Previous attempts to quantify the agreement between astrologers’ keywords for the planets and the Gauquelins’ independently derived lists of planetary traits have been marred by the use of less than ideal data. A fresh analysis, with new data and a different method, is presented here. The results show quite high, non-random agreement, especially for Mars, Saturn and Moon though arguments are also presented for regarding the measurements as only rough estimates. Improvement in astrologers’ accuracy over time was anticipated but the evidence supporting it was slight.

The author’s previous research with M. and F. Gauquelin data confirmed the existence of planetary effects for eminent professionals. However, the present research casts doubt on Gauquelin’s physical explanation. (1) For sports champions the planetary effect was unrelated to astronomical variables (distance of Mars from Earth, its angular size, apparent magnitude, declination, right ascension, solar elongation, and radius vector). Further, the effect did not diminish during Mars-Sun conjunctions. (2) For ordinary people, Gauquelin’s claim that geomagnetic activity enhanced the planetary correspondence between children and parents was not supported. Nor did the planetary effect for eminent professionals covary with geomagnetic activity. lt seems that Gauquelin’s positive results with geomagnetism are due to random oscillations. (3) Gauquelin’s claim that planetary effects decrease after 1950 – a presumed side-effect of applying obstetric drugs – could not be veried with professionals’ data. However, the number of post-1950 births was insufficent for a definite conclusion. (4) The accuracy of birth times on official documents increased markedly through decades 1830 – 1950 but produced no corrresponding increase in planetary birth frequencies. In the light of these results, Gauquelin’s midwife hypothesis, seems to be untenable, in which case an interpretation of planetary effects in terms of physics and physiology must be replaced by something else.

An exploratory investigation is reported in which physiognomic evidence for seasonal alternant-sign periodicity with predictable directionality was sought in the photographic portraits of Caucasoid and Negroid males. The portraits, which were taken from published biographical directories that also list birth dates, were examined for specific physiognomic traits that were postulated to be characteristic of either the odd-numbered sun signs (or solar months), traditionally associated with extraversion (E), or the even numberred sun signs, associated with introversion (I). The results are corroborative, but the method is not without its shortcomings: (1) the test instrument, which consists of several thousand small photographic portraits mounted on 3 x 5 inch cards, required much time and effort to prepare and cannot easily be reproduced for replication studies; (2) judges with sufficient talent and motivation to learn face reading are rare; (3) despite repeated efforts, a unitary physiognomic trait capable of dichotomizing the protratis was not found and it was only by weighing several traits in each face simultaneously that significant scores could be achieved; (4) the proprotion of photographic subjects with prototypic faces is small (less than 10% for each polarity); (5) a small but significant excess of smiling faces was found among the E sign portraits, so the possibility of cueing by astrologoically sophisticated photographic subjects cannot be excluded.

The breadown of the French population according to the culminating and rising degrees at the time of birth is strikingly uneven. Out of 56 million population, we show that the most frequently observed combination is Sun in Cancer with Leo rising (617,000 occurrences) versus the less frequently observed Sun in Saggitarius with Aries rising (155,000 occurrences). In a similar wein, it is estimated that 3 million French people living today are born with Pluto in their descendant, while 6 million of them are born with Pluto rising. A degree of disparity had been anticipated, but not to that extent. In this respect our study brings a valuable contribution. The results are disconcerting to both the statistician and the astrologer, and they lead to several questions. For instance, are these disparities taken into account in the samplings used by astrological research? Our study could also lead to the determination of a national astrological collective profile, refelcting the seasonality of births as well as astronomical factors.

This study reports a test of the astrological prediction that extraversion is increased by being born with the Sun in one of the odd-numbered tropical zodiacal signs, and introversion by being born with the Sun in one of the even-numbered zodiacal signs. Also tested was the hypothesis that greater emotionality is linked to being born with the Sun in one of the so-called water signs. A sample of 572 Indian boys and 618 Indian girls were administered the Junior Personality Inventory and their birth dates ascertained. Results supported the prediction for neuroticism for boys and girls separately and jointly. But the hypothesis concerning Extraversion was not supported in the total sample.

In this article the concepts of symbolism, chronicity and archetype are reviewed with a rational and critical eye; we show that they have no sound scientific basis and rather constitute fashionable, literary notions, which eventually undermine astrology and strengthen its opponents’ arguments.

Ten scientific studies of the correlation between sun sign and the Eysenck personality dimensions, Extraversion and Neuroticism are briefly reviewed. Four produced positive results and for statistical or methodological reason, even these are not clealry supportive of the hypotheses tested. Smithers’ 1981 study is examined and found to be methododologically flawed.

The ‘Mars effect’ identified by Gauquelin is controversial, and has been challenged by various studies. The present study reanlyses French data (Benski et al ‘The Mars Effect’: A French Test of Over 1000 Sports Champions. Amherst NY: Prometheus) which, apparently, rejected the Mars hypothesis. The French data included 1,066 sports champions obtained from studying two biographical sources. Mathematical calculations by the Dutch statistician Nienhuys corrected for the effect of a wrong expectancy.
Ertel further investigates the possibility that some of the sports champions were not eminent enough to be included for study, since their names were listed in only one of the biographies of eminent sports people (this posssiblity was investigated by CFEPP for only 2 of 36 sports disciplines). Ertel identifies “supreme eminence” of some 300 sports champions, in that they were listed in both biographical sources. These men and women did indicate a statistically significant Mars effect (p = .02). Ertel then asked various researchers to check his data and calculations. Six scholars responded and all confirmed Ertel’s data counts. Four of these experts also confirmed Ertel’s statistical model and calculations.

After covering the relations bewteen neo-astrology and various branches of science, the author discusses the present and possible impact of astrology and astrological research on those disciplines which study science itself. Some of the current literature is considered and the paper concludes by reviewing the current state of the “Mars effect” controversy, and its implications.

Following the collapse of Communism in Russia in the early 1990s there has been a surge in religious interest and observance. However, because of many decades of atheistic indoctrination, knowledge of religion is poor and many people instead are turning to a variety of mystical and new age belief systems. There has been a considerable rise in interest in astrology, as ordinary people explore a variety of new age and metaphysical beliefs.