| Lecture | |
|---|---|
| Source banner: 🔗 https://pixabay.com/fr/photos/bannière-livres-globe-conseil-354429 | |
 | |
| “Space and contemporary beliefs” lecture (zététique event day 2015) | |
| Title | Astrology refuted by astronomy |
| Animation | Jean-Noël Sarrail |
| Place | The Osète room (Duranti space) in Toulouse |
| Date and times | Friday, February 27, 2015 from 8 p.m. to 10 p.m. |
| Frame | The lecture was held as part of the “Space and contemporary beliefs” event, held on the occasion of the second zététique day in Toulouse (weekend of February 27 and 28, 2015). |
| Keywords | astrology, astronomy, sky, lecture, belief, star, science, popular Science, zetetique |
| Information |  I am a member of the ALDERAN association in Toulouse. To know more about, see the page of the cercle de zététique in the association. |
I am writing this article a few hours after this lecture (almost immediately), with the emotions of the present. It is written with my words, my personal view, my sensitivity 😉 I now present its summary to you:
1. A few words about the speaker▲
Jean-Noël Sarrail has been amateur astronomer for many years. He worked at the Cité de l’Espace in Toulouse as an educational manager (creation of educational workshops, particularly for schools). He organizes courses at the Sabarat observatory in Ariège. I will also learn during the event day that he is a music teacher 🙂
2. A few words about the lecture▲
During the lecture, I took some personal notes, particularly notions or elements that struck me.
The subject of the lecture is to establish the obvious errors of astrology, which is proclaimed by its followers as… a science. “Being of a sign”, knowing your personal zodiac sign is common… And yet… To follow:
- Our look on the stars in the sky,
- The three obvious errors of astrology,
- The other errors.
3. Our look on the stars in the sky▲
I noted that there were around 3000 stars visible to the naked eye in the sky (a starry country sky, unpolluted by city lights). Man has grouped them “in drawings”: the constellations, numbering 88. The names depend on the culture of the civilizations: for us, they have their origin in Greco-Latin mythology.
The examples that I retained:
- Bear
- Small bear (containing the current polar star),
- Taurus (Aldebaran),
- Eagle (Altaïr),
- Swan (Denebe),
- Scorpio (Antares),
- Hercules,
- Perseus,
- Gemini (Castor and Pollux).
Way of looking
In Antiquity, we believed that the stars were all located at the same distance from the Earth: we were the victim of an optical illusion. Likewise, the grouping of stars is also just a way of creating groups, and therefore arbitrary.
The speaker mentions the example of the constellation Orion. Its stars are located at different distances and seen from one side, there is no more Orion (hunter with his belt and bow) because of the view we have of the trajectories of light coming from these stars.
So we are not at the center of a sphere with a carpet of stars. ➔ Awareness in the 19th century.
Use the Stellarium software: open source planetarium software.
4. The three obvious errors of astrology▲
According to followers of astrology, “the stars” would influence the human lives in a significant and personal way depending on the moment of their birth (sign, ascendant, decan, etc.).
Definition: from the Earth’s point of view, the Sun moves and the apparent trajectory of the Sun seen from the Earth is called the ecliptic.
4.1. First error▲
Failure to take into account a movement of the earth: the precession of its axis in 26,000 years (a movement phenomenon similar to that of the axis of a top). As a result, this causes an average shift of one constellation between the months of the astrological sign and the real month (Sun in the constellation at the time of birth).
Note: a consequence of this movement is the displacement of the axis of the Earth’s poles and therefore also the periodic modification of the name of the Polar Star. Currently, our North Star is Alpha Ursa Minor. In the time of the Egyptians, it was Thuban, a star in the Dragon constellation!
4.2. Second error▲
The variable size of the constellations: the sun cannot pass a month because of their size. It can spend about a few days in a constellation (Leo, Cancer), like more than a month and a half for Virgo… The duration of a sign cannot be a month. If visible in the sky! And so, the notion of decan takes a big hit…
4.3. Third error▲
The existence of another zodiacal constellation: the serpentine. The Sun indeed passes through 13 constellations (trajectory called ecliptic, same name as the plane). So, astrology forgets a zodiac sign. No kidding !
5. The other errors▲
- The notions of ascendant and descendent cannot apply to all latitudes of our planet because at certain latitudes, the horizon merges with the ecliptic plane, therefore it is impossible to position the Sun in a constellation when it rises (ascending) and when it sets (descending)! So, neither ascendant nor descendent in many countries like Norway, Iceland…
- The notion of vernal point seems to be important data for astrologers: it indicates the current era. Currently, the vernal point is located in the constellation of Pisces, so it is the Age of Pisces. But, to validate this concept, we must accept and validate the third movement of the Earth: precession. So, paradoxical behavior of astrologers.
- Real influences of the stars themselves (gravity, distance). Measurements and experiments invalidate this alleged influence.
These various errors are due to the fact that ancient astrologers took Ptolemy’s Tetrabiblos as a reference work, while ancient astronomers based on Ptolemy’s Almagest, which remained a reference for 1500 years. These two works placed the Earth at the center of the Universe. Astronomers then abandoned their ancient work following the discoveries of Galileo, Copernicus and Kepler (advent of the heliocentric system). Not the astrologers… who continue to refer to Ptolemy’s Tetrabiblos.
6. Speaker’s conclusion▲
We have long believed that we are at the center of the Universe. In such a context of (non)knowledge, it was entirely legitimate to represent the world in this way. But, with current knowledge, it would be high time to grow up… We must accept that we are not at the center of the Universe and that the stars we observe cannot have the influence that astrologers lend them. We must therefore abandon the idea of the geocentric system.
Jean-Noël Sarrail
7. Questions/answers, requests from participants▲
- Notions of heliacal rising and setting.
- The existence of different calendars in the world (without direct link with astrology).
- The explanation of the differences in characters with twins 🙂 Um, I’m a twin 🙂 A thought for Angélique, my monozygotic sister, who has such a different character! 🙂
- The southern hemisphere has a more “beautiful” sky because the center of our galaxy (Milky Way) is in the sky of the southern hemisphere, therefore with more stars.
- Galaxies are not in the same plane.
- Measuring the distance from Earth to stars: parallax method.
- Behavior of astrologers following this refutation: some are in good faith, take into account errors and make adjustments but they continue to write astrological charts and make astrological forecasts…
8. My personal point of view▲
Astrology may be a beautiful chimera, but a chimera nonetheless! It’s nonsense, it’s wind, it’s nonsense and it’s really not kind to the ducks, Eole and the cake 😉 That we continue to give credit to this thing makes me wonder about the mental health of these believers 🙁
I wonder about the posture to adopt in relation to astrologers and especially believers, …as a science enthusiast and a engineer. My heart is beating very hard there! We must definitively abandon the geocentric system and GROW!
Allowing them to think something false, giving them space in communication, is this not a serious moral fault and irresponsibility for scientists?
Sonia Kanclerski, Pause-café chez Sonia, Astrology refuted by astronomy, 2015.
Continuing to see horoscopes in magazines makes me more than cringe… So much paper wasted by pure and simple stupidity! To think and discuss together between science enthusiasts…
Zetetically and astronomically yours.
