NZ Skeptics Articles

Belief in the Stars is not a Good Sign

Paul KurtzAndrew Fraknoi - 1 February 1989

Scientific Tests Fail to Support Astrology

The recent revelations that the United States President’s wife consults astrologers in scheduling important presidential events have embarrassed the U.S. Yet this startling discovery reveals only the tip of the iceberg. Throughout the world people make investments, change jobs, select their mates, and seek medical treatment on the basis of astrological forecasts. Virtually everyone knows the “sun sign” under which he or she was born. Yet very few people understand the origins and tenets of this ancient practice. Especially disturbing is the fact that according to a 1986 Gallup poll, 52 percent of teenagers polled accept astrology as true.

At a recent press conference, President Reagan denied that he guided his life by astrology. Yet when asked if he believed in astrology, he replied: “I won’t answer the question the other way, because I don’t know enough about it to say if there is something there or not.”

Astrology’s continued growth in popularity is to a large extent due to a very profitable media industry. Virtually every newspaper and most popular magazines carry horoscopes, and many report the predictions and activities of astrologers without checking the facts or presenting other points of view. The public is seldom exposed to scientific critiques of astrological claims.

In an effort to make a start in this direction, the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal (CSICOP), an international organization of scientists, journalists, scholars, and other skeptics, in 1984 launched an ongoing appeal to newspaper editors to run a short disclaimer with their horoscope columns. The suggested disclaimer reads: “‘This column should be read for its entertainment value only; it has no reliable basis in scientific fact.” Unfortunately, so far only twenty-one newspapers now carry the disclaimer.

The basic premise of astrology is that if we know the exact time and place of birth of an individual and correlate this with the position of the heavenly bodies (i.e., chart a horoscope), we can ascertain his personality, his physical characteristics, his state of health, his profession, and his destiny. Some astrologers even cast horoscopes for pets, corporations, and nations. Astrologers cannot explain how or why the stars and planets influence earthly events, but they accept on faith that celestial objects are somehow “synchronized” with human affairs.

Astrology stretches back almost 4,000 years to Babylon, to a world dominated by magic and myth. It was used by emperors, kings, and queens to guide their lives and to plan national policy. Astrologers were deeply involved in court intrigue and the notion of subjecting their claims to rigorous testing lay many centuries in the future. But today we can and should ask, Is astrology true, or is it a form of ancient superstition?

Astrology seemed to make sense to people thousands of years ago, at a time long before the advent of science. The moment of birth was considered to be a magical time, and the planets, sun, and moon were thought to embody divine beings. The earth was considered to be the center of the universe, with the planets, sun, and moon traveling around it. The stars were assumed to be fixed lights in the turning dome of the sky.

Modern astronomy has undermined the entire cosmology of astrology. We know that the sun, not the earth, is the center of our solar system and that there are billions of other star systems. Classical astrology, the foundation of the popular astrology of today, was based on the alleged influences of the observable planets, but it was totally ignorant of Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto, which were discovered much later. (It is curious that astrologers did not “sense” their presence in the horoscopes long before they were discovered with telescopes.)

There are other fundamental difficulties with astrology. Why is the critical time the moment of birth rather than the moment of conception? Moreover, astrologers do not allow for Caesarian operations, delayed or induced deliveries, now very common practices.

Is there some magical force or influence exerted by the planets at the moment of birth? Astronomers point out that the gravitational influence of the obstetrician in the delivery room is far greater than that of any of the planets, and scientists tell us that personality and physical characteristics are the result of genetics, learned responses, and environmental influences.

Aside from the absence of any physical theory to explain it, does astrology in fact work? Are sun signs and horoscopes accurate? Sun signs refer to the position of the sun as it was thought to traverse the twelve signs of the zodiac. Sun-sign astrology is what appears in horoscope columns. But exhaustive scientific tests indicate no correlation between the sign under which a person is born and his personality, profession, or future prosperity. For example, John McGervey, a physicist at Case Western Reserve University (USA), checked the birth dates for 6,475 politicians and 16,634 scientists in Who’s Who and found that the sun signs were randomly distributed among them. Psychologist Bernard Silverman of Michigan State University (USA) found no correlation between “compatible” and “incompatible” sun signs after examining 2,978 married and 478 divorced couples in Michigan in 1967 and 1968.

Most astrologers themselves admit that daily horoscope columns are unreliable, but they maintain they are able to cast more precise horoscopes by considering many other celestial objects and are thus able to determine future influences. However, astrologers disagree on how to cast and read a person’s horoscope; different schools of astrology vary widely in their interpretations. ;

If astrologers are able to foretell the future, why don’t they break the bank at the world’s casinos? When astronomers Roger Culver and Philip Ianna (in their book The Gemini Syndrome) examined 3,011 specific predictions astrologers made over a five-year period, 90 percent turned out to be false! A sample of college students did slightly better by simple guesswork. And Californians need not worry about astrological predictions of earthquakes. A test by staff members at the U.S. Geological Survey analyzed a total of 240 earthquake predictions of 27 astrologers and found their accuracy no better than would be expected by chance.

Are horoscopes reliable in analyzing personality characteristics? Geoffrey Dean, an Australian researcher, tested 45 astrologers in Britain and the U.S. They were asked to examine astrological charts of 240 individuals and merely predict whether they were introverted or extroverted. Based on psychological tests the subjects had taken separately, the results were a complete failure. Shawn Carlson, of the University of California, in an article published in Nature (December 5, 1985) reported his test of 30 leading astrologers in Europe and the United States. They were asked to match the personality profiles of 116 subjects with their horoscopes, something the astrologers were confident they could do. An astrologer was given each person’s profile, which had been carefully prepared, and two profiles chosen at random, together with that person’s horoscope. They were asked to match the horoscope to the right profile. But astrologers were able to find the correct profile only as often as chance (guessing) would predict. Since 1980, at least five similar tests have been conducted and the results have invariably been negative.

Why do so many people think astrology works for them if scientific tests reveal it to be false? Geoffrey Dean, who reported his meticulous study of this question in the Skeptical Inquirer magazine, discovered that, surprisingly, many people will rate a reading successful no matter what is said! He reversed the astrological readings of 22 subjects, substituting the opposite of what they were supposed to be. Nonetheless all said the readings applied to them. The same psychological phenomenon is found in readings using palmistry, numerology, tarot cards, or I Ching—equally questionable practices.

One reason for this is that the adjectives used are so general that they apply to almost everyone to some extent. Sun-sign astrology claims that people are “‘assertive,” “‘possessive,” “changeable,” “‘sensitive,” “creative,” “critical,” “harmonious,” “secretive,” “adventurous,” “cautious,” “detached,” “intuitive,” etc. But these general traits seem to apply to some extent to most people’s personalities and thus have a kind of universal validity.

The basic principle at work here is what might be called the “stretched sock principle”; that is, today one can buy socks that will fit any size from 8 to 11 1/2. Similarly, a system of belief, even if false, may tend to give some order and meaning to a person’s life. But it is the person who imposes the order, and he validates it himself. In horoscopes, you find general advice like “You have a problem with money” or “You are often misunderstood,” which can obviously apply to just about everyone.

Although astrology fails every test and is at best a sort of psychological chewing gum, many people—especially those who find themselves in a physical or emotional crisis in their lives—take it all too seriously. This is why we ask that daily astrology columns and the coverage of astrological forecasts be presented (and clearly labeled) as entertainment. When the media’s coverage of astrology leads people to base serious decisions on its predictions, then astrology is no longer a game, and can be dangerous—especially in the areas of politics and economics.

The world is advancing with the assistance of science and technology. Yet notions may be endangered by the growth and persistence of pseudoscientific attitudes in large sectors of the public. If we are to cope with the complicated problems of our time, then we need to use the best critical intelligence we can muster, and not seek to escape into a superstitious mythology that originated in our primitive past, when we still huddled around the campfire, afraid of the night.

© 1988 by the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal.

Paul Kurtz is Chairman of the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal (CSICOP), and Professor of Philosophy at the State University of New York at Buffalo. USA

Andrew Fraknoi is Executive Officer of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific and a CSICOP Fellow. USA

U.S. Newspapers Carrying Disclaimers with Their Astrology Columns