter the path of the ecliptic, so the sun has "passed through Ophiuchus" indefinitely far forwards and backwards in time. Precession of the equinoxes alters the time of year at which this happens, but not the path itself. Hence, while Ophiuchus is presently a "summer constellation" for the northern hemisphere (visible just after sunset during the summer months), it will be a "spring constellation" 6000 years from now, as the equinoctial points shift eastward. The ecliptic actually cuts across a tiny corner of Cetus, so there are actually 14 constellations through which the sun passes. The auto insurance story is bizarre, since they were apparently applying astronomical constellation boundaries to the astrological signs. Why? Who knows.
Great video, thanks. I hadn't thought about the sun spending more time in some constellations than others. But I'm assuming the chart you showed is of 'corrected signs', since my understanding is that normal astrological signs are almost 30 deg off due to the amount of precession that has happened since astrology was invented.
How can precession (that only changes the attitude of the earth) change the ecliptic? Isn't the ecliptic defined by earth orbit? Does precession also affect orbit?
Dr. Grey reminds me of my hs class valedictorian, Lilou. I'd always group with her in labs 'cause she had excellent lab technique and she never wanted to copy off me. She was also happy to do dissections when I wasn't even though she was three years younger than me. I can still remember her hair falling into the sheep's aqueous humor. I bet Dr. Grey was an epic lab partner, too.
The explanation of precession was not correct. Precession does not change which constellations the sun moves through. Rather, it causes the position of the equinoxes to move along the ecliptic and thus changes the constellation the sun is located in on the equinox. Or to put it another way - it changes what time of the year the sun moves through each of the constellations but not which constellations it moves through. A full cycle takes 26000 years.
Huh, from the title I was expecting something like "Virgos have their birthday in the summer, and therefore tend to have their driving lessons in the summer. When winter then comes, they're less prepared then those who had driving lessons in the winter and make more crashes as a result." not "They didn't normalize the data".
Astrologers have standardized the star signs so they all last 30 days. In reality, because the constellations the sun passes through are different sizes, if you go exactly by which star sign the Sun is in during the year, they will all have different lengths --- i.e. it takes the sun longer to pass through some constellations than others. This is just more proof that astrology is bunk, since the star signs astrologers use don't match up with the sun's position in the constellations.
I may have misunderstood the video but shouldn't the title be "The real reason more car crashes can be attributed to Virgos than any other zodiac sign"? It's not that, on average, a Virgo will have more car crashes than others, but that the Virgo group has the most car crashes (because it also has the most people).
5:50 This explanation is wrong. It doesn't matter which direction the Earth's spin axis points, the ecliptic still goes along the same path in the sky. It would take a shift in the inclination of the orbit to move the ecliptic.
You're not a taurus, dr. Gray. Because of the precession of the equinoxes, the dates assigned to the zodiac constellations are outdated. You were actually born under the sign of Aries, near the IC279 galaxy.
You said 'in June, the sun would get aopear to be in gemini', but I dont think even that is true because of the precession that has happened since the invention if astrology.
At first I thought it would have something to do with drivers education cutoff dates or something like that. It also could have something to do with virgo being nine months after the coldest months of the year. You know, the months when we all spend alot of time indoors close to one another with not much to do >wink wink
6:15 Pfft Scorpios with their low accident occurrences. I think that insurance companies will find that people named Jizanthapus have the lowest accident occurrences (people named "Homer" are a close second), so should be charged less for car insurance accordingly.
Hey, There are 88 constellations, there use to be less. Well less classified I believe previously there was 48 official constellations. Any how with Relativity I would not be so quick as to write off the influence of our birth signs. Whether placebo or not! They do have an effect/influence on all of us.
I am intrigued by your argument.... Please explain to me how relativity has a role in making astrology into a legitimate science? Any handy links you have to legitimate scientific papers on this would also be helpfull.
Relativity makes zero difference in this context, nor quantum physics, or any scientific theory you want to claim (without evidence) can explain astrology. Astrology is still bunk. Period.
The anecdote starting at 4:40 is nonsense. Astrological star signs do not follow astronomical constellation boundaries. They are twelve evenly spaced sections along the ecliptic.
Yes. The original thing from Allstate was a joke. This video didn't seem to realize that and also maybe didn't realize that astrologers don't use the astronomical constellation boundaries.
You would think an insurance company (an industry that is almost entirely reliant on statistics and probability) would know better than to publish a study like that with raw numbers and not sample proportions. I would like to know what company did that so I can avoid them... Being a Virgo with a history of zero car accidents, I don't want to be charged more based on something so asinine.
MrTURBOJOHN Very true. In fact, in the modern era, astronomy and astrology are just about one month off, so that Pisces' month is actually when the sun is crossing Aries.
First of all, i'm not defending astrology, for all haters. I always take the side of the truth, even if it proves my previous position wrong. Now, imlpying that astrology is not true would be not entirely right. There's a shitton of stuff we don't know yet. Maybe there are some new fields to be discovered, or maybe the interactions of ones that we already know of have some kind of effects on our brain. We don't know how our body works in it's entirety, for heaven's sakes. So when you're presented with a few thousand years old tradition, you shouldn't say "It's wrong". You should say "It's wrong, because..." and then show theories fit with experimental evidences. That's how science works. Here's a story that happened with me. Believe it or not - your business, my job is just to tell it. My wushu teacher was a respected astrologist, he had big and rich names in his client's books. When i've started to talk about astrology in a skeptical way, he didn't start an arguement with me, instead he just said "Give me birthdates of your friends, accurate up to 5 minutes, and where they were born". I've asked 3 of my friends and told him their birthdates. He had no way of knowing even who they were, let alone speaking to them. Yet the next day he says to me "This one is a sportsman, probably a boxer, lively and good with girls, that one is probably a drug addict and he has issues with his parents, and that one is a very smart guy, and he likes doing things that require a lot of concentration and sitting, but his back is his weak spot". This was all true, first one really had a serious background in boxing, dropped it because of trauma, and he was always the heart of the company, the second one grew up in a military family and was abused by his father, so he ran from home at 15 and he smokes a lot of weed, and the third one is a programmer and a passionate fisherman who once broke his back. After that i'm not so skeptical anymore. Again, IMO it's wrong to say "Astrology doesn't work" and not proving it, when you can really find people who can provide you with evidence of the contrary. P.S. I said "my wushu teacher was", because he was killed and he knew that something would happen that evening. He called to all his students and told that "we will be moving to a new gym, so there will be no training today, and you should go there and pick up your gear tomorrow". That night he got attacked in his car and died after getting stabbed 54 times. Later we discovered that the owner of the gym knew nothing about this moving thing. Now go figure, what's right and what's wrong.
You are easily fooled. That is more likely than that stars, that have NO RELATION TO EACH OTHER have an impact on a single person, thousands or million of lightyears away. The odds of making a difference are the same as if air turns spontaniously into gold.
This is false logic. The burden of proof is on the person asserting the claim, not the other way around; you have to prove astrology works. Despite your lengthy anecdote there has never been any real proof that astrology works. Also some practitioners have been proven to be frauds.
I have the trouble understanding the sun travels in the Constellations. It is more like because the sun blocks the Constellations while the earth goes around the sun.
Not only is Virgo longer, August and even more so September, are the most common months for people to be born. It turns out that people enjoy each other's company in December, and January.
Talking about the time the sun spends in constellations, doesn't get to the heart of the matter because in popular astrology, the signs are of (approx) equal duration
Stars themselves have no impact on our personalities. However, the positions of constellations correlate with seasons, seasons correlate with behaviours, and the behaviours a child is exposed to at key points in their development will naturally affect the child's personality. So it makes sense that people born under the same sign (and in the same regional climate) would be more likely to share personality traits than people born under different signs. To a lesser degree, the lunar cycle might have had some effect on development in an age without convenient artificial illumination. In trying to make sense of the perceived patterns, people attached significance to the stars themselves. From there, it isn't much of a leap to fold planets into the story. That part is probably less about actual personality differences and more an artifact of humanity's tendency to find meaning and resemblance everywhere we look for them, which is everywhere. When modern astronomers nickname an astronomical feature based on what it resembles, they don't look for a story about the significance of a horse's head or a butterfly or a bullet. But we still sometimes develop reverence for places like the Pillars of Creation. Our understanding has come a long way, but we are no less human than the people who developed astrology.
I don't disagree, but I would like clarification. Are you referring to my latching on to my own perceived patterns to ascribe the same behavior to others? Sorry to be dense; that's really my best guess right now, and it sounds more like projection than dissonance.
Brian Schiefen If you happen to be an astrologer than it's something called doublethink rather than dissonance. It's ability to lie and tell the truth at the same time. Like when you said that astrology is nonsense but really it's not because of the seasons and whatnot. An astrologer has to be comfortable with that. If you are not an astrologer then you don't have to be comfortable with believing and not believing in astrology at the same time. On the intellectual level you might be perfectly aware that astrology is rubbish, but for example a strong parental figure that influenced you greatly when you were growing up, might had been a firm believer in astrology and now you don't want to 'offend' them in your mind. Religious and political preferences operate on the same level to a large degree. So in a nutshell, believing and not believing in astrology creates a dissonance, and one option gets pushed to the back of the head when it needs to be.
I can hardly believe you're this dense to conflate actual sociology with a defense of astrology @Kavetrol. Well maybe considering your name I should take your comments with a grain of salt? Please read brian's actual comment and actual claims because he's spot on: People do differ according to patterns in their environment, including when they're born. Astrology is B.S., but mild variation due to environment is to be expected ... you troll.
Isn't that funny, that once you believe in your sign , then you read astrological prediction, and act accordingly. So do they really have no influence on population? Maybe not physical, but psychological?
Can you prove that our zodiaks doesn't affect us? If you can, I would also like you to explain how our self-awareness works. Can a bunch of atoms really build a conciusness or is there something more that we aren't aware about?
You can prove the first one through an extensive study. The second one, there currently is no answer for, and is completely unrelated. It's one of the biggest unsolved mysteries in neuroscience. Doesn't mean we won't find the answer someday :)
Well the problem with disproving things is that you normally need some evidence to disprove first. You try; my teapot causes oaks to shed their leaves in the autumn. Disprove this. Also ask yourself if a bunch of atoms can make my thoughts appear before your eyes. This would have been beyond an act of God 500 years ago, but since then we have learned many things. The brain is much more complex then just a 'bunch of atoms' and we don't yet fully understand it, let's at least finish understanding it before we consider whether the position of the sky affects who we are.
Now those are extremely unrelated questions. And yes, it is proven that astrology is bullshit. There have been many studies on twins, both born on the same time, and seeing if their star sign affects them. And they never do.
I agree that astrology is nonsense, but this video perpetuates a misconception that astrology has something to do with constellations. Modern Western zodiac signs actually have nothing to do with the constellations that share their names. Why the insurance paper used the astronomical definition I don't know, but it's not standard practice within astrology. While it's true that the 12 divisions of the sky are named after constellations, most astrologers will tell you this is just a convention and the 12 divisions exist independently of stars. This is why the usual dates for zodiac signs do not correspond to the position of the sun in the sky with regard to constellations, and also why Ophiuchus is ignored by most astrologers. That's right, astrology has even less to do with reality than you thought.
There seems to be something that many of you are not getting. Astrology is rral, but not in the way that everybody thinks. Stars and planrt don't have any effect on the human behavior but they do have something that relates to it, and that is ciclic patterns. Humans follow a patter of behavior (which ir more likely to be molded by the season they are born in which molds how societies behave. The stars are the most inmediate way we have to measure time and patterns. So it is save to asume that all we did was to correlate the stars cycles to the way our behavior develops. That's why astrology works on so many people and why it doesn't matter which zodiac are you, wether it be greek, chineese or nordic, following it will always more than likely be correct on your personal life.
"That's why astrology works on so many people and why it doesn't matter which zodiac are you, wether it be greek, chineese or nordic, following it will always more than likely be correct on your personal life." ROFL. No. It's usually "correct" because it's so general it applies to everyone. Try it. Take the bullshit section of the newspaper and cut out each section of the zodiac and remove the star sign it pertains to. Have a bunch of people read them all and tell you which one is the most accurate for them. I guarantee that only about 1/12 of the time people will pick the horoscope that applies to them. Astrology is pure, unadulterated bullshit. People that believe it are either ignorant, stupid, or both. People that provide readings are either ignorant, stupid, or scammers.
I don't agree with Astrology generally... but I think it's a bit presumptuous to think that we aren't affected at all by the other bodies in the solar system. I'm sure they affect us, but we just can't sense it. String theory? I know 6 capricorns - including myself - and I might be imagining things, but I really think we have traits in common :) Stay open minded people!
+Wes Joe > but I really think we have traits in common Of course you do. If you take any random six people and think hard enough, you will find a lot of common traits among them. Even if it was unlikely for six people to be as similar as you say, you can't make ANY predictions based on a couple data-points. > Stay open minded people! My idea of an 'open mind' means taking things seriously when there are reasons for them to be taken seriously. Not 'act is everything was true even if there is no evidence for it at all'. I'm ready to accept that stars can influence people's lives but only if rigorous statistical analyses of data would clearly indicate that.
You can calculate how much astronomical bodies are affecting us. And this is many orders of magnitude LESS than the car passing by on the street below LOL
Interesting that an insurance company would use the IAU definitions for the size of constellations *_not_* the astrological boundaries of roughly equal size. Maybe they were trying to avoid the bias caused by our unequal length months and fell into an even worse trap.
The explanation the existance of a 13th constelation in the zodiiac makes no sense. The woble of the earth cannot affect the apparent path of the sun through the sky.
-yes, yes it can. That's exactly what it does: since it wobbles, the axis of rotation changes, so the sun, as well as the stars, seem to travel through a different path.- EDIT: I was wrong. RichardB1983 explained it well.
Even if the wobble did not affect the apparent path, the 13th constellation makes sense due to a difference in definitions. Astrology and astronomy use different definitions of constellations, where astrology says constellations are groups of stars forming figures or shapes, astronomy says constellations are like borders for a country on a continent. This allows there to be 13 constellations because astronomy uses a stricter definition. "Technically" there are 13 constellations, not 12, that the sun apparently goes through.
***** Precession will dramatically affect what constellations are visible and what the pole star is, but won't change the ecliptic (the apparent path of the Sun) much. The ecliptic is defined by the Earth's orbit. No matter what the tilt of the Earth is, the Sun will pass through the 13 zodiac constellations as long as Earth's orbit doesn't change much. Precession will change the time of year that the Sun is in those 13 constellations though. And Taurus will in 13,000 years' time be a southern constellation with Orion too low to see from the UK, but the Sun will still pass through Taurus (in December)
I have more of an aesthetic than a scientific reason why I do not believe in astrology. I have heard the scientific arguments, but I lean more on a philosophical reason why I do not WANT astrology to be true, and admit that it is a personal preference and not absolute knowledge. Reason: As an amateur astronomer, albeit a very lazy one as of late, I want the heavens to be a distant place. I like the fact that they are light-years away and do not care about me. I like the fact that they are serenely indifferent. Why would anyone not admire the beauty of the night sky, the vast distances, and not enjoy the icing on the cake of the fact that the stars are way out there and you are here?
Something doesn't seem right. Each of the zodiac signs cover about the same number of days (approximately 30 days/1 full month). The ecliptic is divided into 12 parts, and each part is about a 30-degree arc of the ecliptic (12 x 30=360). So even though the sun spends more time in Virgo than Scorpio, for the purpose of the zodiac signs, the sun spends the same amount of time in each. So, I assume the insurance company take the birthdate of each participant and assign an "actual" constellation which many times, would not actually match the persons "traditional" zodiac sign.
The way it's always been explained to me is that precession doesn't matter because as originally described by Ptolemy, etc., western astrology isn't about the lines drawn from the stars through the sun to earth, but really about the shapes and angles formed between the sun, the earth, and the other planets. So the stars are just placeholders, markers saying "this is where the 30 degree mark would be", which is why it doesn't bother western astrologers that the sky doesn't line up correctly to the symbols on a natal chart. It's bewildering that State Farm used that kind of data, because no one in the U.S. thinks that way when you ask them what their sign is. Whether or not speaking of astrology is more along the lines of speaking poetry, or doing science, is another question--all I'm trying to get straight here is what language the poetry is even being spoken in.
Wait...I thought that there were really 13 zodiac constellations because the Romans chipped off Scorpio's claws to make Libra? The constellations in their modern form can't have been around long enough for precession to have that much effect on the Sun's apparent motion. Precession occurs on a 28,000-year cycle, if I remember correctly, and even assuming the constellations have existed for 6,000 years, I don't see how precession would have that big an impact.
All zodiac signs last for about a month each so if there were no other variables the zodiac distribution among people would be uniform, independently of how much time the sun spends in each constellation, so that's not the reason why Virgos seem to have more car crashes. Maybe has to do something with more sex during Christmas so more births in August - September ;)
*The 88 traditional constellations are too messy, arbitrary and nonsensical. Their asterisms and patterns only make sense to humans and no-one else. Most importantly, asterisms spatially change a lot throughout thousands of years. The current star maps need to be reconstructed and subdivided again from scratch according to equal areas of the current J2000 equitorial celestial sphere and change the stellar notations and identifiers accordingly. If I controlled the IAU, I would change the constellations and the ditch traditional Grecoroman+Arab+Hindu animistic superstitions of random nonsensical sky 'animals', 'deities' and 'objects' (even though, I am Greek, haha) I think even Hipparchus/Ίππαρχος and Ptolemy/Πτολεμαίος would agree with me)*
Common sense? How can anything many light years from Earth have any effect on people's daily lives? As Brian says, if astrology contains truth, then it's up to those who believe in it to demonstrate that truth with evidence.
Here is as good a place as any to state an uncontestable, if annoying, fact about astrology. Except for the purposes of astrology, there would never have been astronomy. No one would be looking at Hubble Telescope images today, because there would never have been a Copernican Revolution, for lack of any accumulation of miscellaneous heaven-ward mythology and facts to re-contemplate, and Newton would have had no reason to formulate a law of universal gravitation. In short, the whole of physical science seems to have been critically dependent on one titanic mistake in connecting the state of the heavens to the fate of human beings. There is no reason to fret unduely over what might have happened if human beings had not made this mistake, because it is as certain as anything else about human nature that they would have made this mistake.
Astrology is more complicated than that. First off, there are two types of zodiac systems in astrology: tropical and sidereal. 4:32 This "study" isn't based on any existing zodiac system, there's a clear misconception here regarding "star signs". Both the tropical and sidereal zodiacs divide the year in 12 parts (signs/star signs), and each of those lasts for roughly a month... So it doesn't matter that the Sun actually takes 44 days to "pass through" Virgo, both zodiac systems will still call it a month. If you take this into account, there's no reason why there should be more virgo drivers, other than, perhaps, the tendency of people to increase their sexual activity 9 months before august/september (around christmas, that is)... which isn't really the case, if you ask me. It seems like this study took the date of birth from all those drivers, and assigned them a "scientific zodiac sign", based on actual scientific data. The problem with this is that neither zodiac system (tropical or sidereal) actually does that. So this video is mixing concepts that don't belong together. The tropical zodiac (used in Western astrology) doesn't take the ecliptic into account as described in the video. Instead, it uses the vernal equinox in order to determine the starting point of the zodiacal cycle each year, that's the only occasion in which the tropical system actually cares about the constellations (that's also how the zodiacal ages are determined, btw). Each zodiac sign in the tropical system represents a celestial division of 30º (12 x 30 = 360º), they DON'T represent the constellations themselves. There's no connection between the tropical zodiac sings and the actual constellations, other than the names. Personally, I think that both zodiac systems (sidereal and tropical) are rubbish, but if you want to make a serious case against them, at least do it right, do proper research on how they actually work before passing judgement. That's the kind of attitude that gives the scientific community a bad reputation. Too many scientists adopt dismissive attitudes without actually knowing much about the things they are dismissing. This is dangerous, since two of the things that separate science from all the rest are rigor and knowledge... those should always be present, specially when dealing with stuff that science doesn't agree with.
+Goreuncle i don't blame scientists for not knowing the details of BS. no matter how much BS you stack onto BS, it is still BS. Scientists have enough details to learnm know and test etc. no need to waste time on non scientific nonsense.
