On the balance - Astrology makes accurate predictions

There are three major problems with Pro's argument relative to the definition Pro gave for Astrology in round 1. "Astrology is any system that uses heavenly bodies in relation to ones birth to predict possible outcomes for an individual. Heavenly bodies are most commonly refereed to, but not limited to, the Earth, Sun, Moon, planets, and stars." 1) Fundamentals of the Chinese Zodiac are wrong Pro asserts that different animals on the Chinese Zodiac are related to different months of the year. As I discussed in my previous round (see Brief Introduction to Chinese Astrology/Zodiac), the Chinese Zodiac assigns signs/animals based on what year a person is born. Every single link I gave in round 3 confirms this. 2) Not related to the position of heavenly bodies Pro simply argued that the older children in the class will preform better than the younger children in the class. The age of a child in class is not entirely affected by the position of heavenly bodies relative to their birth. For example, a child may be held back a year or start school a year late. These children would be predicted to perform well regardless of the month they were born, because they would be older than their classmates. There are other influences on possible outcomes other than the position of heavenly bodies. For example, domestic violence at home is likely to cause a child to perform worse than their peers at academics and social interactions [1]. This has no relationship to any heavenly body, including what time of year an individual is born. Obviously, to make the predictions Pro claims, astrologers must know more than just the relationship of the heavenly bodies relative to ones birth. They must also know about the home environment, age cutoff for school, and other factors that influence child performance. Clearly, this does not meet the definition for Astrology that Pro gave in round 1. 3) Doesn't limit possible outcomes Pro's argument asserts that an individual is more likely to succeed if born in a certain month. This prediction is too general. According to the sources I gave in round 3, Chinese Astrology attempts to predict what type of career is best for an individual, but Pro's form of prediction can't get close to attempting that. Pro gives two examples where the oldest kids in the class are expected to perform best at whatever it is they are doing, not one specific category. Because it is a statistical prediction, exceptions to the rule are acceptable. A child's performance does not always correlate to their age relative to their peers. So again, we end up with a scientific prediction, not an astrological prediction. One closing note. The predictions that Pro has put forth are not made by any popular form of Astrology that I could find. Pro did not include one reference to a pro-Astrology source. If Pro is using Astrology, it appears to be so obscure as to not have a name. It is as if it is a form of Astrology that Pro invented in order to meet his own definition of Astrology, even though I have shown that Pro is using science, not Astrology. Thanks for debating me, medv4380. Good luck in the future. 1) http://educationnext.org...