The Waterbury Democrat., 1931-07-31
HISTOLOGY FAKE
 SCIENTISTS SAY
Noted Astronomers Say There Is No Basis What
 eyer for Claims

Predicting the future Dy eazinS at the stars is just as impossible as 1t is by peering at mess or lea leaves or shuffing a deck Of cards Yet, though the official attitude toward these humber forms or soothsaying Is pretty strict in some places. the astrologers are allowed to wax rich at the expense or the credulous.
 over large part of the United States. from two to twenty times a week, the air carries the pom. ous. pseudo scientific parlance or tha radio astrologers. The Federal Trade commission, which has been active in prosecuting sponsors Of fradulent printed advertising, and the Federal Radio commission. which is empowered to control radio for the "convenience. inter. est. and necessity of the public, have not prevented the astrologers from entertaining their listen ers-and getting their money-py telling them when and whom 10 marry. when and how to play the stock market, and whether or not to have their appendix out. NOT have the postal authorities stopped inc imnosters from fieecing the nmblic. despite the fact that the mails carry the bulk of the radlo astrologers' bogus predictions. which include great deai oh dangerous, fraudulent medical ao-
 Why are these chalatans permit ted to continue their questionable nra ctices and victimize an increas- inr number of gullible, supersti- tious and uninformed persons! IHe reason probably Is that their oft- reneated claims that they work on "scientific principles" are pellevea bv many of those who make anu enforce our laws, whites Jesse r' Geiders in the September Fopu- lar Science Monthly.
 Is there any truth m tnese claims? To obtain an autnornaa- na . five answer to that question; tne writer called upon group oL IeC. ognized scientists, whose IIe woIh is to study the stars and penetr@a1e @ the mysteries of the universe; IHe group include Professor ns Schlesinger, of the departmeIS - astromy at Yale University, .,t,, D !. cS nhvsics at New York University; professor E. w. Brown, of the de- rartment of astronomy at faie, ana president of the American Astronomical society; Dr Clyde Eisher. curator of astronomy or ina American Museum of Naturai History. and president of the Ama- : teur Astronomers association; Dr n. Brouwer, of the department or astronomy at Yale; Professor Henry Norris Russell, and Profess nor John stewart, of the depart ment of astronomy at Princeton' Professor George P. Pegram. or the department of physics at Columo oi,t' and w. J. Eckert, instructor III astronomy at Columbia.
 These men of science are unan- iy,ous in declaring that there IS no scientific basis whatever for tne Reductions and predictions maue hv the astrologers, and that there arc no known forces or innuehces such as the astrologers ascripe to the stars and planets.
 Professor Schlesinger. or fale, voiced the opinion of the sciehliste when he expressed himself 10 tnS affect that astrology is "the bunk, and that most astrologers are we'' aware of that fact.
 If there were any pasis TOT as trology, astronomers would be very glad to know of it," he said. some of us have gone into 1t. l nave, and I have come to the conciusion D that there is no basis for US claims. I believe that most astro- Iogers are conscious charlatans.
 Professor Emeritus Herring, or New York University, also mas made a personal investigation or astrology. Two words sufficed nm to characterize 1t. He iouno u 'Inconsistent and absurd"