We never know what can inspire us to write new blog. While surfing through different blogs, I come across a blog on astrology. In 21st century, when we already landed on moon and planning to send man on mars, here is one person like millions other who is advocating Astrology as Science.

People believe all sorts of things, it does not bother me until their belief are against Humanity or Science. Astrology is definitely against Science. As long as you keep it away from science and enjoy reading your horoscope or make a tattoo of your Zodiac it hardly bother anyone. However, when you claim, astronomy is science; you need to produce evidence. Moreover, extra ordinary claims require extra ordinary evidence. So, where are the evidence?

I received a links in support of astronomy being science. Let me present to you their analysis



It gives checklist to compare astrology with Science as below:


Focuses on the natural world?
Astrology’s basic premise is that heavenly bodies — the sun, moon, planets, and constellations — have influence over or are correlated with earthly events.


First, Planets are different from moon and sun. Sun is actually a Star like billions other stars in our galaxy. People who invented astrology didn’t knew that planet revolves around sun and not earth. How they can measure planet influence correctly if they did not know correct position of earth, sun, moon and planets respective to each other?


Aims to explain the natural world?
Astrology uses a set of rules about the relative positions and movements of heavenly bodies to generate predictions and explanations for events on Earth and human personality traits. For example, some forms of astrology predict that a person born just after the spring equinox is particularly likely to become an entrepreneur.



When you make a prediction, there must be a certain degree of certainty. Just stating that person is “likely” to become an entrepreneur is mere a guess-work. Astrology explain nothing with high degree of certainty. Thus, it can’t be considered as science.


Uses testable ideas?
Some expectations generated by astrology are so general that any outcome could be interpreted as fitting the expectations; if treated this way, astrology is not testable. However, some have used astrology to generate very specific expectations that could be verified against outcomes in the natural world. For example, according to astrology, one’s zodiac sign impacts one’s ability to command respect and authority. Since these traits are important in politics, we might expect that if astrology really explained people’s personalities, scientists would be more likely to have zodiac signs that astrologers describe as “favorable” towards science.1 If used to generate specific expectations like this one, astrological ideas are testable.


The above point refutes itself as “astrology is not testable” . If some theory can make a prediction, it must be true in most of the cases, but if we find few cases, which goes against it, the whole theory is wrong.

Relies on evidence?


Once again, the above point proved that astrology is not science as evidence did not support astrological ideas.

Involves the scientific community?


Any article which is not peer-reviewed cannot be considered as scientific paper.


Leads to ongoing research?


A correct theory must produce some new discoveries. Astrology has produced none in thousand years of its existence.

Researchers behave scientifically?

No test, no evidence, no Science.

Truth about Astrology:

 (Source: http://www.thedailystar.net/is-astrology-science-or-pseudoscience-37018)

The horoscope shows the position of the Sun, planets and the Moon relative to the twelve constellations of the zodiac as they were thousands of years ago. Since then, change in the orientation of the Earth’s rotational axis due to precession shifted the position of the ecliptic—path of the Sun against the background of stars. Consequently, the location of the constellations in the sky changed. They no longer correspond with the constellations in the horoscope.

As an example, astrologically I am an Aquarius because the Sun is believed to have been located in that sign at the moment of my birth. But that was thousands of years ago. In the year I was born the Sun was in Capricorn, not in Aquarius.

Astrologers divided up the year equally, ignoring variations in the size of the constellations. Since Virgo is huge, they chopped some of its sky and added it along with bits of Scorpio to the tiny Libra to bring it up to size. Astronomers call it “equal-opportunity swindling.”

There are currently thirteen zodiacal constellations, not twelve. Astrologers have ignored the thirteenth one, Ophiuchus, because they believe that this constellation was invented by the astronomers to bedevil them.

Unfortunately, people put their trust on the predictions and advices offered by the astrologers without demanding proof or verification. By doing so, they are not gaining any real knowledge. Instead, their blind faith on the prophecies shows a lack of understanding of what science is and of the distinction between scientific theory and faith-based convictions. Many careful tests have shown that, despite their extraordinary claims, astrologers really can’t predict anything.

Astrologers sometimes argue that astrology is based on statistics and may not, therefore, be accurate for an individual. If their claim is true, then there should be a correlation between astrological lore and the different signs under which a person is born. Scientists have made serious attempts to test this hypothesis, but no correlation has ever been found.


Click here to read PART-II


Read more on same website: http://www.thedailystar.net/is-astrology-science-or-pseudoscience-37018