On the balance - Astrology makes accurate predictions

Introduction Thank you for taking this challenge. Also, thank you for defining Astrology. I often take definitions for granted. For example, I used the phrase, "On the balance" which implies that we share a burden of proof. In the case of Astrology, a prediction is a testable claim made about the future. Obviously, we cannot debate future events. Given that Astrology was formulated a long time ago, I don't expect to argue that predictions made by Astrology were made after the fact. Clarification I hope that it can be inferred from my topic and the challenge description in round 1 that I did not intend to say that there are zero predictions made by Astrology that are accurate. After all, the chance that I will get a prediction correct goes up with the number of predictions I make, and Astrology makes a lot of predictions, each applying to a large group of individuals. The number of predictions is even higher when given the consideration that there are many forms of Astrology, and Pro has included all of them in his definition of Astrology. Rather, if we were to enumerate all the predictions made by Astrology and to pick one at random, Astrologers would expect that the probability of that prediction being true is either 100% or close to 100%. However, such an experiment has not, to my knowledge, been conducted, and we have no database of predictions to draw from. Therefore, the most reasonable way forward is for the two of us to select predictions we feel best support our case. I hope this is not a deal breaker for you. If this clarification causes you stress, I will agree to a tie debate at your request. Opening Arguments Berkley University set out to test the claims of Astrology [1]. In their analysis, they stated that many of the claims made by Astrology are not testable claims. So they took a few of those that are and put them to the test and found them false. For example, Astrology makes claims about which Zodiac signs make the best leaders: Aries, Cancer, Libra and Capricorn [2]. Most people who have heard about Astrology understand that Astrology provides a daily horoscope based on one's sign which was determined by their time of birth. Astrology provides multiple signs based on one's time of birth, most of which are tied to a specific heavenly body. The daily horoscope is usually based on the sign assigned to the Sun. One very tantalizing test is to examine the signs related to US presidents. The Berkley study showed random variation of the Sun signs of the presidents [1]. One website that supports Astrology gives a detailed analysis of the Sun, Moon, and Mars signs for presidents, and gives statistical analysis for the findings [3]. The lack of statistical significance of Sun signs is agreed on. What the analyzer points out when you total the signs for these three bodies, there are statistical outliers. We would expect the signs of leaders to stand out. Here is a table of their results. I have listed them from most common to least common, putting an * after the four signs that are predicted to be leaders by their sign. For some reason when I use the table HTML tag, it shows a lot of blank space in, so I have provided this table at the very bottom of my argument after the references. There is an even distribution of leader signs in this analysis. The highest ranked leadership sign is Capricorn in third place. The lowest ranked leadership sign is Pisces tied for last place. This does not stop the author of the study from agreeing with Astrology. He looks at the data and reasons backwards from the data as to why the signs that are common, even applying logic to specific points in time. For example, According to the historical patterns, having the Moon or Mars in Pisces is a definite negative. Having the Sun in Pisces isn't so good either, since all four presidents with their Sun in Pisces held office in the nation's first century. George Washington (1788), James Madison (1808), Andrew Jackson (1832), and Grover Cleveland (1884) were our only Pisces presidents, and it may be that the Pisces natural selflessness doesn't come across as being assertive or bold enough in more modern times. Although the author is a good source of reliable information about the signs of the presidents, the author fails to show that any of the outcomes of the presidents lives were predicted by Astrology. However, when we look at the predictions made by Astrology and compare them with the data presented, they do not match. John H. McGrew and Richard M. McFall from the Psychology Department of Indiana University conducted a small test in which astrologers were given full details of 23 volunteers lives and were asked to match them with their birth charts. The conclusion was that the astrologers failed to do better than chance. They also failed to do better than non-astrologers who attempted the same task. Furthermore, they failed to agree with each others predictions with any degree of statistical significance [4]. In my research, I have found that scientific evidence for Astrology isn't agreed upon by different astrologers. For example, try asking the question which zodiac signs are most likely to commit murder. According to one source, the Sun sign for murders are Gemini, Virgo, Sagittarius and Pisces [5]. According to another source, there is no link between the Sun sign and murders whatsoever. It is mostly the Mars sign that matters, and how it interacts with the moon sign [6]. Consequently, it is important that studies that show the predictions made by Astrology are accurate are reproducible. Wikipedia gives one example of a study done by an astronomer which showed a relationship between athletes and their Mars sign. It has yet to be reproduced [7]. So when we look for scientific evidence for Astrology, we need to use the same criteria we use to test other scientific claims: 1) There is a prediction made 2) The prediction is falsifiable when tested 3) The test is reproducible I have already shown that astrologers don't always agree with each other when making predictions. They have also invalidated each others scientific claims. The sources I have given that favor Astrology all use backward reasoning; they create their predictions from the observed data instead of the other way around. Again, I apologize for the table being so far down. I couldn't figure out how to fix the spacing issue. 1) http://undsci.berkeley.edu... 2) http://astrology.about.com... 3) http://www.neptunecafe.com... 4) http://www.scientificexploration.org... 5) http://www.nvwoa.nl... 6) http://www.astrologyresearchjournal.org... 7) http://en.wikipedia.org... Sign Sun Mars Moon Total Leo 3 10 4 17 Scorpio 5 7 4 16 Capricorn* 4 4 6 14 Taurus 4 3 6 13 Aquarius 5 3 3 11 Libra* 4 4 3 11 Virgo 2 5 4 11 Cancer* 4 2 4 10 Sagittarius 3 2 4 8 Gemini 2 1 4 7 Aries 2 1 1 4 Pisces* 4 0 0 4