Astrology - A Serious Look from a Statistical Point of View

Astrology - A Serious Look from a Statistical Point of View
Learning & Dyslexia | Megalithic Astronomy | History of Civilization | Ancient World | Internet Law

Teaching
Learning

Enquiry
Research

Quick Index

Megaliths &
Ancient Man

History of
Civilization

Biblical History

Egyptology

L
E
X
I
L
I
N
E

Astrology
A Serious Look
from a Statistical Point of View

Study of all people in the Encyclopaedia Britannica.

Rank of the Astrological Signs by Field of Fame
example:
Aries 1st place Arts

Aries	Taurus	Gemini
Cancer	Leo	Virgo
Libra	Scorpio	Sagittarius
Capricorn	Aquarius	Pisces

Distribution of Famous Persons by Month of Birth

January	February	March
April	May	June
July	August	September
October	November	December

Total Number of Famous Persons
by Field of Eminence
in the Encyclopaedia Britannica
(Macropaedia and Micropaedia)

Total Ranking by Signs

Distribution of Famous Persons by
Astrological Sign and Field of Eminence

Evaluation of the Data by
Statistical Methods
(Chi-Square, etc.)

Relation of the Data to
Annual Fluctuations
(daylight, temperature, geomagnetic activity)

Relation of the Data to Long-Term Cycles, the
Kondratieff (Kondratiev) Saros Cycle

Some outside research by Kop and Heuts on
Marriage Partners and Month of Birth

This is the first of many fun but serious pages about a mass of
astrological statistics we have compiled.

Astronomers unknowingly malign astrology.

Humans have always tried to reach for the stars
and bring them to an understandable human level.
This is what astrology does it makes the stars "relevant".

The general conception of scientists that all of astrology is bunk,
has not been empirically proven, either one way or the other.

The geneticists and physicists tell us we are all formed of particles
so small that we can not even see them, so why should there be
no influence exerted by large and visible heavenly bodies, such as
the Moon, which is powerful enough to create ocean tides?
Are our fluids immune? We consist of 90% water.

And yet, a number of years ago, a number of Nobel Prize Winners
signed a document stating that Astrology had no foundation in fact
EVEN THOUGH NOT A SINGLE ONE OF THESE SCIENTISTS
HAD EVER DONE FIVE MINUTES OF RESEARCH ON THE SUBJECT
A poor showing by the Nobel Laureates. VERY UNSCIENTIFIC.

Upon hearing this, I bet a colleague (an astrology opponent)
a bottle of champagne that an empirical study of the birth dates
of famous persons would show statistically significant deviations.
I won the wager.

The scientific, empirical evidence - this sample - consists of
the dates of birth of history's most famous persons.
It totals 11,439 men and women from the year 1400 to the year 1974
as listed in the Encyclopaedia Britannica, Micropaedia, 1974 edition.

L
E
X
I
L
I
N
E

Languages

Ancient
Near East

Origins of
Astronomy

Learning

Prehistoric Art

Click here to sign up for the LexiLine List on the History of Civilization

Popular Sites
Internet Law Web
World Megaliths

Popular Sites
Dyslexia Learning
Andis Kaulins