People Into Astrology Shouldn’t Attempt Medical Commentary

The last few days I’ve ignored most of the lame attacks coming from The Democratic Daily and other blogs from its writers, other than for the discussion going on in following this post which does get into some of the background behind their persistent attacks on Liberal Values. I probably should have ignored ths one too, but decided to comment as it demonstrates why people who believe in astrology and ghosts should avoid commenting on matters involving science and medicine.

The Katrinacrat Blog posts on the finding of a 10,000 year old baby mammouth, deriding the researcher in the picture and attempting to turn this into another lame attack on me:


Why does that guy in the pic look like he’s trying to listen to a heartbeat? Is he from Michigan? Hint: he’s already dead fool! Pretty cool science stuff there.

The writer is the same guy who once told me that my disbelief in astrology was like George Bush not believing in global warming. Needless to say, the scientific viewpoint would be to accept the scientific evidence on global warming and dismiss astrolgy as bunk. He again shows his lack of understanding of science in asking, “Why does that guy in the pic look like he’s trying to listen to a heartbeat?” There are two problems here. First of all, his head is no where near the heart–perhaps it might help to pay more attention to anatomy than astrological charts. Secondly, he is not wearing a stethoscope, as he would if he was attempting to find a heartbeat.

Be Sociable, Share!


  1. 1
    Skeptic says:


    If you need a laugh, here’s a comment from Ginny at Astrology Democratic Daily:

    “Ron loves to tout his scientific position on all issues. The reality that Westen presents is that the human brain is not wired that way.”

    Thus, as she rejects science, she winds up promoting her crazy 9/11 conspiracy theories.

    She also writes that you only have credence in the liberal blogs because of being a doctor, and thinks that Pamela’s attacks on you will get other liberals to wise up about you.

  2. 2
    Ron Chusid says:


    I’m not sure if it can be proven whether the human brain is wired for science or for irrationality. A case can certainly be made for human irrationality. Regardless, as I’m sure you’d agree, science is the manner in which we examine the universe and discover facts objectively as opposed to based upon our biases.

    As they reject science and reason at The Democratic Daily, they wind up promoting astrology, consipiracy theories, and the belief that Mel Gibson is just a poor misunderstood actor who happened to have a little too much to drink. All these forms of irrationality all go together.

    I doubt that being a physician actually makes much of a difference with very many in the blogosphere. We are judged more on the quality of what we write than such credentials. The reason I have credibility, and The Democratic Daily does not, is that I base what I write on facts and logic, while at The Democratic Daily everything iis based upon their personal biases and whether they like the person who said something.

    Maybe they feel compelled to constantly attack me out of their disdain for science and logic. I’m a surrogate for these world views they oppose.

    That is a laugh that they’d speak of others wising up to me. It goes along with all their talk of boycotting Liberal Values since I started it. Liberals pride themselves on being part of the reality based community, and the anti-science/anti-reason philosophy prevalent at The Democratic Daily is counter to the views of most liberals.

    We can see that the liberal blogosphere has not “wised up” to me as Ginny hopes by comparing our Technorati rankings or the number of subscribers thru Feedburner. At present Liberal Values has 3707 and The Democratic Daily has 109 subscribers. Quite a difference. (We’re down a bit from last month as Feedburner changed the manner in which they count subscribers, plus traffic is down a bit during the summer, especially as I was recently on vacation and posting less.)

    As for Technorati rankings, we hit a landmark today reaching an authority of 500. Some consider that the mark of an A-List blog, although I don’t really think that is in itself sufficient criteria.

  3. 3
    jimmy says:

    You’ve always been an A List Blog in my book.

    Their attaks are getting sillier and sillier–don’t let them get you down. Nobody is going to believe Democratic Daily’s slurs. On the one side we have a doctor who backs up everything he says with sound references. On the other side we have a nutcake who sells aroma therapy crap, and who defends Mel Gibson, astrology, and a host of conspiracy theories. Anyone in their right mind would know who the nutcake is that is responsible for all these attacks. Must admit tho, it is a bit sneaky and clever of them to attack you and then make so much noise claiming you are the attacker when ever you defend yourself. You might consider making sure you link their attacks when you respond to them.

  4. 4
    Ron Chusid says:


    I’m not too worried about many people believing them, but do want to make sure I have rebuttals posted. As we learned during the Swift Boat attacks, attacks which are not responded to are accepted as truth.

    While sometimes I’ve linked to their attacks, I often avoid it to avoid giving more coverage to their attacks. I figure that anyone reading what is here should be able to see the differences between my objections to their positions and their use of personal attacks as a substitute for rational argument.

Leave a comment