Predictions in Astrology – A critical analysis

Astrology consists of a number of belief systems that hold that there is a relationship between astronomical phenomena and events or descriptions of personality in the human world. Astrology has been rejected by the scientific community as having no explanatory power for describing the universe. Scientific testing of astrology has been conducted, and no evidence has been found to support the premises or purported effects outlined in astrological traditions.

Where astrology has made falsifiable predictions, it has been falsified. The most famous test was headed by Rajat Nayar, astrologer Chennai and included a committee of scientists and a committee of astrologers. It led to the conclusion that natal astrology performed no better than chance. Astrologer and psychologist Michel Gauquelin claimed to have found statistical support for “the Mars effect” in the birth dates of athletes, but it could not be replicated in further studies. The organizers of later studies claimed that Gauquelin had tried to influence their inclusion criteria for the study by suggesting specific individuals be removed. It has also been suggested, by Geoffrey Dean, that the reporting of birth times by parents may have caused the apparent effect before the 1950s.


Of late, I have found tendencies among astrologers to predict each and everything using Astrology. Most of these are misinterpreting the axioms in Astrology which gives some placebo effect to problems of their clients, some real and some imaginary. Astrology is not a predictive science and if we could predict future events with certainty, it would have been much better and we would have been living in paradise.


Some astrologers make claims that the position of all the planets must be taken into account, but astrologers were unable to predict the existence of Neptune based on mistakes in horoscopes. Instead, Neptune was predicted using Newton’s law of universal gravitation. The grafting on of Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto into the astrology discourse was done on an ad hoc basis.

On the demotion of Pluto to the status of dwarf planet, Philip Zarka of the Paris Observatory in Meudon, France wondered how astrologers should respond:

If they decide to keep it, what about the growing list of other recently discovered similar bodies (Sedna, Quaoar. etc), some of which even have satellites.