No. No it doesn’t. Never has. Never will, and it’s really easy to show that to doesn’t with just a few people and scrambling the astrological fortunes or mis-labeling their astrological signs. It’s all bunk.
Sure, anyone can look around and see anecdotal evidence that Astrology is nonsense, but it’s nice to have a large statistical data set cleanly proving it.
Normally I’d agree with you but I really don’t think we need empirical data to prove that the time of year someone is born in doesn’t affect their personality decades later, or that the position of celestial bodies relative to another doesn’t cause anyone to have “bad luck” (whatever the fuck that means in scientific terms)
Isn’t the biggest sign that astrology is bullshit because over time the night sky is shifting and “scorpio” people are for example actually “pisces” or whatever?
I mean the other thing is that you can read 4 newspapers and they tell 4 different stories about astrology, but somehow people just believe the thing they like.
The worst thing with pseudosciences and mystics is that they claim that “its a subtle art. It’s not supposed to be 100% accurate. It’s a guideline” and it prays on peoples naivety.
Unfortunately hard facts are not going to convince believers
This test was well thought. It doesn’t allow astrologers and astrology believers to change goalposts afterwards, the lack of impact of experience on the results further shows that no skill is being developed, and if the h₀ (astrology doesn’t work) was incorrect the test would show it.
You’re not gonna do well on this study if you get all the answers from Uranus.
