- News>
- Newspapers
Stars are just stars, no more; astrology fails marathon test: Hindustan Times
London, Aug 24: This may be a good omen for those who predicted it: Scientists have now shown that astrology is bunkum.
London, Aug 24: This may be a good omen for those who predicted it: Scientists have now shown that astrology is bunkum.
Astrology's backbone — human characteristics are determined by the position of the stars and planets at the time of birth — appears to have been broken by the most scientific study made of the subject so far.
The researchers tracked more than 2,000 people since 1958, most of them born within minutes of each other, and called 'time twins'. According to astrology, these people should all be very similar. The study, reported in the current issue of the Journal of Consciousness Studies, found otherwise.
More than 2,000 babies, born in early March 1958, were registered and their development monitored regularly. The research was analysed by Geoffrey Dean, a scientist and former astrologer based in Perth, and Ivan Kelly, a psychologist at the University of Saskatchewan, Canada.
They 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. But the scientists failed to find similarities between the 'time twins'. They reported: "The test conditions could hardly have been more conducive to success ... but the results are uniformly negative."
The findings do not predict a bright future for astrologers, particularly high profile ones like Meg Ryan and Russell Grant who reportedly rake in over £600,000 a year from such work.
But astrologers, in turn, have debunked the study. Roy Gillett, president of the Astrological Association of Great Britain, said the ‘findings’ should be treated "with extreme caution".
Talking to the Hindustan Times, Gillett said Dean claims his “study is objective, but in fact it is selective". He said, “Palmistry or astrology are not mechanistic science. Mind is not a machine. One cannot use tools of mechanical science." Thus, he explained, it might not be possible to predict a divorce but difficulties in the marriage can be predicted. "A doctor can diagnose sickness but cannot decide he time of death."
Frank McGillion, a consultant to the Southampton-based Research Group for the Critical Study of Astrology, agrees. “(The study) is too simplistic and highly subjective.”
But will the findings affect people who are, in varying degrees, addicted to 'finding out’ their future? Surveys show astrology is becoming more popular. Over 80 per cent Britons, 75 per cent Americans and 85 per cent Indians regularly read star columns. A profitable astrology website can be worth £50 million. The Daily Mail offered a £1 million salary and a £1 million bonus to its zodiac expert when he threatened to quit in 1999.
Astrology's backbone — human characteristics are determined by the position of the stars and planets at the time of birth — appears to have been broken by the most scientific study made of the subject so far.
The researchers tracked more than 2,000 people since 1958, most of them born within minutes of each other, and called 'time twins'. According to astrology, these people should all be very similar. The study, reported in the current issue of the Journal of Consciousness Studies, found otherwise.
More than 2,000 babies, born in early March 1958, were registered and their development monitored regularly. The research was analysed by Geoffrey Dean, a scientist and former astrologer based in Perth, and Ivan Kelly, a psychologist at the University of Saskatchewan, Canada.
They 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. But the scientists failed to find similarities between the 'time twins'. They reported: "The test conditions could hardly have been more conducive to success ... but the results are uniformly negative."
The findings do not predict a bright future for astrologers, particularly high profile ones like Meg Ryan and Russell Grant who reportedly rake in over £600,000 a year from such work.
But astrologers, in turn, have debunked the study. Roy Gillett, president of the Astrological Association of Great Britain, said the ‘findings’ should be treated "with extreme caution".
Talking to the Hindustan Times, Gillett said Dean claims his “study is objective, but in fact it is selective". He said, “Palmistry or astrology are not mechanistic science. Mind is not a machine. One cannot use tools of mechanical science." Thus, he explained, it might not be possible to predict a divorce but difficulties in the marriage can be predicted. "A doctor can diagnose sickness but cannot decide he time of death."
Frank McGillion, a consultant to the Southampton-based Research Group for the Critical Study of Astrology, agrees. “(The study) is too simplistic and highly subjective.”
But will the findings affect people who are, in varying degrees, addicted to 'finding out’ their future? Surveys show astrology is becoming more popular. Over 80 per cent Britons, 75 per cent Americans and 85 per cent Indians regularly read star columns. A profitable astrology website can be worth £50 million. The Daily Mail offered a £1 million salary and a £1 million bonus to its zodiac expert when he threatened to quit in 1999.