an e magazine from ASSAM & NAGALAND      

(c) Opponents of astrology declare that the natal-chart is a meaningless scrawl with an arbitrary distribution of planetary ownership of zodiacal houses.

The fact is that the design of the natal chart which was finalized in Mesopotamia and has remained unaltered for the last three thousand years, is a codified map of the solar system with the Sun, Moon and six planets showing their relative orbit within the solar system (the enigma why the Moon is placed nearest to the Sun, and the logic behind the design will be discussed subsequently).

(d) One major objection against the Indian astrology is that most of the Naksatras (combination of stars) which are supposed to influence the 'fate' are located at a distance from the Earth which may vary from tens to millions of light years away. However powerful may be the energy regime within these Naksatra, the distance from our Earth is too great for them to have any significant influence on the biological world on this Earth. Even the energy received on Earth's surface from quasar and neutron stars are too feeble to bring any appreciable change in an individual's life.

In reality the Naksatra are used in the Indian astrology as only indicators (like milestones) to ascertain the angular positions of the celestial members of the solar system, in relation to the earths observation posts.

It is comparatively easier to put forward 'rational explanations' in support of astrology than to provide scientifically verifiable proof. We are submitting the evidences and the readers can draw their own conclusions about the scientific veracity of astrology.

From the Sixties of the present century a number of authors have come out with a mass of statistical data evincing that the success of astrological predictions goes much beyond the possibilities for achieving the same by mere chance or coincidence [Gauquelin, M; Davies.P; Eysensk. H.T.; Brown F.A.(Jr) and others]. Weakness of this form of scientific evidence is that no definite motive force behind the astrological 'influence' has been identified. Secondly, the antagonists may argue that there may be entirely different causative factors behind the statistically supported 'successful' astrological predictions.

For the last one century, the proponents of 'scientific astrology' are loosely using terms such as 'cosmic force', 'cosmic rays', 'cosmic energy' etc. in their literature never bothering to clearly define these terms. From the thirties of the twentieth century, studies of the effects of the sunspot cycles on the terrestrial electromagnetic field disturbances brought out a statistical relationship between increase in the incidence of 'accidents and crime with violence' and the increase in the quantum of electromagnetic disturbances in the Earth's atmosphere is triggered by intensification of solar turbulence. A number of scientists came out hesitatingly with statements like, "There appears to be links between the life functions and geomagnetic field". The geomagnetic field in its turn is affected by the fluctuations of the solar-terrestrial and interplanetary energy field. P. Seymour (1988) in his book 'Astrology: the Evidence of Science' came out boldly with the suggestion that the interplanetary electromagnetic force field is the "link of astrological influence".

Adynamy of this genre of work is that successive authors have failed to establish that the ancient formulators of astrological tenets of any civilization knowingly or unknowingly followed particular laws, systems or periodicity of 'electromagnetic energy field' construed by the modern physicists and confirmed by instrumental verification. If they could demonstrate that at least some cardinal rules governing astrological predictions or predictive classifications are exactly same, or at least very much similar to the established rules of cosmic physics, the 'scientific astrology' would then have stronger legs to stand.