Researchers - Astrology Is Bunk

A 50-year-study nstudy of 2,000 people born minutes apart has proved what may people have thought for a long time - astrology is rubbish!

The babies were originally recruited as part of a medical study begun in London in 1958 into how the circumstances of birth can affect future health. More than 2,000 babies born in early March that year were registered and their development monitored at regular intervals.

Researchers looked at more than 100 different characteristics, including occupation, anxiety levels, marital status, aggressiveness, sociability, IQ levels and ability in art, sport, mathematics and reading - all of which astrologers claim can be gauged from birth charts.

The scientists failed to find any evidence of similarities between the "time twins", however. They reported in the current issue of the Journal of Consciousness Studies: "The test conditions could hardly have been more conducive to success . . . but the results are uniformly negative."

Comments

[Devin]

Maybe astrology is like Quantum Physics in that if you monitor it closley, it acts differently because the results are being measured.

[Joseph]

This is quite interesting, about UK banks using astrology...
http://www.newsmonster.co.uk/paranormal-unexplained/britains-biggest-banks-use-astrology-to-play-the-markets.html
I'm not really in much doubt that astrology is useful but as P Carroll put it...

[astrology] assumes a causal relationship between events which are linked only very weakly if at all. If the relationship were strong, then astrology would be an ordinary secular science. As the relationship is very weak, astrology owes whatever success it has to the natural prescience of its practitioners and obscures its failures with imprecision, evasiveness and ambiguity.