Finally Statistics Says Something Positive About Astrology

[Mersenne]

For the attention of the Forum.

By now you all know that statistics can be used to say something useful about Astrology. But, this has always been on statistics' own terms- addressing only a single issue, with all possible data, and with stern caveats about the conclusions.

What if, however, we relax the requirement that a specific issue be addressed? What if, instead of asking "do these 5,000 horoscopes from tax inspectors have some feature in common" we ask "out of all 70,000 horoscopes, do all strongly positive and strongly negative features tend to display the regularities we expect of a single horoscope?"

If so, then of all the possible angular separations between Planets and Points, we would expect the traditional Aspects to stand out. We would expect these Aspects to be different when a Planet is a Chart Ruler than otherwise. We would expect the Cusps, the Signs, and the Angles to have some significance, to poke above the mean, to make themselves known through the noise.

Well, as it turns out... yes. When all the horoscopes in all the datasets are put into fairly broad categories, and positive and negative angular contributions are tallied, support is found for all the traditional components of Astrology, Planets, Points, Signs, Houses and Rulerships.

If you quote from the above, please credit as follows, along with the date you access the file:

Mersenne the Astrologer (2019). In Support of Traditional Astrology. C/O the Astrologers' Forum, posted 19/08/2019.

Kindest regards,

Mersenne.