In this article, the author looks at some of the functions of computers that can be used to lighten the load of the astrological researcher. Consideration of statistical techniques are excluded. For planetary orbit calculations the author refers to the work of “Matrix” publications. Data Management and Data Presentation are covered. The author asks the question: with a large chart collection and some ideas of what one may want from it, how can one organise it so that there is the smallest amount of programming to do?

The frequency of major aspects (conjunction, opposition, square, trine and sextile) of orb 5 degrees between Sun, Moon, Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn was examined for several groups of eminent professionals totaling 15,334 cases. When all five aspects were combined the mean excess or deficit of aspects involving planets significant in key sectors was 1.4%. Overall the occurrence of individually significant results was at chance level. There was no correlation with the effect of the same planets in key sectors or with the results of an aspect study previously reported by Dieschbourg. The results do not seem to support the traditional meanings generally attributed to these aspects by astrological textbooks.

This article is a synopsis of a talk given at the Astrological Association Research Conference in London on 25th November 2000. It deals with the possibility of using the position of the Moon and Sun at the time of the moon’s maximum declination, in terms of geographical longitude, as an indicator of the location of hurricanes and tropical revolving storms.

In 1979, CSICOP–skeptics tried to replicate Gauquelin’s Mars effect using a sample of 408 U.S. athletes. Their first intermediate result (from batch 1 of 3 sub-samples) which was not made public confirmed Gauquelin’s effect, i.e., an excess of athletes was born when Mars was rising or culminating. The main researcher, Paul Kurtz, enlarged the sample (by batch 2 and 3) and ended up with a deficit of athletes born with Mars in the sensitive zones. Suspicion of data manipulation that might explain why the Mars effect changed significantly and even reversed within an ongoing research process arose in CSICOP’s own circle. Gauquelin and others expressed like concerns, but none had scrutinised the data. The present study reanalyzes CSICOP’s athletes data and reveals two anomalies (1) For athletes of batch 2 and 3, citation counts – which is an eminence indicator – decrease significantly (athletes must be eminent for a Mars effect to become manifest), citations would hardly decrease under proper sampling conditions. (2) An unattended additional indicator of a Gauquelin Mars effect, namely an excess of birth counts for secondary Mars sectors 36 and 9 (no. 36 preceding Mars rise sector 1 and no. 9 preceding culmination sector 10) did not change, remained unaffected from batch 1 of the initial sample, to batch 3 of the enlarged sample. In 1979, birth counts in secondary sectors were not yet considered effect-indicative. Thus, empirical evidence supports the hypothesis of data manipulation. My attempt to get permission to check the US athletes data in Buffalo in CSICOP’s headquarters in order to verify this hypothesis remained un-acknowledged. The present account of this case of doubtful data treatment adopted CSICOP’s own guidelines:” Debunking should not be abused, but should be used with caution; it should be based on an arsenal of facts” (Kurtz, 1986). Another case of debunking in the field of Mars effect research, by J. W. Nienhuys (1997), is shown to fall short of this admonition.

This is a reply to Jan Ruis’s comments on the author’s replication of Ruis’s earlier synastry study. It reveals some more results based on Ruis’s comments. It also suggests that articles which claim positive findings for novel investigations should include clear statements of hypotheses to facilitate replication. In this respect, it also discusses the issues involved and the problems encountered when trying to form unambiguous and non-overlapping hypotheses.

At present a key question in astrological research is whether diurnal planetary effects are confined to eminent people. In order to investigate this, 23 predictions concerning the personality correlates of planets placed in Gauquelin’s plus zones at birth were obtained from previous experiments and from judges. These predictions were tested on 468 ordinary people by means of 11 measures of personality from the EPQ and the 16PF. Only three of the predictions gained any support: Mars in plus zones was associated with Psychoticism (p<0.05) and Extraversion (p<0.1). Because of the many failures to replicate, no firm conclusions can be drawn from these results.