THE PLANETS
may control your future after all. A renowned
astronomer has broken with scientific orthodoxy
to claim that astrology could have some basis in
fact.
Long dismissed as little better than fortune
telling, astrology has been attacked as a
pseudo-science by the Royal Astronomical
Society.
But one of its
members, Dr Percy Seymour, has reopened the
debate with a provocative book claiming
movements of the sun, stars and planets can
influence the brains of unborn children in
measurable ways.
Seymour is a former principal lecturer in
astronomy and astrophysics at Plymouth
University who has been a researcher at the
Royal Observatory in Greenwich. While stressing
he has no time for star-sign horoscopes, he does
believe human brain development may be affected
by the Earth’s magnetic field, especially during
growth in the womb.
In his book, The Scientific Proof of
Astrology, he suggests that the Earth’s magnetic
field is affected by interactions with those of
the sun and the moon. Other planets such as
Jupiter, Mars and Venus also play a part because
their magnetic fields affect solar magnetism.
Seymour said: “It means the whole solar
system is playing a symphony on the Earth’s
magnetic field. We are all genetically tuned to
receive a different set of melodies from this
symphony.”
His claims will infuriate other astronomers.
They have suffered the humiliation of seeing
astrology rising in popularity with top
astrologers’ earnings surging beyond those of
even the most eminent of researchers.
Until now they have at least had the comfort
of being able to dismiss any suggestion of
scientific support for the idea that people’s
lives and personalities are influenced by the
planets.
Among the most outspoken figures against
astrology are Sir Martin Rees, the astronomer
royal, and Professor Stephen Hawking. Rees has
described astrology as “absurd”, adding: “There
is no place for astrology in our scientific view
of the world; moreover its predictive claims
cannot stand any critical scrutiny.”
Seth Shostak, a leading American astronomer,
was also scathing, describing Seymour’s theory
as “nonsensical”. He pointed out that even
though large planets like Jupiter had magnetic
and gravitational fields far greater than the
Earth’s, they were massively diluted by
distance.
“Jupiter’s magnetic field is about a trillion
times weaker than the Earth’s,” he said. “You
would experience a far stronger field from your
lights and washing machine.”
Shostak works for the Seti Institute in
California which is building a powerful radio
telescope to seek alien life. “By 2025 we will
have surveyed a million stars and I believe we
will have found intelligent aliens,” he added.
Hawking, Lucasian professor of mathematics at
Cambridge University, has said that astrology
became impossible as soon as early scientists
found that the Earth was not the centre of the
universe, an idea on which astrology was
founded.
However, Seymour’s theories won qualified
support from an unexpected source. Richard
Dawkins, professor for the public understanding
of science at Oxford University, who once
suggested that astrologers be prosecuted under
the trades descriptions act, said that although
he had not read the book Seymour’s ideas sounded
interesting.
Astrologers were delighted by Seymour’s
claims. Russell Grant, the astrologer, said: “At
last someone is not just saying: ‘It’s a load of
poppycock’. If the moon is connected with the
ebb and flow of the tides, and humans are 70%
water, then why can’t the moon be affecting us?
So we have good moods or bad moods depending
upon the position of the moon?”
Others seem to agree although few will
discuss it openly. Several years ago it emerged
that the European Bank for Reconstruction and
Development was using astrology to help manage
its £5 billion investment portfolio —
programming computers with crucial dates such as
lunar eclipses and planetary conjunctions.
This year’s Sunday Times Rich List included
an analysis of the star signs of Britain’s 1,000
richest people — finding significant differences
with 110 born under Gemini but only 73 under
Pisces.
Among the powerful who have admitted
consulting astrologers to make decisions are
Ronald and Nancy Reagan, who allowed the
astrologer Joan Quigley to dictate the
presidential agenda, including the take-off
times for Air Force One. Reagan's chief of staff
reportedly had a colour-coded calendar around
which he was expected to organise the
President's schedule: green for “good” days and
red for “bad”.
Even Margaret Thatcher once told MPs: “I was
born under the sign of Libra, it follows that I
am well-balanced.”
STAR SIGN OF THE RICHEST
1000
Gemini 110
Taurus
104
Aries
95
Capricorn
92
Aquarius
91
Virgo
88
Libra
87
Leo
84
Sagittarius
84
Cancer
80
Scorpio
79
Pisces 73
Source: The Sunday Times Rich List
2004