<!--NO VIEW-->
Good news for rational, level-headed Virgoans
everywhere: just as you might have predicted, scientists have found
astrology to be rubbish.
Its central claim - that our human characteristics are
moulded by the influence of the Sun, Moon and planets at the time
of our birth - appears to have been debunked once and for all and
beyond doubt by the most thorough scientific study ever made into
it.
For several decades, researchers tracked more than
2,000 people - most of them born within minutes of each other.
According to astrology, the subject should have had very similar
traits.
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."
Analysis of the research was carried out by Geoffrey
Dean, a scientist and former astrologer based in Perth, Australia,
and Ivan Kelly, a psychologist at the University of Saskatchewan,
Canada.
Dr Dean said the results undermined the claims of
astrologers, who typically work with birth data far less precise
than that used in the study. "They sometimes argue that times of
birth just a minute apart can make all the difference by altering
what they call the 'house cusps'," he said. "But in their work,
they are happy to take whatever time they can get from a
client."
The findings caused alarm and anger in astrological
circles yesterday. Roy Gillett, the president of the Astrological
Association of Great Britain, said the study's findings should be
treated "with extreme caution" and accused Dr Dean of seeking to
"discredit astrology".
Frank McGillion, a consultant to the Southampton-based
Research Group for the Critical Study of Astrology, said of the
newly published work: "It is simplistic and highly selective and
does not cover all of the research." He added that he would lodge a
complaint with the editors of the journal.
Astrologers have for centuries claimed to be able to
extract deep insights into the personality and destiny of people
using nothing more than the details of the time and place of
birth.
Astrology has been growing in popularity. Surveys
suggest that a majority of people in Britain believe in it,
compared with only 13 per cent 50 years ago. The Association of
Professional Astrologers claims that 80 per cent of Britons read
star columns, and psychological studies have found that 60 per cent
regularly read their horoscopes.
Despite the scepticism of scientists, astrology has
grown to be a huge worldwide business, spawning thousands of
telephone lines, internet sites and horoscope columns in newspapers
and magazines.
It seems that no sector of society is immune to its
attraction. A recent survey found that a third of science students
subscribed to some aspects of astrology, while some supposedly
hard-headed businessmen now support a thriving market in "financial
astrology" - paying for predictions of trends such as the rise and
fall of the stock market. Astrology supplements have been known to
increase newspaper circulation figures and papers are prepared to
pay huge sums to the most popular stargazers.
Some of the most popular figures in the field, such as
Russell Grant, Mystic Meg and Shelley von Strunckel, can earn
£600,000 or more a year.
A single profitable astrology website can be worth as
much as £50 million.
When the Daily Mail discovered that its expert on the
zodiac, Jonathan Cainer, was about to leave the newspaper in 1999,
it reportedly offered him a £1 million salary and a £1 million
bonus to stay. He still preferred the offer at the Daily Express:
no salary but all the money from his telephone lines.
The time-twins study is only the start of the bad news
for astrologers, however. Dr Dean and Prof Kelly also sought to
determine whether stargazers could match a birth chart to the
personality profile of a person among a random selection.
They reviewed the evidence from more than 40 studies
involving over 700 astrologers, but found the results turned out no
better than guesswork.
The success rate did not improve even when astrologers
were given all the information they asked for and were confident
they had made the right choice.
Dr Dean said the consistency of the findings weighed
heavily against astrology.
"It has no acceptable mechanism, its principles are
invalid and it has failed hundreds of tests," he said. "But no hint
of these problems will be found in astrology books which, in
effect, are exercises in deception."
Dr Dean is ready for a torrent of criticism. He said:
"I'm probably the most hated person in astrology because I'm
regarded as a turncoat."
<!--NO VIEW-->