Concerning the Possible Influence of Planets on Human Beings
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 10264456 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Michel Gauquelin (corresponding author) |
| Year | 1975 |
| Volume | 8 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 228 |
| Publication date | 1975-01-01 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Leonardo (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0024-094X • E-ISSN: 1530-9282 |
| Publisher | JSTOR (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.2307/1573244 |
| OpenAlex | W2319973802 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 3 |
Since the publication two years ago in Leonardo of Lawrence E. Jerome's article 'Astrology and Modern Science: A Critical Analysis' [1], there has been a considerable exchange of views on the subject in the journal [2-7]. I had the opportunity only recently to read Jerome's attack on my statistical work on correlations of planetary positions with human birth times. He disagrees with my following proposition: The pattern of the birth frequencies of notable professionals with respect to the positions of certain planets differs significantly from the pattern obtained for a control sample of unnoted persons taken from the general population [8]. In particular, the sample of professionals tended to be born just after the rise or the upper culmination of one of the planets during its diurnal motion. Jerome says: ' . . . Gauquelin has confused cause and effect. What his statistical data really indicate is that there exist deviations from the demographic norm, that people with differing temperaments tend to be born at differing hours of the day. The planets just happen to be found in the sky at those times' [1, p. 129]. In order to justify his assertion, Jerome gives three examples
Astrobiology · Astronomy · Biology · Physics · Planet · Historical Astronomy and Related Studies · Historical, Religious, and Philosophical Studies · Marine and environmental studies
| Highly cited | No |
|---|