`::That's a terrible argument against astrology; ``scientific process`` has changed drastically over the centuries.  There was a time when astrology was just as much of a science as astronomy or physics.  It is not a science anymore because it has been wholly rejected by the scientific community (because, to way way oversimplify, it has been falsified).  But I've been tracking through Theodore7's edits, and he's been making drastic or subtle changes to a whole range of astrology-related articles, and usually calling them minor edits, with no discussion.  I found him because he changed almost every instance of ``astronomer`` to ``astrologer`` in Kepler.  Theo, please realize that your strategy of replacing information is making other editors very frustrated.  Instead, you should add sections, wholly in your own words and explicitly referenced, about your positions in each article you are interested in (preferably on the talk pages, first).  Then we can discuss your work and sort what is accepted by consensus from what the majority considers to violate NPOV.   `