Bingo. When you spend enough time looking at the sky, even without a telescope if you aren't presently distracted by all the high tech shit in Western society (live for a few decades in a 3rd world country where there are no city lights clouding the sky), you'll see things a different way. Mayans, Egyptians, and Sumerians got pretty goddamn accurate with their "astrology" if you ask me.
It's like if I were to say I can't see with my ears. Ask a blind person.
Please feel free to enlighten us, and try to refrain from analogies like "seeing with your ears". And don't bring older cultures into it, back in that time period astrology and astronomy were linked and almost interchangeable in their usage.
That's not astronomy. It's astrology, astronomy is science and astrology is voodoo.
I'd bet money astrology isn't bogus.
And, I'd bet a lot of it.
Also, how do you plan to win a bet proving astrology isn't bogus when astrology itself is a belief system, and can't really be disproven or proven (like religion).
"Seeing with your ears" was chosen because that's essentially what happens subjectively. I don't care that ears are not eyes. Blind people adapt and they begin to use their ears for spatial recognition. Do you think thoughts are also non-visual experiences? I don't know about you, but I can see my thoughts clearly and vividly, especially if I focus on them. Senses are interconnected. Hold your nose and eat something; I bet it doesn't taste the same. Or, notice how people turn down the music in their car when they are looking for addresses. Why would people do this if hearing didn't influence your vision?
I'm not sure why you brought up religion. I think you were trying to indirectly suggest that religions are based upon no evidence. Even if that was true (check out East Asian religions, they are extremely scientific), not only is faith still the common denominator between science and religion -- or astronomy and astrology -- you can never say "prove" soundly with ANY inductive method of any kind. But, I've had direct knowledge/experience of "God" (for lack of a better word), and I can't prove that to you. It was self-evident. The thing about evidence-based beliefs is this:
What one knows he cannot prove, and what one can prove he cannot know.