Here is a collection of papers which discuss scientific
analysis of (and occasionally evidence for) correlations of
planetary movements with life on earth.
|
|
Suitbert Ertel - Hopeful Findings, Unduly Neglected, on Stars
and Human Affairs |
| Prof. Suitbert Ertel
evaluates: a study by Müller & Menzer of correlations between
infant mortality and Saturn; and Timm & Köberl's study of
astrologers, which suggests possible PSI effects. Ertel argues
that such emergent phenomena should be taken as a challenge
for further research. |
|
Petra
Stapp - Police Control Room Staff & their Perceptions
of Full Moons |
| This
paper is based on research amongst police staff, into the
frequently-encountered idea that full moons are times when
there are peaks of anti-social behaviour. As well as the inherent
interest of the subject, it sheds a great deal of light on
the issues facing a researcher into astrology. |
|
Astrology,
Scepticism and Knowledge - a dialogue between Dennis Elwell
& Garry Phillipson |
| The
author of Cosmic Loom discusses his reservations
about the presentation of the sceptical viewpoint in chapters
9 & 10 of Year Zero |
| Nick
Kollerstrom: How Ertel Rescued the Gauquelin Effect |
| A concise
analysis of the recent history of the Gauquelin work. |
| An
Index to Nick Kollerstom on the Web |
| Where
to find all his articles - worth serious attention. |
| Full-length
interview with Dean, Ertel, Kelly, Mather & Smit |
| Includes 64 exchanges not included in the
Year Zero version of the interview |
| Mike
Harding - Prejudice in Astrological Research |
| Mike takes a look at the philosophical basis
for scientific evaluations of astrology |
| Dialogue
between Dennis Elwell and the Researchers |
| A long series of exchanges between a renowned
astrologer and four renowned critics of astrology. This link
takes you to a page which gives more detail on the 10 articles
which make up this body of work |
| Bob
Marks v Geoffrey Dean: The Importance of the Gauquelin work |
| What are the implications of the
Gauquelin work? How significant is it for astrology? Does
it challenge commonly-held views of the universe? Or is its
significance somewhere between little and nothing? Two very
different perspectives are offered here. |
| Suitbert
Ertel: Comments on Marks, Gauquelin and Dean |
| Prof. Ertel supports Bob
Marks's argument that the Gauquelin work is still a force
to be reckoned with; with links to two very substantial papers
for those who want more detailed analysis. |
| James
Brockbank: The Sceptical Attack of Dean et al on Astrology
(with Critique by Dean, Mather & Kelly) |
| A philosophical view of the issues involved
in evaluations of astrology, which can be downloaded as a
pdf file. Also available here: two critical commentaries on
Brockbank's article by Geoffrey Dean & Arthur Mather;
and a brief response from Brockbank. |
| James
Randi & Dennis Elwell: On the JREF's $1M Paranormal Challenge |
| A discussion between two protagonists with
very different views of the Challenge. With further input
from astrologer Deborah Houlding, and psychologist/scientist
Prof Suitbert Ertel. |
