Respected astrology researcher Geoffrey Dean lends a hand

Respected veteran researcher Geoffrey Dean has shown a keen interest in assisting with testing for the Planetary Types. Mr Dean is a rigorous research into astrology and believes he is considered by many as a ‘turncoat’ for being a critic of astrology. I have quoted Mr Dean several times in my book:

“Likewise, Geoffrey Dean and others in “Recent Advances in Natal Astrology fount that astrologers make claims which lack substance and that the research done was “amateur in its conception, faulty in its execution and less than rigorous in its statistical analysis of the data.” “Astrology: Science of Superstition p. ix  (p.22)

“The current chaos in astrology is largely the result of a chronic infatuation with symbolism at the expense of reason. This is because the majority of astrologers reject a scientific approach in favour of symbolism, intuition and holistic understanding.” Geoffrey Dean — “Recent Advances in Natal Astrology.” (p.5)

There is a brief bio here: http://www.rudolfhsmit.nl/u-biog2.htm And a few words on astrology research and its conclusions here: http://www.rickross.com/reference/general/general574.html

Mr Dean has agreed to send me some material that may assist in establishing a bona fide test for the validity of the planetary types. It is very encouraging to have someone of Mr Dean’s stature in the field showing an interest. I will keep you posted on the progress.

In the meantime I am still requesting assistance from as many quarters as possible. Go to the Facebook fan page for details on how to get involved. http://bit.ly/19XE0Q

 

Testing for the Science of Celestial Influence

If my mind posits a tantalising possibility or theory, I have to follow it through, so when I  found out about the connection between the endocrine types and planetary archetypes, I had to devise my own tests to see if it was a true connection. I was emboldened by the success of Michel Gauquelin on planetary types.

My approach was to be slightly different from Gauquelin’s. Whereas his studies were based on psychological profiles, mine were based on the easily identifiable physical characteristics of each type, which seemed much more solid criteria.

I proceeded to collect nearly 400 horoscopes of well-known individuals along with photographs of each. My aim was to determine their planetary types to see where the planets fell. If a subject was, for instance, a Mars/Jovial, according to my judgment, I would look for either of these planets in key positions, which, in this particular Science of Celestial Influence means aspects or angles to the ASC or MC.

For chance predictions alone, one would expect a 16% success rate. My results for this first test ranged from 27% to 75%.

The second sample comprised a total of 33 friends and acquaintances of which 31, or 94% contained the appropriate planet.

For my third test I enlisted the aid of the National Council of Geocosmic Research in the USA. Two members agreed to send me photographs of 43 subjects, whose type I would identify and send them the planets I expected to find in the charts. They then sent the results by email. Of a total of 44 subjects I was able to identify 42 as types, from which I predicted 29, or 69.5% correctly.

My files have all been lost after several home moves, with the exception of the celebrity tests which are included as an appendix in the book. All I can offer is my word that the results are accurate. The other important point is, that I am not a scientist and an expert statistician could probably pick my test protocols apart and lay waste to my results, which is why further tests are necessary.

In about a week I will be calling for research partners who have an interest in establishing the reality of this connection between the planets and man.