In which a skeptic accidentally proves astrology while trying to disprove it

(This is the first in a 3-part series. Read the other posts here:

• Why you can't test astrology using blind chart matches, Part I 

• Why you can't test astrology using blind chart matches, Part II)

A post by someone named Spencer Greenberg has been going around on Twitter, claiming to want to start a scientific study into astrology. It claims it will be fair, reasonable, and so on.

But Spencer is a skeptic of astrology and does not understand it, as indicated by his retweet of this post that claims astrology is a “personality test” and “useless.”

Not exacly an unbiased observer.

And there are many problems with Spencer’s “study” on its face.

First of all, an actual scientific study done by serious people wouldn’t be advertising itself this way. One particularly funny detail is that he asks astrologers to message him if they want to know more.

“DM me bruh, and I’ll tell you the details.” 

Real studies are upfront, and usually have a webpage that explains things like:

• The researchers involved, their backgrounds and affiliations, along with contact information

• The organization(s) sponsoring the study, if any.

• The people directing the study, if any (for example an Institutional Review Board that ensures ethical standards are met.)

• The hypothesis being tested

• The methods proposed

• Benefits and harms anticipated

Based on the only information provided in the tweet, we don’t even know what this study is trying to examine! But the tone taken by the writer seems to suggest that it’s trying to “prove” whether astrology is real or not.

I’m not even going to get into details here, about why this approach is completely wrong-headed. That’s an essay for another day. But in a nutshell, this is yet another example, of MANY, showing that people trained in the hard sciences tend to have very, very, very poor abilities in examining other fields. I’ve worked in university settings for over a decade, and I’ll tell you… whenever a scientist tries to write about other topics, the results are always terrible. (Although they always think they nailed it, of course!)

And if this study is about trying to prove that astrology is real, it’s a lame way to go about it. For example, how do you “prove” that History is a “legitimate and real” academic pursuit? Would you show an historian 5 maps of battlefields and ask them to tell you which war these are from? If they couldn’t do it, would that debunk History? If they got it right, would that “prove” History?

Anyway, I’m not going to go into that now. What I want to focus on is how this skeptic accidentally engaged in astrology, while trying to debunk it!

Spencer’s post included an astrological chart:

He gave no explanation for what chart this was. At first I wondered if it was Spencer’s own birth chart. However, with Pluto at 22º Scorpio, and Saturn at 8º Aquarius, that would put this native (if this is a birth chart) as being born in 1992. Spencer’s About page says that he started an investment firm in 2005. (Hat tip to Sam Reynolds for finding this!) The person represented by the chart above would have been 13 years old at that time. It’s possible that Spencer was some kind of child prodigy who managed to open a stock market investing firm before he was legally old enough to open a brokerage account… but quite unlikely.

So we don’t know whose chart this is. And we don’t know why he picked it to illustrate his offer.

But what Spencer probably does not know, is that the chart he chose speaks to the moment he is trying to create. Spencer engaged in astrology without trying!

I’ll explain.

This chart has Aquarius rising, the sign of rational objectivity, defiance of norms, and exploration of theoretical ideas.

Saturn rules Aquarius, and Saturn rules traits like critical thinking, suspiciousness, and logical thought. Saturn is concerned with questions like “What is real? What can endure the test of time? What is solid?”

These qualities point to someone who is trying to develop a scientific study trying to figure out reality of a topic.

The first thing I noticed was that Saturn is dignified in its own sign, but placed in the 12th house of deception, hidden enemies, and ulterior motives. Saturn is also under the beams of the Sun, showing weakness in its ability to manifest its nature.

The next thing I noticed was that Mercury—ruler of communication and technical inquiries—conjoins Mars— ruler of arguments, conflicts, and irritation. Mars is exalted in Capricorn, indicating a somewhat inflated sense of importance. Mercury opposes the Moon—ruler of constant change and illusions. This speaks to me of someone who LIVES to argue. They love debating, and they gain a sense of superiority to others by their ability to verbally run them into the ground. However, their debate tactics are what I’d call “shifty.” They constantly move the goalposts, twist the wording of things, and throw up irrelevant details to try to confuse their opponent.

The Midheaven is in Sagittarius, the sign most closely associated with philosophical inquiry. Sagittarius is ruled by Jupiter, which is retrograde and in its sign of detriment. This shows a wrong-headed way of looking at philosophical topics.

So you see, Spencer tried to disprove astrology, but the Universe has a sense of humor, and it led him to post a chart that exactly describes what he’s trying to do!

Congratulations, Spencer! You did your first astrology reading, without even trying!

Now, let’s look at this chart as a horary question, really quickly, just for fun. Will he be successful in his study? He is seeking participants, which would be indicated by the 7th house. The 7th house is Leo, ruled by the Sun. The Sun represents that participants would be people who are looking for their time in the spotlight. People who want attention and fame.

In horary, we would look for aspects between the significators to see if a thing will come to pass or not. In this case, the Sun is approaching Saturn, so the answer is probably yes, Spencer will find some people willing to participate in his study.

However, the Sun and Saturn mutually harm each other. Placed in the 12th house, this effect is worse. Each one has ulterior motives that will cause damage to each other and to the study overall. Nobody will really be happy in the end.

If Spencer were a client asking me if he should run this study, and this were the chart, I would advise him to be careful. Go back to the drawing board and learn a little bit more about what you’re trying to do. This study is unlikely to have the effects you are hoping for.

If I had more time, I would look at the chart of the moment he posted this Twitter post, to get more details, but I don’t have time today.

Have a great weekend, everyone!