Why Astrology is Nonsense

Astrology is the pseudoscientific belief that the positions of stars and planets influence human affairs and personality traits. While astrology has ancient origins and remains popular today, there is no scientific evidence to support its validity. Here are some key reasons why astrology should be considered nonsense:

The Forer Effect Explains Astrology’s Accuracy

Many people find that astrological readings seem accurate and describe them well. However, this is due to the Forer effect or Barnum effect. The Forer effect refers to people’s tendency to view vague, general statements as uniquely applicable to themselves. Astrological readings rely heavily on vague claims that most people would agree apply to them to some extent. However, these statements are not specific enough to provide true insight.

Astrological Signs are Arbitrary

The astrological signs used in Western astrology represent arbitrary slices of the sky that do not align with any natural boundaries or scientific significance. The traditional signs are based on constellations that are no longer aligned with the actual star signs due to shifts in Earth’s axis over thousands of years. When astrology was developed, it simply divided the sky into 12 equal sections. There is no reason why being born in a certain slice of the sky should influence personality.

No Proposed Mechanism

Astrologers have been unable to provide any scientifically plausible mechanism by which distant celestial objects could influence human personality and events. There is no known force, energy, or process by which this could occur. Vague claims about “alignments,” “energies,” or “vibrations” have no factual or scientific basis. Without a scientifically valid explanation for how astrology could work, there is no reason to take its claims seriously.

Double Blind Studies Show No Effect

When astrology has been subjected to scientific testing under controlled, double-blind conditions, it has consistently failed to demonstrate any predictive power or accuracy. A meta-analysis of over 40 astrology studies found no evidence that astrological readings had any validity beyond random chance. Well-controlled scientific studies are the best way to determine if a claim has any factual merit. The lack of evidence for astrology in such studies is very telling.

Confirmation Bias Drives Belief

Many dedicated astrology believers selectively remember and focus on vague statements that seem to be accurate while ignoring the large majority that are incorrect or vague. Our human nature makes us much more likely to take note of evidence that confirms our beliefs, rather than evidence against them. Controlled studies avoid this bias by removing the human factor through blind conditions and statistical analysis. This reveals how weak astrology really is when our biases are eliminated.

In conclusion, despite its ancient pedigree and popularity, a closer look reveals that astrology is unfounded nonsense without any scientific validity. Vague statements and confirmation bias may make it seem accurate, but when studied scientifically, there is no evidence that the stars can predict our personalities or destiny.


Carlson, Shawn. “A Double-Blind Test of Astrology.” Nature, vol 318, 1985, pp. 419-425.

Dean, Geoffrey. “Artifacts in Data Often Confused for Psi.” The Humanist, vol 77, no. 4, 2017, pp. 24-27.

Phillipson, Garry. “Astrology in the Year Zero.” Skeptical Inquirer, vol 23, no. 4, 1999, pp. 23-27.

Ploutz-Snyder, Robert. “Astrological Pseudo-Science.” The Scientific Review of Alternative Medicine, vol 3, no. 2, 1999, pp. 25-27.

Leave a comment