On the balance - Astrology makes accurate predictions

Many wise astrologers have a saying 'The stars impel; They do not compel.'[5] I wish I had the original source for it, but it's such an old, and common quote it's most likely lost to the flow of time.Here are some reasons to vote Pro, and against Con.Statistical Significance:My opponent has made a few claims, but hasn't presented any statistically significant data to support his claim. Now if astrology made the claim that the predictions were absolute then maybe his flawed data would be valid. However, astrology, and myself, never made any absolute claim. When an astrology says that the stars impel they mean that there is a force persuading you to perform, or behave a particular way, but other influences in your life have impact as well.The data that my opponent has presented is completely invalid. I warned him about the invalidity of such samples in hopes that he'd take some time, and find a sufficient sample. It's not as if a sufficient sample was outside of his grasp. There are too few US Presidents, but there is plenty of US Senators if you include the last 700 hundred. What do we know anecdotal about the Senate? If it were me I would say that extremists have a harder time getting into the Senate than they do getting into the house. So which astrological sign is known for political extremism in Western Astrology? Since my opponent has such difficulty elsewhere. Aries would be a pretty safe bet.[6]This took a while to put together since the only easy list of US Senators with birthday is only of the latest 100. Then Excel doesn't like dates earlier than 1900 so you have to do a bit of extra work to get a truly significant sample. I wasn't sure if I'd have the time to get enough of a dataset, but I was so I ended up with two charts.The first is a chart of the probability of a US Senator being born 6 months from the starting month. The sample size is just over 700 so there isn't much doubt in what each chart shows. At least for the senators elected over the last 100 years. The Second chart shows each month on its own. Most months have over 60 samples, and all of them exceed 30 which I stated was the minimum needed to even consider making a claim. As you can see April, Aries, has an odd dip. Is the dip there because Spring makes people crazy as The Journal of Psychology suggested in 1997[7]. Is April just the latest date for a Relative Age Effect caused by the GOP and DNC conventions in June to August, and if so why is May unaffected? The correct answer requires a lot more data, and research. However, that doesn't discount the ability for Astrology to predict it. Only the ability for Astrology to claim the cause. There are statistical tests like a Box and Whiskers analysis[8] that will easily show that April is an outlier that should be looked at.My claims have more significance than anything my opponent has presented, and what my opponent has presented as "significance" is little more than the significance found in the AntiVax data based off of only 12 cherry picked cases. Why he insisted on US Presidents despite it being statistically invalid is beyond me.Accuracy of Facts:I don't know why opponent is ignorant of Chinese Astrology, but he has no excuse given that I provided a perfectly valid link to explain things for him. I know most Westerners are ignorant of Chinese astrology having Monthly, Hourly signs, and many more. However, it's not that hard to look up, and since I provided a link explain as such he has no excuse.So here's a few more links for him to educate himself.http://bonniemd.hubpages.com...or how about the wikihttp://en.wikipedia.org..."In fact, there are also animal signs assigned by month (called inner animals), by day (called true animals) and hours (called secret animals).'If my opponent wants to debate astrology then the onus is on him to educate himself about the subject before to ensure a good debate. If he wants to claim that my knowledge of astrology is flawed them perhaps he shouldn't have exposed his complete ignorance of the subject that can be quickly, and easily confirmed with a search.Reverse Causation:Finally my opponent failed to respond to my claim with Mayan Astrology. What the Mayans clearly demonstrated was a case of reverse causation. Their belief in something actually caused the effect. Belief might sound insignificant, but it's actually why things like the placebo, and nocebo effect work. This ensures a level of predictability in Astrology as long as people use it.I'd like to thank my opponent even though he should have taken more time to do some actual research on the subject.Finally, thank you to the voters, and vote Pro. [5] http://books.google.com...='The%20stars%20impel%3B%20they%20do%20not%20compel'%20source&f=false[6] http://www.alwaysastrology.com...[7] http://www.oprah.com...[8] http://www.purplemath.com...