User talk:Rursus/Bad antiastrology

fail blatantly

Your response to the question "Why is the moment of birth, rather than conception, crucial for astrology?" has nothing to do with astrology at all. How does a conjecture about what a psychologist would think invalidate a question about how an astrologist works? Wẽãšẽĩõĩď^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 19:08, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Argument 1 is only ever applied to horoscopes and signs, rather than more general astrology. The two are interrelated, but to say that it's an argument only used against astrology in general is a straw man of an apparent straw man. I also don't get the rebuttal to no.4; anyone claiming supposedly supernatural or predictive ability could very easily sell it for much more than the usual charlatans can, and even if they weren't interested in personal gain they could give it to deserving charities. It's an economic argument, not some kind of ad hom scorn. ^{...I'll jostle your flap!} 19:49, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

I hope this doesn't end up in mainspace. Weaseloid^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 22:59, 5 October 2011 (UTC)