THE PLANETS may control your
future after all.
A renowned astronomer has broken
with scientific orthodoxy to claim that astrology could have
some basis in fact. Long dismissed as little better than fortune
telling, astrology has been attacked as a pseudo-science by the
Royal Astronomical Society. But one of its members, Dr Percy
Seymour, has reopened the debate with a provocative book
claiming movements of the sun, stars and planets can influence
the brains of unborn children in measurable ways.
Seymour is a former principal lecturer in astronomy and
astrophysics at Plymouth University who has been a researcher at
the Royal Observatory in Greenwich. While stressing he has no
time for star-sign horoscopes, he does believe human brain
development may be affected by the Earth's magnetic field,
especially during growth in the womb. In his book, The
Scientific Proof of Astrology, he
suggests that the Earth's magnetic field is affected by
interactions with those of the sun and the moon. Other planets
such as Jupiter, Mars and Venus also play a part because their
magnetic fields affect solar magnetism.
Seymour said: "It means the whole solar
system is playing a symphony on the Earth's magnetic field. We
are all genetically tuned to receive a different set of melodies
from this symphony." His claims will
infuriate other astronomers. They have suffered the humiliation
of seeing astrology rising in popularity with top astrologers'
earnings surging beyond those of even the most eminent of
researchers. Until now they have at least had the comfort of
being able to dismiss any suggestion of scientific support for
the idea that people's lives and personalities are influenced by
the planets.
Among the most outspoken figures against astrology are Sir
Martin Rees, the astronomer royal, and Professor Stephen
Hawking. Rees has described astrology as "absurd",
adding: "There is no place for
astrology in our scientific view of the world; moreover its
predictive claims cannot stand any critical scrutiny."
Seth Shostak, a leading American astronomer, was also scathing,
describing Seymour's theory as "nonsensical".
He pointed out that even though large planets like Jupiter had
magnetic and gravitational fields far greater than the Earth's,
they were massively diluted by distance. "Jupiter's
magnetic field is about a trillion times weaker than the Earth's,"
he said. "You would experience a far
stronger field from your lights and washing machine." Shostak
works for the Seti Institute in California which is building a
powerful radio telescope to seek alien life. "By 2025 we will
have surveyed a million stars and I believe we will have found
intelligent aliens," he added.
Hawking, Lucasian professor of mathematics at Cambridge
University, has said that astrology
became impossible as soon as early scientists found that the
Earth was not the centre of the universe, an idea on which
astrology was founded.
However, Seymour's theories won qualified support from an
unexpected source. Richard Dawkins, professor for the
public understanding of science at Oxford University, who once
suggested that astrologers be prosecuted under the trades
descriptions act, said that although he had not read the book
Seymour's ideas sounded interesting. Astrologers were delighted
by Seymour's claims. Russell Grant, the astrologer, said:
"At last someone is not just saying:
ŒIt's a load of poppycock'. If the moon is connected with the
ebb and flow of the tides, and humans are 70% water, then why
can't the moon be affecting us? So we have good moods or bad
moods depending upon the position of the moon?"
Others seem to agree although few will discuss it openly.
Several years ago it emerged that the European Bank for
Reconstruction and Development was using astrology to help
manage its £5 billion investment portfolio ‹ programming
computers with crucial dates such as lunar eclipses and
planetary conjunctions.
This year's Sunday Times Rich List included an analysis of the
star signs of Britain's 1,000 richest people ‹ finding
significant differences with 110 born under Gemini but only 73
under Pisces. Among the powerful who have admitted consulting
astrologers to make decisions are Ronald and Nancy Reagan, who
allowed the astrologer Joan Quigley to dictate the presidential
agenda, including the take-off times for Air Force One. Reagan's
chief of staff reportedly had a colour-coded calendar around
which he was expected to organise the President's schedule:
green for "good" days and red for "bad". Even Margaret Thatcher
once told MPs: "I was born under the
sign of Libra, it follows that I am well-balanced."
STAR SIGN OF THE RICHEST 1000
Gemini 110
Taurus 104
Aries 95
Capricorn 92
Aquarius 91
Virgo 88
Libra 87
Leo 84
Sagittarius 84
Cancer 80
Scorpio 79
Pisces 73
Source:
The Sunday Times Rich List 2004
Jonathan Leake
Science Editor
Sunday Times 16 May 2004
Ýstanbul
-28.05.2004
http://sufizmveinsan.com
|