This article shows exactly why astrologers have no clue on how things are accepted to be valid in science. This person is trying to grasp as the flimsiest straw based simply on one, ONE, hypothetical musings on a "theoretical astrophysicist". I'll let you read the rest of the article, which really provides ZERO evidence to accept the validity of astrology. But what gets my goat is what was said at the end of the article:
Thus far, the few scientific studies that support astrology have shown significant correlations, but correlations are measurable observed links between one happening and another....they don't reveal predictable outcomes. So, perhaps astrology will never be confirmed by the majority of scientists, but even Seymour points out that scientific thought...both ancient and modern...is fallible due to preconceptions and that astrology is dismissed without study by the average scientist.
But what about not accepting something FIRST before valid and convincing evidence are presented? It is NOT the job of science to prove that you are wrong, it is the job of whoever is trying to show that something is valid to find convincing evidence. Every single scientific discovery and new ideas have to go through that process. Einstein had many doubters to all of his idea when presented. Quantum mechanics had a lot of challenges against it. It is when these ideas are backed by overwhelming body of evidence (as in empirical evidence), only THEN are they accepted to be a scientific idea and considered to be valid. Not before then.
Yet, so many people, including this "astrologer" have already accepted astrology to be valid, despite the lack of any valid evidence. Astrology is dismissed because of that. And considering that such a belief has been around for hundreds of year and it still can't get beyond the phase of trying to prove its existence, it has been understandably categorized as crackpottery. A valid phenomenon never languishes in the land of "is it true, or is it not true" for that long. Our understanding of every single valid phenomenon improves with time, from the moment of discovery to making even more careful measurement of its various properties. We know more about the top quark mass now when compared to when it was first discovered at the Tevatron. We know more about the behavior and puzzling properties of high-Tc cuprate superconductors, even though we still don't quite fully have a valid theory for it. All of these phenomena have gone way past the "discovery" phase and into more detailed studies. One cannot say that about "astrology", that is still stuck at first base.
It is crackpottery.