Astrology militants attack my blog!

Paarsurrey says:

I appreciate your explanation on the following issues:

1. Moon has no observable effect on the human body

2. Syzygy is when three celestial objects align within a gravitational system, like the Sun, Earth and Moon, and moonquakes have been observed when syzygy occurs. A syzygy can also produce a more powerful spring tide due to the enhanced gravitational effect of the Sun added to the Moon’s gravitational pull.

Your answers are reasonable. Religion does not oppose rationality, nature or science. No founder of any religion like Buddha, Krishna, Zoroaster, Socrates, Moses, Jesus, and Muhammad ever opposed science. Their message belonged to the ethical, moral and spiritual fields which are based on Word of Revelation from the one true God and hence religion is not contradictory to nature/science.

Thanks for writing such informative posts in your blog.

The Endoskeptic

Since posting something here a few months ago, in which I addressed a number of common misconceptions regarding astrology and star signs, I’ve received several emails from what appear to be a group of disgruntled 8 year-olds, desperately defending their belief in the impossible! One of the more literate communications I read was from a Quantum Physicist PhD, an apparently highly intelligent individual explaining their belief in the system.  I’d like to share their thoughts and my responses with you now.

Comment:  “It is a fact that [the] gravitational force of the Moon causes tides on Earth. Moon being relatively small body in our solar system is able to affect large quantities of earthy waters… But it also is a relatively small celestial body compared to the likes of Jupiter, Saturn or Sun… As we all know, around 80% of human bodies consist of water… So it’s gotta affect…

View original post 1,072 more words

Tags: , , , , ,

8 Responses to “Astrology militants attack my blog!”

  1. Nick T Says:

    Many thanks for the reblog, very much appreciated and great to know people are enjoying the read. Although, unfortunately, there are many examples throughout history where religious beliefs have directly opposed scientific endeavour; the case of Galileo and the Pope, for example.

    But this post wasn’t written to evoke that discussion, but instead ensure that the facts of science are presented in the face of the supernatural belief that the celestial bodies can affect our behaviour; which they can’t!

    Thanks again; looking forward to reading some of your writing in the future!


    • paarsurrey Says:

      I thank you very much for visiting my blog; also for your comments.

      I am of the view that there is no contradiction in Nature- the Work of God– that corrects science; and a revealed Religion- Word of God– that depends on the Revelation from the one true creator God.

      Coming to your other points:

      1. Galileo’s persecution by the Pope was unjust. The pope or his associate clergy do not represent the truthful religion. Jesus, Moses, Buddha, Krishna, Zoroaster, Socrates and Muhammad did not oppose any scientific endeavor or persecute any scientist. The above persons were the direct recipients of Revelation.

      The acts of the clergy are wrongs done by man against man and it is sinful and deplorable. It is just like the secular rulers who do wrongs sometimes or often.

      2. If a human word spoken can effect changes in the world; then I think Word of God could do much.

      If for example, words spoken by the Head of State of America can make changes in the world; Word of the creator God could do much more.

      Friendly discussion is always welcome.
      Thanks again and regards

      I intend to make this peaceful dialogue a new post at my blog. I think you won’t mind.


  2. Galileo’s persecution by the clergy is deplorable | paarsurrey Says:

    […] […]


  3. Nick T Says:

    Thanks for your comments, respectfully received. I appreciate your views on the poor acts of the clergy in recent times in their attempted oppression of scientific endeavor.

    With regards to your thoughts on the founding prophets; It’s rather difficult to respond to these thoughts because for the most part they’re non-falsifiable. These prophets were alive when scientific knowledge wasn’t able to adequately challenge the religious beliefs of the time, beliefs which dominated most of the explanations for recognised phenomena. For example, lightening was considered the wrath of god, the Earth was flat and the shining celestial bodies were gods of the sky.

    Science now explains clearly the very phenomena that god is credited for in religious texts; the origins of the cosmos, astronomy, biological evolution. So while religious texts don’t necessarily condemn science per se, many of the modern practitioners do, because the science of today is not the same science that existed when these religious texts were written.

    But what is a religion if not its practitioners/followers? To insist that the pope is not a true representation of the catholic church because he attempted to obscure the path of science, is to commit the ‘no true Scotsman’ fallacy (; without a legitimate living prophet to encourage scientific endeavour, the pope and clergymen, and the equivalent priests and clerics in other religions take the mantle as head. Although I certainly don’t know for sure, I suspect that these religious leaders do oppose science, it is the responsibility of the more rational religious masses to speak out and condemn their objections so we can co-exist in peace. More importantly, it is not religious objections to science that is a problem, but more so the religious objections to other religions..

    Finally, I must apologise if I don’t post frequent responses on this or future threads, although I will try; while you seem like an articulate and intelligent individual, I’ve been in these debates many times before to know that there will be no mutual conclusion, and I fear that regardless of the evidence presented on both sides, neither of us will be able to empathise whole-heartedly with the other’s viewpoint. I began writing my blog to share my love of science, not to engage in conclusionless debates about religion.

    What I will do, however, is recount the end of a conversation I had with a muslim chap just a few weeks ago that was handing out fliers. Young, fresh-faced, cheerful and respectful, he tried to convince me that humans came from Adam, created by the one true god. After twenty minutes of spirited debate I emphatically explained that, as a scientist, I would not be able to agree with his viewpoint. However, we shook hands and agreed that while we may have alternate viewpoints on WHERE humans all came from, we could certainly agree on the fact that we all came from the ”same place”, wherever that may be, and as such, we’re all brothers and sisters on this planet!

    Peace to you.


  4. Love of science | paarsurrey Says:

    […] […]


  5. paarsurrey Says:

    […] […]


  6. Only through peaceful dialogue, peace is to be established | paarsurrey Says:

    […] […]


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: