Latest news with #Babylonians
Times
6 days ago
- Entertainment
- Times
Would you let the stars dictate where you live?
Despite living in an age in which GPS tracks our every move and most of us have a map available at the touch of a screen, a growing number of people are turning to a different guide for directions: the cosmos. Astrocartography, a practice combining geography and astrology, claims to map the world for a person based on the moment they were born, offering guidance on where to go on holiday and even where to live. Developed in its modern form by the American astrologer Jim Lewis in the 1970s, at the root of the concept, which is sometimes called locational astrology, is the theory that by relocating to or spending time in areas that match with favourable planetary lines, we could tap into positive energies. • The Indian mothers paying for C-sections under 'lucky' stars 'Essentially it's a map based on the moment you took your first breath, which shows you your most powerful locations in the world,' says Helena Woods, a former actress from New York who is now an astrology influencer living in Australia. She charges $550 for an initial one-hour astrocartography reading. The idea of celestial influence on Earthly locales isn't new. Ancient civilisations, including the Babylonians and Egyptians, relied on observing the stars to make decisions about agriculture, architecture and governance. In recent years astrocartography has experienced a resurgence, particularly on social media, carving out a niche for itself within the reportedly $2.2 billion global industry that is astrology. On platforms such as Instagram and TikTok, astrologers including Hagan Fox (280K followers on Instagram) and Chani Nicholas (630K followers on Instagram) share practical tips. The latter, who counts the singer Lizzo among her fans, also ties locational astrology to broader themes of identity and social justice. Meanwhile the podcast host and astrologist Chris Brennan invites specialists to unpack the practice in depth on The Astrology Podcast (240K subscribers on YouTube). • Read more luxury reviews, advice and insights from our experts The rise of remote work and digital nomadism has fuelled interest as people explore where in the world they may feel happiest. 'I've helped people completely uproot their lives and start over in far-off locations,' Woods says. 'We've all been to cities or towns that feel right [and] others that don't; Astrocartography helps explain these place-based attractions,' says Clarisse Monahan, a Goldman Sachs analyst turned professional astrologer based near Dublin, who charges €220 for an hour of astrocartography. 'It matches us to our hot spots on Earth. Deciding where to live for work or raising a family is probably one of the biggest decisions you make in life.' On a less life-changing note, some people turn to astrocartography to decide the best place and time to take a holiday. 'For example, they might want to go to Paris on their Venus line in order to find some romance,' Monahan, who is also Soho House's resident astrologer, says. • Tick, tick, hiss — watches for the year of the snake Woods and Monahan offer single or multiple astrocartography sessions for clients depending on the questions they have, and Woods offers masterclasses and workshops. Both have also written or are writing books on the subject. As for the next frontier in the astrology world? How about astroherbalism, which combines astrology and plant medicine to map planets and signs on to herbs for emotional healing? Back to the future indeed.
Yahoo
21-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Opinion - Looking back at election forecasts
Predicting future events is difficult. The Babylonians discovered this nearly 2,700 years ago, when they began trying to predict the weather. We have been working to improve those forecasts ever since. Lives, crops and more depended on them. It took until 1859 for a country (Britain) to offer its first official weather forecast (for shipping, the lifeblood of the maritime empire). After millennia of refinement, just how accurate are weather forecasts? The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration tells us that five-day forecasts are accurate nearly 90 percent of the time. Ten-day forecasts and longer are only correct about half the time. When it comes to where hurricanes will make landfall, even a 48-hour forecast has a margin of error around 50 nautical miles. Humans can be even less predictable than weather patterns. Yet here, too, the stakes can be sky-high. Billions, if not trillions, of dollars are at stake in economic forecasts. Corporations, stock market investors and even the Federal Reserve rely on them to make consequential decisions. Two Berkeley business school researchers analyzed responses to the Survey of Professional Forecasters, conducted by the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia since 1968. They found forecasters were correct a mere 23 percent of the time. To take just one recent example, economists predicted U.S. gross domestic product would grow by 1.3 percent in 2024. In fact, the growth rate was more than twice the forecast. A dear friend who spent a few years working at a prominent econometric forecasting firm decades ago, reported their staff motto was 'we predicted 10 of the last three recessions.' Election forecasting has a shorter history. It is both more difficult and less consequential, since the forecasts have no effect on the real world. But it has grown into a cottage industry. Given the difficulties, it is surprising just how accurate these forecasts have proven to be, especially when they employ data collected many months prior to the event itself. The American Political Science Association recently published a journal with a dozen forecasts all completed well before the election, each of which used somewhat different data and varying methodologies. Most of them foresaw the close popular vote finish. The high-end prediction for then-Vice President Kamala Harris's share of the popular vote was 54.5 percent and the low-end was 45 percent — the first based on online betting data, the second on the expectations of ordinary people, techniques that I would caution against. Still, most of the predictions clustered within a few points of the actual results. Of the 11 entrants who forecast the popular vote, five foresaw victory for President Trump and six a win for Harris. Five predicted an Electoral College victory for Trump, whereas three wrongly anticipated that Harris would win the electoral vote. As regular readers would expect, the predictions based on fundamentals (the economy, partisanship, presidential approval) tended to be the most accurate. As I have described before, Ray Fair's model, the longest running such forecast (but not included in the American Political Science Association collection), and based largely on hard economic indicators, was within a quarter point of the actual result. Charles Tien and Michael Lewis-Beck added presidential approval to a smaller array of economic variables, producing a forecast also less than a point off the mark. Models employing poll data tended to be slightly farther off. I have previously quoted statistician George Box saying that 'all models are wrong. Some are useful.' Models are (over-) simplifications of the world. To be wholly right, they'd have to be as rich, complex, and confusing as the world itself. But these simplifications can tell us something about the 'whys' of this and other presidential elections. For example, despite the conventional wisdom asserting elections are about the future, most of the accurate models use retrospective information about the past, not data about future expectations. None of these models use information about the candidates' personalities, abilities or issue positions. Which is to say, the 2024 election was destined to be close, but any Democrat would have had a difficult time winning it. The situational deck was stacked against us, and neither candidate had a secret formula for greatly exceeding expectations. An exceptional candidate backed by an exceptional campaign may have been able to overcome the odds, but that's exactly what would have been required — beating the odds. Would a different candidate, or one who had faced a primary, have done better? We have no way of knowing, but there is no evidence or suggestion Harris blew a race that was hers to lose. Would former President Biden have done better or worse? Again, we cannot know, though one of the American Political Science Association modelers claims evidence that Biden himself would have done slightly worse than Harris did. It is no longer fashionable to quote Karl Marx, but he was right in saying that individual people 'make history, but not in circumstances of their own choosing.' Psychology teaches us that humans put too much weight on personal factors while underrating the power of circumstances and situations in shaping behavior. These models remind us that circumstances count for a lot and that the new science of presidential election forecasting stacks up pretty well, as predictions go. Mark Mellman is president of The Mellman Group a consultancy that has helped elect 30 U.S. senators, 12 governors and dozens of House members. He served as pollster to Senate Democratic leaders for over 30 years and is a member of the American Association of Political Consultants' Hall of Fame. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
The Hill
21-05-2025
- Business
- The Hill
Looking back at election forecasts
Predicting future events is difficult. The Babylonians discovered this nearly 2,700 years ago, when they began trying to predict the weather. We have been working to improve those forecasts ever since. Lives, crops and more depended on them. It took until 1859 for a country (Britian) to offer its first official weather forecast (for shipping, the lifeblood of the maritime empire). After millennia of refinement, just how accurate are weather forecasts? The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration tells us that five-day forecasts are accurate nearly 90 percent of the time. Ten-day forecasts and longer are only correct about half the time. When it comes to where hurricanes will make landfall, even a 48-hour forecast has a margin of error around 50 nautical miles. Humans can be even less predictable than weather patterns. Yet here, too, the stakes can be sky-high. Billions, if not trillions, of dollars are at stake in economic forecasts. Corporations, stock market investors and even the Federal Reserve rely on them to make consequential decisions. Two Berkeley business school researchers analyzed responses to the Survey of Professional Forecasters, conducted by the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia since 1968. They found forecasters were correct a mere 23 percent of the time. To take just one recent example, economists predicted U.S. gross domestic product would grow by 1.3 percent in 2024. In fact, the growth rate was more than twice the forecast. A dear friend who spent a few years working at a prominent econometric forecasting firm decades ago, reported their staff motto was 'we predicted 10 of the last three recessions.' Election forecasting has a shorter history. It is both more difficult and less consequential, since the forecasts have no effect on the real world. But it has grown into a cottage industry. Given the difficulties, it is surprising just how accurate these forecasts have proven to be, especially when they employ data collected many months prior to the event itself. The American Political Science Association recently published a journal with a dozen forecasts all completed well before the election, each of which used somewhat different data and varying methodologies. Most of them foresaw the close popular vote finish. The high-end prediction for Harris's share of the popular vote was 54.5 percent and the low-end was 45 percent — the first based on online betting data, the second on the expectations of ordinary people, techniques that I would caution against. Still, most of the predictions clustered within a few points of the actual results. Of the 11 entrants who forecast the popular vote, five foresaw victory for President Trump and six a win for Kamala Harris. Five predicted an Electoral College victory for Trump, whereas three wrongly anticipated that Harris would win the electoral vote. As regular readers would expect, the predictions based on fundamentals (the economy, partisanship, presidential approval) tended to be the most accurate. As I have described before, Ray Fair's model, the longest running such forecast (but not included in the American Political Science Association collection), and based largely on hard economic indicators, was within a quarter point of the actual result. Charles Tien and Michael Lewis-Beck added presidential approval to a smaller array of economic variables, producing a forecast also less than a point off the mark. Models employing poll data tended to be slightly farther off. I have previously quoted statistician George Box saying that 'all models are wrong. Some are useful.' Models are (over-) simplifications of the world. To be wholly right, they'd have to be as rich, complex, and confusing as the world itself. But these simplifications can tell us something about the 'whys' of this and other presidential elections. For example, despite the conventional wisdom asserting elections are about the future, most of the accurate models use retrospective information about the past, not data about future expectations. None of these models use information about the candidates' personalities, abilities or issue positions. Which is to say, the 2024 election was destined to be close, but any Democrat would have had a difficult time winning it. The situational deck was stacked against us, and neither candidate had a secret formula for greatly exceeding expectations. An exceptional candidate backed by an exceptional campaign may have been able to overcome the odds, but that's exactly what would have been required — beating the odds. Would a different candidate, or one who had faced a primary, have done better? We have no way of knowing, but there is no evidence or suggestion Vice President Kamala Harris blew a race that was hers to lose. Would former President Joe Biden have done better or worse? Again, we cannot know, though one of the American Political Science Association modelers claims evidence that Biden himself would have done slightly worse than Harris did. It is no longer fashionable to quote Karl Marx, but he was right in saying that individual people 'make history, but not in circumstances of their own choosing.' Psychology teaches us that humans put too much weight on personal factors while underrating the power of circumstances and situations in shaping behavior. These models remind us that circumstances count for a lot and that the new science of presidential election forecasting stacks up pretty well, as predictions go. Mark Mellman is president of The Mellman Group a consultancy that has helped elect 30 U.S. senators, 12 governors and dozens of House members. He served as pollster to Senate Democratic leaders for over 30 years and is a member of the American Association of Political Consultants' Hall of Fame.
Yahoo
20-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Yahoo
Astrology 101: Breaking Down the Basics
"Hearst Magazines and Yahoo may earn commission or revenue on some items through these links." Learning about astrology can feel like discovering an iceberg. What you thought was just sun signs and casually checking Co-Star is actually an entire system involving houses, planets, modalities, birth charts, and more. That being said, it's a good idea to get a grasp of the basics before you start to descend into the deep. For example, what exactly is astrology anyway? And how has it changed over the years? Below, Tali Edut, one half of The AstroTwins, ELLE's resident astrologers, answers all those introductory questions. If after reading, you're looking to learn even more, Edut recommends analyzing your own birth chart and in turn, learning about how planets, signs, and houses can all be pieced together. Astrology is where math meets myth. It is the calculation of the planets in their orbit combined with thousands and thousands of years of storytelling and watching patterns. You could also say astrology is kind of the cosmic code to our personalities and also the energies that are happening outside of us in the world. It's a system that's been developing since the Babylonians and then the Egyptians, the Greeks, and then in modern days, too. It was once considered something that people studied at universities, too. So there's something about it that has lasted through the ages. A number of people are now going back and learning Hellenistic astrology, which was the astrology that existed back in antiquity in Greece. But I'm not a fan of it, because it stops with the planet Saturn, and Saturn is the patriarchy planet. I'm like, come on, Uranus comes after that, the planet of revolution. Then comes Neptune, the planet of dreams and subconscious, and Pluto, which is shadow work. They deserve to be part of this. I consider myself an evolutionary astrologer. I really do believe that we're always evolving, and the interpretation of our sun signs and moon signs will evolve as we do through our lives. Like my Scorpio moon might've made me jealous and possessive and insecure when I was a teenager, but now I use it to be empathetic and understand people and get compassionate with them. A personal love of astrology is primarily a tool for self-love and self-acceptance. I think when you understand that the birth chart is the cosmic blueprint to the person you are, why you are the way you are, and what potential there is to tap, it's like the gold mine, the treasure map to who you are. You're not stuck with, oh, I'm a Capricorn, I must work hard, or I'm a Virgo, I am a neat freak. Not at all. It's a treasure map to the energies you have to tap into, based on where the stars were when you were born. You can also use astrology for predictive purposes. Depending on where the planets are at any moment in time, you can look ahead and prepare for those energies that are coming in. A lot of astrologers, including myself, are self-taught, but there are certification programs. People are learning astrology faster and faster now, because there are so many great tools for it out there. Sometimes things just click into place collectively. But to actually become a great astrologer, it's not just about knowing how to regurgitate stuff, and I see that happening a lot, and I did that a lot in my early days as an astrologer. There's a lot of nuance. I think it's a lifelong practice of learning, studying human behavior. Notice all the people who are Aquarians in your life. What do you see? Look at all the celebrities who are Aries: Diana Ross, Celine Dion, Jill Scott, Aretha Franklin, all these divas. Why is that? It's observing, learning, doing your own personal development work, and then bringing that together with the principles and rules of astrology can make you a great astrologer. Our role as astrologers isn't to scare people, freak them out. I've heard people say, 'Oh, an astrologer told me I'd never get married. I'd never get pregnant.' That's just cruel. The role of astrologers is to support people in self-discovery and empowerment, and, of course, let them know if there's something they need to look out for. But to do it in a way that's empowering, it takes practice. When we started doing it, I would talk to people about their moon sign, and they'd be like, what are you talking about? Before it went wild on the internet and social media, there weren't a bunch of tools or calculators or apps. But over the last 15 years, astrology became more accessible, because you could do a free chart online. And then I think Trump coming into office [in 2016] and all the breakdowns from that did wonders for astrology, because people started to go, 'Why is this happening?' When something happens in the world that doesn't make sense, we want to come home to our souls. We want to come home to the one place of security that is self-knowledge. So people's interests in trauma, attachment styles, astrology, I think it's all part of somewhat of a coping mechanism. It's also a knowing that we all have that truth that resides inside of us. It's kind of an anchor and a centering. If I can learn my own tendencies by understanding my astrology chart, I can navigate this world even when the world seems to be going bonkers. Yeah, but I still think there's a lot of diminishing ways that people think about [astrology]. They try to wrap it up with a pretty bow like, all Geminis are like this or that. I think a little bit of knowledge can be a dangerous thing, too. I've heard of people writing other people off, because they didn't like their sign or saying, 'I don't date Geminis,' and that's silly. Everybody is different. The idea that there's a fixed way to interpret anything. There are also a lot of people who are learning the rules of astrology, which I think is important, but then they get really, really serious about the rules, and they forget that astrology is meant as a tool for understanding, not interpreting so literally. That's what's so interesting about astrology is it's at once this very defined mathematical system, and also nowadays, something that's subject for enlightened interpretation rather than rigid, by-the-books interpretation. This interview has been edited and condensed for clarity. You Might Also Like The 15 Best Organic And Clean Shampoos For Any And All Hair Types 100 Gifts That Are $50 Or Under (And Look Way More Expensive Than They Actually Are)
Elle
20-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Elle
Astrology 101: Breaking Down the Basics
Learning about astrology can feel like discovering an iceberg. What you thought was just sun signs and casually checking Co-Star is actually an entire system involving houses, planets, modalities, birth charts, and more. That being said, it's a good idea to get a grasp of the basics before you start to descend into the deep. For example, what exactly is astrology anyway? And how has it changed over the years? Below, Tali Edut, one half of The AstroTwins, ELLE's resident astrologers, answers all those introductory questions. If after reading, you're looking to learn even more, Edut recommends analyzing your own birth chart and in turn, learning about how planets, signs, and houses can all be pieced together. Astrology is where math meets myth. It is the calculation of the planets in their orbit combined with thousands and thousands of years of storytelling and watching patterns. You could also say astrology is kind of the cosmic code to our personalities and also the energies that are happening outside of us in the world. It's a system that's been developing since the Babylonians and then the Egyptians, the Greeks, and then in modern days, too. It was once considered something that people studied at universities, too. So there's something about it that has lasted through the ages. A number of people are now going back and learning Hellenistic astrology, which was the astrology that existed back in antiquity in Greece. But I'm not a fan of it, because it stops with the planet Saturn, and Saturn is the patriarchy planet. I'm like, come on, Uranus comes after that, the planet of revolution. Then comes Neptune, the planet of dreams and subconscious, and Pluto, which is shadow work. They deserve to be part of this. I consider myself an evolutionary astrologer. I really do believe that we're always evolving, and the interpretation of our sun signs and moon signs will evolve as we do through our lives. Like my Scorpio moon might've made me jealous and possessive and insecure when I was a teenager, but now I use it to be empathetic and understand people and get compassionate with them. A personal love of astrology is primarily a tool for self-love and self-acceptance. I think when you understand that the birth chart is the cosmic blueprint to the person you are, why you are the way you are, and what potential there is to tap, it's like the gold mine, the treasure map to who you are. You're not stuck with, oh, I'm a Capricorn, I must work hard, or I'm a Virgo, I am a neat freak. Not at all. It's a treasure map to the energies you have to tap into, based on where the stars were when you were born. You can also use astrology for predictive purposes. Depending on where the planets are at any moment in time, you can look ahead and prepare for those energies that are coming in. A lot of astrologers, including myself, are self-taught, but there are certification programs. People are learning astrology faster and faster now, because there are so many great tools for it out there. Sometimes things just click into place collectively. But to actually become a great astrologer, it's not just about knowing how to regurgitate stuff, and I see that happening a lot, and I did that a lot in my early days as an astrologer. There's a lot of nuance. I think it's a lifelong practice of learning, studying human behavior. Notice all the people who are Aquarians in your life. What do you see? Look at all the celebrities who are Aries: Diana Ross, Celine Dion, Jill Scott, Aretha Franklin, all these divas. Why is that? It's observing, learning, doing your own personal development work, and then bringing that together with the principles and rules of astrology can make you a great astrologer. Our role as astrologers isn't to scare people, freak them out. I've heard people say, 'Oh, an astrologer told me I'd never get married. I'd never get pregnant.' That's just cruel. The role of astrologers is to support people in self-discovery and empowerment, and, of course, let them know if there's something they need to look out for. But to do it in a way that's empowering, it takes practice. When we started doing it, I would talk to people about their moon sign, and they'd be like, what are you talking about? Before it went wild on the internet and social media, there weren't a bunch of tools or calculators or apps. But over the last 15 years, astrology became more accessible, because you could do a free chart online. And then I think Trump coming into office [in 2016] and all the breakdowns from that did wonders for astrology, because people started to go, 'Why is this happening?' When something happens in the world that doesn't make sense, we want to come home to our souls. We want to come home to the one place of security that is self-knowledge. So people's interests in trauma, attachment styles, astrology, I think it's all part of somewhat of a coping mechanism. It's also a knowing that we all have that truth that resides inside of us. It's kind of an anchor and a centering. If I can learn my own tendencies by understanding my astrology chart, I can navigate this world even when the world seems to be going bonkers. Yeah, but I still think there's a lot of diminishing ways that people think about [astrology]. They try to wrap it up with a pretty bow like, all Geminis are like this or that. I think a little bit of knowledge can be a dangerous thing, too. I've heard of people writing other people off, because they didn't like their sign or saying, 'I don't date Geminis,' and that's silly. Everybody is different. The idea that there's a fixed way to interpret anything. There are also a lot of people who are learning the rules of astrology, which I think is important, but then they get really, really serious about the rules, and they forget that astrology is meant as a tool for understanding, not interpreting so literally. That's what's so interesting about astrology is it's at once this very defined mathematical system, and also nowadays, something that's subject for enlightened interpretation rather than rigid, by-the-books interpretation. This interview has been edited and condensed for clarity.
