MICHEL AND FRANCOISE GAUQUELIN; SCIENTIFIC STUDY OF ASTROLOGY.
The Scientific Coverup: Denying Astrology's Validity
Jacob Schwartz
"Is astrology true or is it nonsense exploited by people simply taking advantage of a gullible public?" This was the question a young French statistician, Michel Gauquelin, attending the prestigious Sorbonne University in the early 1950's posed to his fellow student, later girlfriend, then wife and research collaborator, Francoise Schneider. "Why don't we send for one of these computerized horoscope interpretations using birth data from a really nasty criminal and see if the report ever mentions a life of crime and violence, eh?" he asks. Little do they realize, but they would later become the first scientists in history to demonstrate astrology to be valid beyond the shadow of a doubt, risking their academic reputations by presenting irrefutable data proving that astrology can predict occupational success based upon the birth horoscope!
Fooling the Astrology Report Service
"That's a wonderful idea. Let's use the birth data of the mass murderer the police recently caught," Francoise replied. "The newspapers gave his birthdate. And French law dictates that birth times be recorded for every birth. So we'll request, from the province where he was born, a copy of the public record of his birth. We'll get his birth time, and send away for the astrological report based upon an accurate date, time and place of birth."
And that's just what they did. Francoise and Michel, pretending as though the birth data for this murderer was one of their own, mailed the data and the money for the computerized report. They disguised the name connected with the data because they did not want the computer company to suspect that the actual murderer, whose name was very prominent in the press at the time, was requesting the chart. Scientists as they were, they did not want to encourage any bias to affect the report.
A few weeks later, the report arrived in the mail. The young, enthusiastic researchers impatiently opened the package containing the bound report. They closely scanned every line looking for reference to crime, violence, or murder. They found none. On the contrary, they found glowing references to love, fair dealings, success, and public admiration, a collection of flattering references; telling what they think others want to read about themselves. Not one negative character trait.
"That's too bad. We've been deceived. But I wonder," murmured Francoise, "whether there is some validity to astrology. After all, the connection between cosmic activity and human experience has been popular since Babylonian times five thousand years ago. We're statisticians, we can accumulate and analyze lots of data," she said as her eyes began to sparkle with enthusiasm for an impending scientific discovery, "perhaps we should do some original research demonstrating whether or not astrology is valid at all."
Do Sun Signs Alone Predict Success?
"Most people know the zodiac sign for their Sun. My father dabbled into astrology," Michel replied, "and astrology is much more complicated than the Sun signs. But that's a start. It would be difficult to collect all the data, but when we're finished we can make clear, definitive statements. We could collect the birth data for a large number of people successful in certain occupations, and see if the Sun sign correlates and thus predicts occupational success."
"Isn't Aries supposed to be good for very aggressive types like military leaders; and Leo is connected with egotists like dictators, conductors, and actors who always take the limelight. Taurus and Scorpio would be good for bankers, maybe, Gemini for sales people and writers, and so forth. Anyway let us look at some astrology books, Michel, and see what occupations are associated with what zodiac Sun signs. Then once we have a list of these traits and thousands of birth dates and times and places, we can identify statistically significant differences. We'll let the scientific world know of our findings and make all the raw data available."
They carefully gathered data for thousands of successful people, compared it with the Sun signs, and discovered there was no statistically significant correlation between Sun signs and success in given occupations. Musicians, for example, were no more likely to have their Sun in Pisces, a sign associated with music, than any other sign. If fact, none of the ten occupational groups listed, from athletes to writers, from soldiers to actors, had any significantly larger proportion in one sign versus another. That finding was true in the 1950's as well as the late 1970's when the research was repeated on a different population.
Schools Universally Reject Astrology
Except for a very rare teacher, we're all taught in school, from elementary grades to colleges, to ignore astrology except to ridicule the subject and its devotees, or to regard astrology strictly as amusement no more valid than Chinese fortune cookies. The academicians label astrology superstitious, a pseudo-science, and with no objective validity, or even worse. Invariably the detractor knows nothing about astrology and bases their judgments upon a scientific prejudice or upon what they have heard from their own teachers.
Defending Astrology
Some of the popular arguments against astrology are that the world can't be divided into only twelve groups corresponding to the Sun signs. In reply, astrology is hardly limited to Sun signs. A horoscope is a unique document based on a date, time, and place of birth. In addition to Sun signs, we have Moon signs, rising signs, Mercury signs and so forth. What about twins, the skeptics ask, they sometimes lead very different lives. That's true and twins born a few minutes apart can have different rising signs because the rising degree (the ascendant) changes one degree every four minutes of time, and changes signs every two hours, and each degree and sign of the zodiac has a different meaning.
There are hundreds of studies showing twins separated at birth later getting after more than 20 years apart, comparing their life histories and discovering that they married, divorced, had children, changed residences and occupations at the same time. This is widely documented in a recent book by William Wright in Born That Way. Our natal horoscope describes being born that way.
For another thing, skeptics will point out, the gravitational impact of the Sun and Moon and planets are so much smaller than the gravitational pull of people, and the strength of lights, in the delivery room. But before we nod in support of the scientists making this comparison, let's look carefully at what's being said. A scientist often sets up a simple, and quite naive model, and then shoots down the model to conclude astrology is invalid. The scientist assumes that the effects of planets at birth is due to gravity or light, neither assumption ever given by astrologers to account for planetary effect. Even worse, this naive and unscientific approach remains unquestioned by students and colleagues, and is then passed from one generation to others and gradually evolves into a statement of truth.
Gauquelins Pioneering Discoveries Supporting Astrology
"Even though Sun signs don't predict occupations, maybe," the Gauquelins thought, "planetary positions in the horoscope can predict occupational success. Remember, a horoscope requires all three ingredients: date, time, and place of birth." And so, the Gauquelins began the stupendous task of collecting horoscopes of thousands of persons who, by stringent criteria, were determined successful.
They were able to conclusively demonstrate that, just as the ancient teachers of astrology had maintained, outstanding individuals in varying professions are more likely than not born when specific planets are close to the horizon and the meridian axes.
The Angles
The four points on the ascendant and meridian axes are referred to as the angles by astrologers. The ascendant and descendant describe the eastern and western horizon points respectively. Planets rise in the east and set in the west. Nothing of importance in your personal and social life happens without the ascendant and descendant being involved! Other names for the same points are the rising sign and the setting sign, synonymously the cusps of the first house and the seventh house.
The meridian axis is the vertical line rising from the place of birth to cross the path of the Sun, or the ecliptic, at its highest and lowest points. The highest point in the zodiac at any time is the Mid Heaven, usually abbreviated MC for the Latin medium coeli, synonymously the cusp of the tenth house. Opposite this point, at the bottom of the chart and below the Earth is the Lower Heaven, usually abbreviated IC for the Latin imum coeli, cusp of the fourth house. Every major change in your domestic or career life must involve transiting or progressed planets on your meridian axis. The most powerful house placements were the end of the 12th house when the planet is first visible above the eastern horizon, the end of the 9th house just to the right of the mid heaven, and to lesser extents at the end of the 6th house having just set in the west, and then the end of the 3rd house.
The Gauquelins' Discovery
The Gauquelins, to their astonishment, discovered that top military leaders, sports champions, and business leaders were born "under Mars," that is Mars was distributed far more often than chance just before the four angles. In other words if Mars is found just before the ascendant, lower heaven, descendant, or mid heaven, the child is more significantly likely than chance to be a successful military leader, athlete or business entrepreneur. If the baby had Saturn at the very same places in the horoscope, there is a greater likelihood of being a scientist, with the Moon there one more likely becomes a successful writer and politician, and with Jupiter an actor or politician. The Gauquelins found no correlation with the Sun, Venus, Mercury, and planets beyond Saturn. However, later research of personality concluded Venus' placement in the same zones to be a predictive tool.
Mars in the natal horoscope of Muhammed Ali is in the ninth house, in one of the four sectors where Mars is more likely found in the charts of famous sports champions.
The Gauquelins discovered that significant placements for planets predictive of occupational success were the entire 12th house and the first third of the first, the latter half of the third house and the first eighth of the fourth, the latter two-thirds of the sixth house and the first eighth of the seventh, the entire ninth house and the first quarter of the tenth as shown in the illustration.
Universal Applications
Their findings at first were based upon birth data from France. Skeptics attempted to discredit the data by saying French persons were different than those in other countries. So, the Gauquelins scoured the data from other countries, and applied the same detailed statistical analysis to data from Italy, Germany, Netherlands, and Belgium. The same findings held in every country. Francoise moved to California and collected data from United States sources, discovering the same phenomena was true. If that weren't enough, the Gauquelins discovered something that may really make your hair stand on end and run a chill down your spine. I had that reaction when first reading the details. When children are born naturally, without being induced or by Caesarean section, the children's horoscope resembled the parents' horoscopes! If the parents had the same planet in the same place in each parents' horoscope, the children had the same planet there too. Imagine that. It's as though the child has an appointment with a planet being a certain place in the sky so it can continue a family tradition! In other words, if your parents had Mars near the angles, and you were born naturally, then you would have a greater chance of also having Mars on the angles in your chart too! When you consider that a planet can be on these angles only a few minutes every day, the babies' connection to the astrology of its parents, and thus its ancestors, is profound as though the child chooses its time of birth when given the chance in order to perpetuate family ties. When the birth is not natural, that connection with the ancestry is changed.
Michel was not a novice to astrology when he attended advanced statistical classes in Paris. He was taught the basics of astrology by his dentist father starting at the age of ten. As he grew older, personal experiences convinced him that astrology held an underlying truth and he decided to dedicate his life to discovering that truth. In 1949 in Paris he chose to major in statistics and psychology, and began collecting birth data on persons listed in the French Who's Who. Three years later, he joined his future wife, Francoise, whose expertise in demography became invaluable to the work.
But the Gauquelins, being true to their scientific training and objectivity, proclaimed their findings to the world. They published articles and books, founded a journal, and lectured wherever their voice was allowed to speak. And unlike the vast majority of scientists, they made their original data available to anyone. They had nothing to hide. They saw no reason to cover up anything in their files. There were no special cases, every entry adhering to strict criteria. And in spite of repeated attempts to discredit their data, the skeptics were never able to find a single flaw.
The Gauquelins major confrontation came from a self-appointed committee of professors with a long standing antagonism to anything astrological, parapsychological, or occult : astronomer George Abell, statistician Marvin Zelen, and philosopher Paul Kurtz. They initially challenged every facet of the Gauquelin work. They called themselves the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal, or CSICOP. One of the primary targets in those beginning years was the research efforts by the Gauquelins. When the group of scientists examined the work of the Gauquelins, looking for fraud, searching for falsified results, going over each data entry with a fine brush of negative prejudice, they reluctantly concluded they could find nothing wrong with the data or its method of collection.
Most importantly, the skeptical scientists could find nothing wrong with the Gauquelins' conclusions that there was a correlation between cosmic events and human experience -- the very basis of the belief in astrology. But did the scientists report their findings in prestigious journals? No!
Finally and reluctantly they acknowledged in their own journal, The Skeptical Inquirer that the "Gauquelins adequately allowed for demographic and astronomical factors in predicting the expected distribution" of planets in their sampling. One line of acknowledgement. Then silence. Apathy. For a discovery affecting every human being on this planet.
Did the scientific community embrace this new discovery? Did they welcome this new parameter into their equations and consider planetary positions at birth as important variables in research? Did academia accept the truth of the horoscope's validity in predicting occupational success, at least? The answer is a resounding No! Not outspoken rejection, that would have given astrology more attention than academics wanted astrology to have. But apathy and avoidance were the scientists' weapons of choice.
There were and are a few exceptions among the scientific community. Astronomer Percy Seymour, a famous writer of scientific textbooks, has written several books supporting astrology's validity. Psychologist Hans Eysenck has done likewise. And several symposia have been held covering the same subject matter but disguising astrology with other references like: geo-cosmic relations, or cosmobiology and cosmopsychology. As more and more scientists open themselves to the cosmos correlating with human experience, the more I expect them to proclaim they knew about it all the time and take credit for the very body of knowledge they once ridiculed.
The Gauquelins met with a brick wall of rejection, denial, skepticism, countless distractions attempting to take them away from the basic finding. After all, so many teaching and research positions are based upon the status quo ignoring cosmic influences, so why rock the boat and disturb this security by introducing the most profound influence of them all, the planets and stars? So, it is no surprise that the reaction of the scientific establishment at colleges and institutes was and is profound apathy, and even ridicule of the Gauquelins and those few scientists who find validity to their work. The difference between the denying scientists and the astrologers who daily experience astrology's validity has become something like a political battle of beliefs. A recent interest in genetics over environment, may slightly alter this trend.
Michel Gauquelin, with his first wife Francoise Schneider, battled with heroic courage and tenacity the immense scientific prejudice and hostility of colleagues in the scientific community. He was born November 13, 1928 and died in Paris May 20 1991.
Francois continues the work editing a journal in Paris.
Captions from the illustration
Ascendant
Rising Sign
Descendant
Setting Sign
HORIZON
MERIDIAN
Houses
Mid Heaven
Lower Heaven
Massive Scientific Data from Five Countries Prove:
Sports champions, military and business leaders more likely have Mars in the shaded sectors of their horoscopes; famous scientists have Saturn there, famous writers have the Moon, and famous politicians, journalists and actors are more likely to have Jupiter there.
MICHEL AND FRANCOISE GAUQUELIN; SCIENTIFIC STUDY OF ASTROLOGY.
The Scientific Coverup: Denying Astrology's Validity
Jacob Schwartz
"Is astrology true or is it nonsense exploited by people simply taking advantage of a gullible public?" This was the question a young French statistician, Michel Gauquelin, attending the prestigious Sorbonne University in the early 1950's posed to his fellow student, later girlfriend, then wife and research collaborator, Francoise Schneider. "Why don't we send for one of these computerized horoscope interpretations using birth data from a really nasty criminal and see if the report ever mentions a life of crime and violence, eh?" he asks. Little do they realize, but they would later become the first scientists in history to demonstrate astrology to be valid beyond the shadow of a doubt, risking their academic reputations by presenting irrefutable data proving that astrology can predict occupational success based upon the birth horoscope!
Fooling the Astrology Report Service
"That's a wonderful idea. Let's use the birth data of the mass murderer the police recently caught," Francoise replied. "The newspapers gave his birthdate. And French law dictates that birth times be recorded for every birth. So we'll request, from the province where he was born, a copy of the public record of his birth. We'll get his birth time, and send away for the astrological report based upon an accurate date, time and place of birth."
And that's just what they did. Francoise and Michel, pretending as though the birth data for this murderer was one of their own, mailed the data and the money for the computerized report. They disguised the name connected with the data because they did not want the computer company to suspect that the actual murderer, whose name was very prominent in the press at the time, was requesting the chart. Scientists as they were, they did not want to encourage any bias to affect the report.
A few weeks later, the report arrived in the mail. The young, enthusiastic researchers impatiently opened the package containing the bound report. They closely scanned every line looking for reference to crime, violence, or murder. They found none. On the contrary, they found glowing references to love, fair dealings, success, and public admiration, a collection of flattering references; telling what they think others want to read about themselves. Not one negative character trait.
"That's too bad. We've been deceived. But I wonder," murmured Francoise, "whether there is some validity to astrology. After all, the connection between cosmic activity and human experience has been popular since Babylonian times five thousand years ago. We're statisticians, we can accumulate and analyze lots of data," she said as her eyes began to sparkle with enthusiasm for an impending scientific discovery, "perhaps we should do some original research demonstrating whether or not astrology is valid at all."
Do Sun Signs Alone Predict Success?
"Most people know the zodiac sign for their Sun. My father dabbled into astrology," Michel replied, "and astrology is much more complicated than the Sun signs. But that's a start. It would be difficult to collect all the data, but when we're finished we can make clear, definitive statements. We could collect the birth data for a large number of people successful in certain occupations, and see if the Sun sign correlates and thus predicts occupational success."
"Isn't Aries supposed to be good for very aggressive types like military leaders; and Leo is connected with egotists like dictators, conductors, and actors who always take the limelight. Taurus and Scorpio would be good for bankers, maybe, Gemini for sales people and writers, and so forth. Anyway let us look at some astrology books, Michel, and see what occupations are associated with what zodiac Sun signs. Then once we have a list of these traits and thousands of birth dates and times and places, we can identify statistically significant differences. We'll let the scientific world know of our findings and make all the raw data available."
They carefully gathered data for thousands of successful people, compared it with the Sun signs, and discovered there was no statistically significant correlation between Sun signs and success in given occupations. Musicians, for example, were no more likely to have their Sun in Pisces, a sign associated with music, than any other sign. If fact, none of the ten occupational groups listed, from athletes to writers, from soldiers to actors, had any significantly larger proportion in one sign versus another. That finding was true in the 1950's as well as the late 1970's when the research was repeated on a different population.
Schools Universally Reject Astrology
Except for a very rare teacher, we're all taught in school, from elementary grades to colleges, to ignore astrology except to ridicule the subject and its devotees, or to regard astrology strictly as amusement no more valid than Chinese fortune cookies. The academicians label astrology superstitious, a pseudo-science, and with no objective validity, or even worse. Invariably the detractor knows nothing about astrology and bases their judgments upon a scientific prejudice or upon what they have heard from their own teachers.
Defending Astrology
Some of the popular arguments against astrology are that the world can't be divided into only twelve groups corresponding to the Sun signs. In reply, astrology is hardly limited to Sun signs. A horoscope is a unique document based on a date, time, and place of birth. In addition to Sun signs, we have Moon signs, rising signs, Mercury signs and so forth. What about twins, the skeptics ask, they sometimes lead very different lives. That's true and twins born a few minutes apart can have different rising signs because the rising degree (the ascendant) changes one degree every four minutes of time, and changes signs every two hours, and each degree and sign of the zodiac has a different meaning.
There are hundreds of studies showing twins separated at birth later getting after more than 20 years apart, comparing their life histories and discovering that they married, divorced, had children, changed residences and occupations at the same time. This is widely documented in a recent book by William Wright in Born That Way. Our natal horoscope describes being born that way.
For another thing, skeptics will point out, the gravitational impact of the Sun and Moon and planets are so much smaller than the gravitational pull of people, and the strength of lights, in the delivery room. But before we nod in support of the scientists making this comparison, let's look carefully at what's being said. A scientist often sets up a simple, and quite naive model, and then shoots down the model to conclude astrology is invalid. The scientist assumes that the effects of planets at birth is due to gravity or light, neither assumption ever given by astrologers to account for planetary effect. Even worse, this naive and unscientific approach remains unquestioned by students and colleagues, and is then passed from one generation to others and gradually evolves into a statement of truth.
Gauquelins Pioneering Discoveries Supporting Astrology
"Even though Sun signs don't predict occupations, maybe," the Gauquelins thought, "planetary positions in the horoscope can predict occupational success. Remember, a horoscope requires all three ingredients: date, time, and place of birth." And so, the Gauquelins began the stupendous task of collecting horoscopes of thousands of persons who, by stringent criteria, were determined successful.
They were able to conclusively demonstrate that, just as the ancient teachers of astrology had maintained, outstanding individuals in varying professions are more likely than not born when specific planets are close to the horizon and the meridian axes.
The Angles
The four points on the ascendant and meridian axes are referred to as the angles by astrologers. The ascendant and descendant describe the eastern and western horizon points respectively. Planets rise in the east and set in the west. Nothing of importance in your personal and social life happens without the ascendant and descendant being involved! Other names for the same points are the rising sign and the setting sign, synonymously the cusps of the first house and the seventh house.
The meridian axis is the vertical line rising from the place of birth to cross the path of the Sun, or the ecliptic, at its highest and lowest points. The highest point in the zodiac at any time is the Mid Heaven, usually abbreviated MC for the Latin medium coeli, synonymously the cusp of the tenth house. Opposite this point, at the bottom of the chart and below the Earth is the Lower Heaven, usually abbreviated IC for the Latin imum coeli, cusp of the fourth house. Every major change in your domestic or career life must involve transiting or progressed planets on your meridian axis. The most powerful house placements were the end of the 12th house when the planet is first visible above the eastern horizon, the end of the 9th house just to the right of the mid heaven, and to lesser extents at the end of the 6th house having just set in the west, and then the end of the 3rd house.
The Gauquelins' Discovery
The Gauquelins, to their astonishment, discovered that top military leaders, sports champions, and business leaders were born "under Mars," that is Mars was distributed far more often than chance just before the four angles. In other words if Mars is found just before the ascendant, lower heaven, descendant, or mid heaven, the child is more significantly likely than chance to be a successful military leader, athlete or business entrepreneur. If the baby had Saturn at the very same places in the horoscope, there is a greater likelihood of being a scientist, with the Moon there one more likely becomes a successful writer and politician, and with Jupiter an actor or politician. The Gauquelins found no correlation with the Sun, Venus, Mercury, and planets beyond Saturn. However, later research of personality concluded Venus' placement in the same zones to be a predictive tool.
Mars in the natal horoscope of Muhammed Ali is in the ninth house, in one of the four sectors where Mars is more likely found in the charts of famous sports champions.
The Gauquelins discovered that significant placements for planets predictive of occupational success were the entire 12th house and the first third of the first, the latter half of the third house and the first eighth of the fourth, the latter two-thirds of the sixth house and the first eighth of the seventh, the entire ninth house and the first quarter of the tenth as shown in the illustration.
Universal Applications
Their findings at first were based upon birth data from France. Skeptics attempted to discredit the data by saying French persons were different than those in other countries. So, the Gauquelins scoured the data from other countries, and applied the same detailed statistical analysis to data from Italy, Germany, Netherlands, and Belgium. The same findings held in every country. Francoise moved to California and collected data from United States sources, discovering the same phenomena was true. If that weren't enough, the Gauquelins discovered something that may really make your hair stand on end and run a chill down your spine. I had that reaction when first reading the details. When children are born naturally, without being induced or by Caesarean section, the children's horoscope resembled the parents' horoscopes! If the parents had the same planet in the same place in each parents' horoscope, the children had the same planet there too. Imagine that. It's as though the child has an appointment with a planet being a certain place in the sky so it can continue a family tradition! In other words, if your parents had Mars near the angles, and you were born naturally, then you would have a greater chance of also having Mars on the angles in your chart too! When you consider that a planet can be on these angles only a few minutes every day, the babies' connection to the astrology of its parents, and thus its ancestors, is profound as though the child chooses its time of birth when given the chance in order to perpetuate family ties. When the birth is not natural, that connection with the ancestry is changed.
Michel was not a novice to astrology when he attended advanced statistical classes in Paris. He was taught the basics of astrology by his dentist father starting at the age of ten. As he grew older, personal experiences convinced him that astrology held an underlying truth and he decided to dedicate his life to discovering that truth. In 1949 in Paris he chose to major in statistics and psychology, and began collecting birth data on persons listed in the French Who's Who. Three years later, he joined his future wife, Francoise, whose expertise in demography became invaluable to the work.
But the Gauquelins, being true to their scientific training and objectivity, proclaimed their findings to the world. They published articles and books, founded a journal, and lectured wherever their voice was allowed to speak. And unlike the vast majority of scientists, they made their original data available to anyone. They had nothing to hide. They saw no reason to cover up anything in their files. There were no special cases, every entry adhering to strict criteria. And in spite of repeated attempts to discredit their data, the skeptics were never able to find a single flaw.
The Gauquelins major confrontation came from a self-appointed committee of professors with a long standing antagonism to anything astrological, parapsychological, or occult : astronomer George Abell, statistician Marvin Zelen, and philosopher Paul Kurtz. They initially challenged every facet of the Gauquelin work. They called themselves the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal, or CSICOP. One of the primary targets in those beginning years was the research efforts by the Gauquelins. When the group of scientists examined the work of the Gauquelins, looking for fraud, searching for falsified results, going over each data entry with a fine brush of negative prejudice, they reluctantly concluded they could find nothing wrong with the data or its method of collection.
Most importantly, the skeptical scientists could find nothing wrong with the Gauquelins' conclusions that there was a correlation between cosmic events and human experience -- the very basis of the belief in astrology. But did the scientists report their findings in prestigious journals? No!
Finally and reluctantly they acknowledged in their own journal, The Skeptical Inquirer that the "Gauquelins adequately allowed for demographic and astronomical factors in predicting the expected distribution" of planets in their sampling. One line of acknowledgement. Then silence. Apathy. For a discovery affecting every human being on this planet.
Did the scientific community embrace this new discovery? Did they welcome this new parameter into their equations and consider planetary positions at birth as important variables in research? Did academia accept the truth of the horoscope's validity in predicting occupational success, at least? The answer is a resounding No! Not outspoken rejection, that would have given astrology more attention than academics wanted astrology to have. But apathy and avoidance were the scientists' weapons of choice.
There were and are a few exceptions among the scientific community. Astronomer Percy Seymour, a famous writer of scientific textbooks, has written several books supporting astrology's validity. Psychologist Hans Eysenck has done likewise. And several symposia have been held covering the same subject matter but disguising astrology with other references like: geo-cosmic relations, or cosmobiology and cosmopsychology. As more and more scientists open themselves to the cosmos correlating with human experience, the more I expect them to proclaim they knew about it all the time and take credit for the very body of knowledge they once ridiculed.
The Gauquelins met with a brick wall of rejection, denial, skepticism, countless distractions attempting to take them away from the basic finding. After all, so many teaching and research positions are based upon the status quo ignoring cosmic influences, so why rock the boat and disturb this security by introducing the most profound influence of them all, the planets and stars? So, it is no surprise that the reaction of the scientific establishment at colleges and institutes was and is profound apathy, and even ridicule of the Gauquelins and those few scientists who find validity to their work. The difference between the denying scientists and the astrologers who daily experience astrology's validity has become something like a political battle of beliefs. A recent interest in genetics over environment, may slightly alter this trend.
Michel Gauquelin, with his first wife Francoise Schneider, battled with heroic courage and tenacity the immense scientific prejudice and hostility of colleagues in the scientific community. He was born November 13, 1928 and died in Paris May 20 1991.
Francois continues the work editing a journal in Paris.
Massive Scientific Data from Five Countries Prove:
Sports champions, military and business leaders more likely have Mars in the shaded sectors of their horoscopes; famous scientists have Saturn there, famous writers have the Moon, and famous politicians, journalists and actors are more likely to have Jupiter there.