Famous Test Of Astrology Is Seriously Flawed

[juno jones]

Forgive me if some has posted this before, but I was out crusin' around on astrology sites and found this:

http://news.topwirenews.com/2009/07/15/Famous-Test-Of-Astrology-Is-Seriously-Flawed_200907152606.html

He points out that Carlson initially intended to see if the astrologers could select the correct profile as either their first or second choice at a statistically higher than expected rate but “ignored his own protocol without giving reasons.” Based on his reanalysis of the data, Ertel confirmed that the astrologers were able to select the correct profile as either their first or second choice at a rate significantly better than expected by chance.

With statistical significance, the astrologers also were able to identify which personality profile was the poorest “fit”, a finding that also contradicts Carlson’s original claim. And a statistical reanalysis of the one to 10 numerical ranking system the astrologers were asked to use to subjectively indicate how strongly they felt about their individual choices weighed in their favor as well

An interesting deconstruction of the flaws in the construction and interpretation of an experiment which is used widely to 'debunk' astrology. However, the actual results were somehwat positive toward astrology and indicate that at the very least, the subject warrants more study.