The myth of Scientific Consensus
The Press reinforce a myth of scientific consensus with announcements like 'scientists agree'. However, this consensus is not based on independent research or critical analysis. As a result of this herd-like behaviour, Quantum Physics was not taught to physics students for 2/3rds of a century. This opinion was expressed by Louisa Gilder, Physicist and author of The Age of Entanglement. As a physics student, she only learnt about quantum entanglement in a philosophy lecture. However, Einstein's paper (EPR - Paradox) on the subject is now the most cited of all his papers. There are many reasons for this mythical consensus. It takes time to research, effort and stress to disagree and most of all it's easier to keep your job as a scientist by agreeing with the general trend.
The Irrational Reaction of a 'Rational' Sceptic
There is no question that the practice of astrology needs scepticism and greater critical thinking. Intelligent sceptics should prompt astrologers to improve their discipline and dispense with false and illusory notions. However, there is no scientific case to dismiss astrology entirely as a field. For many 'rational' sceptics accostomed to debunking creationists and other woolly beliefs, this impasse causes cognitive dissonance (an uncomfortable feeling caused by holding two contradictory ideas simultaneously). Often this leads to an emotional reaction ranging from an angry outburst to denial.
"I hate astrology with a fervor that is almost frightening." Stephen Fry, actor, journalist & comedian. [For astrologers: Sun, Pluto & Mars conjunct in Virgo]
"I said that astrology was rubbish on my programme, and we got a record number of complaints from stupid people" Profesor Brian Cox, physicist.
Bias can even infect top scientists & journals
 Sometimes the frustration at the lack of evidence against astrology and studies such as Gauquelin upholding the basis of astrology has overtaken scientific integrity. This sceptical prejudice exists even in the most ‘respectable scientific journals’. While there are tests that demonstrate the effects of astrology, the only ones published in Journals like 'Nature' are flawed. If you disagree, you are welcome to cite a test that is not. In fact, Nature has yet to retract the Carlson test despite overwhelming evidence that it is flawed. Go figure!
“After much communication with and observation of fellow sceptics, I concluded that sceptical groups can suffer from the same irrationality, dogmatism and ‘group-think’ as other groups. (Indeed, this seems to me now to be an essential characteristic of human social behaviour). Evidence that resists refutation and threatens foundational beliefs of a group may cause the group to reject, suppress or ignore the evidence.”
~ James Lippard, Foreward to the Tenacious Mars Effect by Ertel and Irving.
"Of course, I expected people to take objection to my theory. But I didn't expect the reaction to be so vehement or so irrational." ~ Dr Percy Seymour, Director of the William Day Planetarium and principal lecturer in astronomy at the University of Plymouth commenting on the reaction of some members of the scientific community when his book, Astrology: The Evidence of Science, appeared in April 1989. [Omni Magazine interview 1989] "... a very worrying trend amongst scientific editors and referees to opt for 'economy and simplicity' in an article at the expense of historical facts, irrespective of the validity or acceptance of the theory." ~ Robert Bauval, commenting on flaws in an archeoastronomy paper published by Nature[1]
Can the peer review process become a closed-shop?
While the peer review process has many advantages, it can become a closed shop. 'Peers' will naturally favour views that support their existing world-view. Reviews of studies in a field like astrology in conventional scientific journals suffers because 'peers' can be qualified in fields like geology or astronomy where a traditional, conventional, mechanistic and materialistic approach is favoured. It is arguable that this puts a necessary brake on radical notions. However, it can also stifle innovative theories.
[1] A brief evaluation of Kate Spence's article in NATURE, Vol. 408, 16 November 2000, pp. 320-324 Ancient Egyptian Chronology and the Astronomical Orientation of Pyramids. Robert G. Bauval, 6 January 2001
Find out why it is no longer acceptable to say astrology is rubbish on a scientific basis.
Robert Currey
www.twitter.com/RobertCurrey
|
 |
 Main Astrology News Page. Information, stories, theories and facts.
Index to past articles Over 50 articles relating to astrology.
|
