As an astrological researcher, I have received much feedback from astrologers and sceptics alike. Given the nature of my findings its hardly surprising that the views of the former are more positive than the latter.
At least half of the communications received from sceptics are utterly dismissive and laced with personal insults. With followers of astrology this is never the case even when I question and challenge many of the issues that they hold sacred, I have always found them to be open minded, considered and polite.
Out of all the possible Sun, Moon Ascendant combinations, triple Capricorns are probably the least likely to be affected by what other people say about them. In fact what I would really like to do is a comparative research study of the charts of astrologers and sceptics. But so far my requests to the latter for their birth details to enable me to understand their position better, have fallen on unreceptive ears.
The birth data source for the Capricorn Astrology Research Project is the Astrodatabank website. All of the charts in the Public Figures section that were on that site in the Spring of 2013 that had verifiable birth times were used.
One of the more absurd criticisms that I have received from sceptics is that this sample source is unusable because it is naturally biased. As if the compilers of the site have only included charts of people whose life experiences show clear and observable links to the astrological factors in their charts.
I have this vision of thousands of computer experts being employed by the Astrodatabank to test all of the possible lines of enquiry that I and other researchers might come up with before deciding to allow a particular celebrity’s details to be published.
The only possible bias that can be suggested is the sheer number of astrologers charts that are on there. Capricorn Research has 953 charts of astrologers, this would give the impression that they make up about 4 % of the population. I think the world would be a very different place if that were true.
Obviously the main reason for such a large collection is that astrologers are the only people who understand the importance of birth times. But the one good thing about such a large sample is that it makes it very easy to test statistically.
One idea that Capricorn Research has always wanted to test is the question of the number eleven.
If you were to ask astrologers themselves which sign or house they would ascribe to their own subject, its likely that they would talk about the 11th sign Aquarius and the corresponding house. If it was to be a planet, Uranus would be the one likely to be put forward.
Presumably in times before Uranus was discovered, astrologers would have identified with Mercury or Jupiter if they wanted to give a certain impression.
In my early days with astrology, I often used to question the Aquarian hypothesis mainly on the basis that a large number of the astrologers that I came across shared my own sign. But this could simply be a case of me attracting my own kind and given that I used to hang out with people from the quaintly old school sounding ” Astrological Lodge of the Theosophical Society “, its probably not surprising it was full of old goats.
So which is it then, Aquarius or Capricorn ? According to the sample that I have, its neither. For the Sun’s sign, Aquarius comes 2nd with a score of 87 ( 110% of the expected figure ), Capricorn is joint 3rd with Sagittarius on 84 ( 106 % ) but the winner with 93 ( 117 % ) is Aries.
The sign that scores lowest by the way is Pisces with 64 ( 81 % ).
These figures are interesting but not statistically significant, the chances of them occurring by chance alone are 0.7, but perhaps the Sun in Aries does say something about astrologers enthusiastically heading off in their own direction.
Its also interesting that the Rising sign backs this up. Once the figures have been adjusted to deal with signs of differing lengths of ascension, Aries is the most common Ascendant with 115 %, Virgo is the least with 77%.
The Moon sign distribution has a better P figure of 0.2, but its still nothing that could be put forward as proof of anything. But if you’re interested, the Moon in Pisces comes top here with 92 ( 116% ), Aquarius 2nd with 90 ( 113 % ), Gemini is 3rd with 89 ( 112 % ) and the lowest scoring are Leo and Scorpio with 63 ( 79% ).
Perhaps the Moon in Pisces top scoring explains why astrology followers are generally such sensitive, supportive and empathic people.
Astrologers themselves might ask what about Mercury ? This distribution has a P figure of 0.17 but here Aquarius scores surprisingly low at 71 ( 89 % ). Top scoring for Mercury is Capricorn with 95 ( 120% ).
Mercury in Capricorn would make sense to this writer because astrology does give a structure through which to view the unknowable Universe.
All of these findings have p figures that would receive short shrift from statisticians, but as is often the case in my research its the Venus and Mars sign distributions that seem to be more marked than the others. Both of these have p figures or around 0.04, still not at the magic 0.01 level, but perhaps enough to raise the odd eyebrow if the findings did fit with astrological theory.
Whether they do or not seems open to debate as the strongest score for any planet in sign is Mars in Virgo with 98 ( 123% ) and the lowest is Venus in Leo with 52 ( 65 % ).
So the sign distribution is interesting but certainly not conclusive. Anyway the Sun and Ascendant in Aries with the Moon in Pisces would just give the sceptics more reason to dismiss us all as daydreaming nut cases who have lost all touch with reality and are charging off on our own personal crusades. They would do, except according to this research, that might prove astrology works.
What about the houses then ? Is there anything here that fits the classic description of an astrologer. Well yes actually and it does so with a very strong p figure of 0.00056 !
In this sample of 953 Astrologers the Sun occurs in the 11th house a staggering 105 times ( that’s 132 % of the expected figure ). This score is some way ahead of the others with 2nd place going to the 10th house with 95 ( 120 % ) and 3rd is the 12th with 94 ( 118 % ).
The lowest house score by some distance is the 7th with 53 ( 67 % ).
What to make of these figures ? It could be that astrologers spend large parts of their time ignoring their husbands and wives ( 7th house ) while staring at their computers ( 11th house ), but however we look at it this is a finding that seriously backs up our discipline’s view of its own subject.
Interestingly, both Venus and Mars top score in the 11th house with 101 ( 127 % ) and 95 ( 120 % ) respectively.
Mercury however, top scores in the 12th house with 104 ( 131 % ) and is lowest in the 6th with 55 ( 69 % ).
Other interesting house distributions are Uranus and Neptune, once adjustments have been made to allow for their tendency to be in some signs and houses more frequently than others owing to the range of birth years of the whole sample. Uranus top scores in the 1st house with 119 % and lowest in the 6th with 65 %. Neptune comes top in the 10th house with 136 % and lowest in the 1st with 81 %.
So what about the aspects ? Are certain planetary combinations more likely to occur in astrologers charts than others ?
Again the astrologer’s take would be to look at the aspects of the personal planets to Uranus, but there’s very little to go on here. Its all pretty average with a slight move towards a Venus / Uranus conjunction on 118 % but on the other hand the Moon / Uranus conjunction scores only at 77 %.
Interestingly the Aries theme comes up again with Mars conjunct the Ascendant occurring at 123 %.
The Sun’s aspects to Mars also make intriguing viewing. Its important to note that the conjunction between these two naturally occurs much more frequently than for other planets and the opposition correspondingly much less often. However once adjustments have been made for this, the Sun / Mars conjunction still scores 118 % and the opposition gets a whopping 132 %.
The relationship between Mars and Neptune is also interesting with the conjunction scoring 130 % and the sextile getting an impressive 135 %.
Anything in these aspect scores that hits 130 % has got to be seen as a statistically significant figure.
Oddly enough some way ahead of this is the Venus / Pluto square aspect with 143 %.
But the one planetary combination that has been attributed to astrologers by their own kind more than any other is that of Jupiter and Uranus.
Capricorn Research has often wondered whether this is a case of astrologers coming up with the aspect that they would most like to have in their charts, but I’ve always felt some connection with it as I have the exact conjunction between Jupiter and Uranus myself. It is also part of an extremely tight T Square with Neptune, Chiron and my Capricorn Ascendant ( all of them are contained within 1.5 degrees of orb ).
It is comforting to know that this places me with the astrological mainstream as the strongest single aspect in the whole sample of 953 Astrologers is the Jupiter / Uranus conjunction with 144 %.
So where are we with all this ? is there a significant Aquarius / Uranus / 11th house connection for Astrologers ?
Well the sign comes 2nd for both Sun and Moon but not frequently enough to really show anything.
The Sun in the 11th house however scores extremely highly and a p figure of 0.00056 is very impressive.
But the Jupiter / Uranus conjunction really provides a link of very strong confidence as so many astrologers have it.
I wonder whether this conjunction was being triggered by transits or progressions when they first discovered the subject. It certainly was for me, as my progressed Sun was opposite Jupiter / Uranus at the time.
So we do have some clear astrological connections that come up in the charts of astrologers themselves. Part of me would love it if research into sceptics produced similarly high scores for Virgo and Saturn, but it could take a long time to collect the data, even if I ask them nicely.