05-12-2016, 01:07 PM
Correlation does not prove causation. That's almost a cliche contained in most debates today, though a surprising number of people adhere to only their own, experienced, anecdotal evidence as convincing.
However, correlation IS a necessary component of proving causation. That is, if A causes B, B must necessarily be correlated with A.
The trouble with Astrology is that not only is there NO causation, there is not even any reliable correlation. One has to invoke confirmation bias on steroids to get to correlation - that is, one has to totally discard all instances of non-correlation, and include only instances of correlation.
However, correlation IS a necessary component of proving causation. That is, if A causes B, B must necessarily be correlated with A.
The trouble with Astrology is that not only is there NO causation, there is not even any reliable correlation. One has to invoke confirmation bias on steroids to get to correlation - that is, one has to totally discard all instances of non-correlation, and include only instances of correlation.
[font=Arial Black]... a man of notoriously vicious and intemperate disposition.[/font]