And the moon sinks low in Scorpio

[venta]

This is something I've been meaning to experiment with for ages, but never got round to. I've just been reminded of it, because someone posted on a thread elsewhere with the assumption that "birthdays are randomly distributed" - which I've always assumed they're not. For a start, there's always a bit of a clump of birthdays round February/March, which I've always blamed on people having early summer holidays in June.

Now, I'm assuming that unlike, say, musical taste, incidence of birthdays among my friends list will at least be representative of the population as a whole. If not, then we're into the suggestion that being born in a particular month predisposes you to particular behaviours and that smacks of astrology, so I don't like it.

(Yes, I know there are other non-astrological factors which might be relevant, but let's give it a whirl, shall we?)



You're getting no tickyboxes for this, dammit, it's radio or nothing. I refuse to allow people to be born in more than one month.

[Poll #424559]

Comments

[al-fruitbat.livejournal.com]

If not, then we're into the suggestion that being born in a particular month predisposes you to particular behaviours and that smacks of astrology, so I don't like it.

Er... being born in a particular time of year emphatically does predispose you to particular behaviours, doesn't it? I thought it was the only reasonable explanation for Astrology there was going...

Admittedly, in the last 50 years or so the most obvious yearly variation of diet in the western world has rather homogenised, since nowadays you can bring up kids on pizza, sunny delight and chips all year round, but things like day length, external temperature and so on must still have quite a developmental effect. Or at least, I've always thought so...

[wimble.livejournal.com]

Depends on whether your explanation for the disposition is "was fundementally influenced by very weak gravity fields at the instant of birth, but at no other time (either previously or subsequently)", or other more "realistic" social and environmental influences, such as the oldest/youngest in class; seasonal dietary effects or simply getting fed up with their birthday always being on Christmas Day!

[al-fruitbat.livejournal.com]

No, not gravity (although I refer the honourable gentleman to the lunatic argument about tides for a good laugh about that one ;-) but yes to seasonal dietary effects, amount of time playing outside & conditions of same, exposure to pathogens & parasites on a yearly basis as well as basic fundamentals like day length & amount of daylight.

[wimble.livejournal.com]

That's the difference between Astrology, and a "reasonable" explanation though, at least, when Astrologers get seriously into what they are doing: precise time of birth, and location, so they can work out which signs or planets were coming over the horizon at the time.

At a crude level, if you simply take the month long sign, then it's not so much astrology, as just a different naming system: January born children (historically) started life with a different diet from July born. That's science. Claiming their differences are due to the star positions: that's astrology.

[onebyone.livejournal.com]

the only reasonable explanation for Astrology

Does astrology require a reasonable explanation? For example, does it make any verifiable claims about birthday-dependent personality characteristcs?

things like day length, external temperature and so on must still have quite a developmental effect.

Do you mean that it's entirely plausible that they would have an effect, or that you'd be extremely surprised if there weren't any (observable) effects?

[al-fruitbat.livejournal.com]

Surprised if no observable effects. I thought (no hyperlink to hand, sorry) that there were observable differences physically between children born at different parts of the year, at the most basic level.

[onebyone.livejournal.com]

thought that there were observable differences physically

I'm not claiming that there aren't, mind you. Just that I've not noticed many astrologers going out on a limb and predicting what they should be...

[venta.livejournal.com]

I remember my mum commenting once that she'd seen an article around the time I was born, which claimed (among other things) that the dominant feature in the face of a Virgo child would be the nose.

So I not only get to despise astrology for being rubbish, but also for causing me to have a big nose.

reasonable explanation for Astrology

[ewx.livejournal.com]

"People will believe any old rubbish"

[sushidog.livejournal.com]

Apparently people born in the winter months are slightly (but significantly) more likely to suffer from schizophrenia and various depressive illnesses.

[venta.livejournal.com]

Is that simply an observed effect, or has anyone come up with a plausible explanation for "why", d'you know ?

[sushidog.livejournal.com]

It's an observed effect, but there is speculation that it is to do with both the amount and the wavelength of light, which apparently may have some effect on the way the brain develops in the first few months.

[neilh.livejournal.com]

If this is so we'd expect a different distribution of such illnesses between, say, India and Finland. Is this true?

[sushidog.livejournal.com]

I don't know if the research has gone that far; certainly the figures from the Northern and Southern hemispheres balance up as you'd expect; here, December babies are more prone to mental illness, there, it's June and July babies that suffer. It would be interesting to compare the figures from countries in the same hemisphere, but with more or less sunlight at any given time in the year, and perhaps even look at the figures from different years and factor in the weather each year.