翻译的原则：由个人理解附会，原文在下方。 jiejing/伦敦的一项研究.md at main · momo24712/jiejing (github.com)
标题：占星术无法预测的研究
最近更新时间：BST时间2003年8月17日 12:01上午
对各地区属处女座的且冷静、理性的朋友的好消息：如大家预料，科学家们已经发现占星术无用。
占星术的核心观点——我们的人类特征由出生时太阳、月亮、其他星体（的位置）决定——似乎已被有史以来最彻底的科学研究搓穿。
几十年来，研究人员们跟踪调查2000多人——其中大多数的出生时间相近（彼此差以分钟计）。根据占星术的观点，此群体应当有非常相似的特征。
此群体婴儿时是被作为一项研究的一部分被招募，这项研究启动于伦敦在1958年，旨在研究出生坏境对未来健康的影响。同年三月初，此群体出生并被登记，此后定期监视其发育情况。
研究人员观察100多种不同特征，包括职业、焦虑程度、婚姻状况、攻击性、社交能力、智商水平和关于艺术、体育、数学、阅读的能力——所有这些特征，占星家们说，可由出生时间的星盘得知（测得）。
然而，科学家们未能找到“相近时间出生人（时间双胞胎）”之间存在相似之处的任何证据。他们在本期的《Journal of Consciousness Studies》上说：“…结果一致性是否定的。” 对这项研究的分析，由来自澳大利亚珀斯的科学家（前占星家）Geoffrey Dean和来自加拿大萨斯喀彻温大学的心理学家Ivan Kelly共同完成。
博士 Dean 说，这些结论推翻了占星家们的说法，占星家们处理出生数据（包含时间、地理）的精度远不如在这项研究中。“占星家们有时会辩解说，出生时间哪怕差一分钟，也会产生改变，促成不同的结果”，“但在占星家们的工作中，他们很乐意（随意的）从客户那里获得不精确的出生时间。”
在昨天，这些发现引起了占星学界的恐慌和愤怒。英国占星学界协会主席 Roy Gillett 表示，应以“极其谨慎地”（态度）对待这项研究的结论，并指责博士 Dean 企图“诋毁占星术”。 总部位于南安普顿的占星术批判研究小组的顾问 Frank McGillion说，“这项研究过于简单且选择性很高并没有覆盖所有的研究。”他补充道，他将向该杂志的编辑提出投诉。
几个世纪以来，占星家们一直声称能够仅凭人们的出生时间和出生地，深入了解人们的性格及命运。
占星术越来越受欢迎。调查显示，当前大多数英国人都相信它，较50年前只有13%相信。专业占星家协会声称，80%的英国人阅读星座专栏，心理学研究显示，60%的人定期阅读其所属星座的相关。
尽管科学家们对占星术（这种方式）持怀疑态度，但占星术已发展成一项庞大的全球产业，在报纸杂志和互联网网站上催生了数以千计的热线服务和星座专栏。
似乎没有哪个社会阶级可免疫于它的吸引力。最近一项调查显示，三分之一的理科生赞同占星术的某些方面（的结果），甚至有些素以头脑冷静著称的商人现在也在促成“金融占星术” 市场的蓬勃发展。——付费预测股市涨跌趋势。作为已知，占星术副刊可增加报纸的发行量，报纸方支付巨额费用给最受欢迎的占星者。
占星术领域中一些最受欢迎的人物，如 Russell Grant、Mystic Meg 和 Shelley von Strunckel，一年可以赚 600,000 英镑 或更多。
一个盈利的占星术网站估价可高达5000万英镑。
当《Daily Mail》发现其占星家 Jonathan Cainer 将于 1999年 离开该报时，其报道，愿支付 Jonathan Cainer 薪资100万英镑和奖金100万英镑以挽留。但 Jonathan Cainer 仍更喜欢《Daily Express》的报价：没有薪资，但他热线服务产生的钱，全部归他。
然而，对于占星家们来说，相近时间出生人（时间双胞胎）的研究只是坏消息的开始。博士 Dean 和 教授 Kelly 还试图确定占星家们能否在（由星盘与之对应的个体组成，然后解除对应关系，打乱顺序的）随机池中，根据个性特征重新建立（星盘与个体的）对应关系。
他们检查40多项研究证明，涉及700多位占星家，发现成功率不比猜的来的高。
即使占星家们得到足够的信息，并对他们作出的选择有信心，成功率也没有提高。
博士 Dean 说，这些发现的一致性严重打击了占星术。 “占星术没有一套被认可的机制，其原则无效且数以百次计的测试以失败告终。”“在占星术书籍中找不到对于这些问题的解释，实际上，这些书籍都是骗术。”
博士 Dean 已做好准备接受一连串的指责。他说：“我可能是占星界中最被讨厌的人，我被认为是叛徒。”
内容版权归属Telegraph Media Group Limited。
Astrologers fail to predict proof they are wrong
Last Updated: 12:01am BST 17/08/2003
Good news for rational, level-headed Virgoans everywhere: just as you might have predicted, scientists have found astrology to be rubbish.
Its central claim - that our human characteristics are moulded by the influence of the Sun, Moon and planets at the time of our birth - appears to have been debunked once and for all and beyond doubt by the most thorough scientific study ever made into it.
For several decades, researchers tracked more than 2,000 people - most of them born within minutes of each other. According to astrology, the subject should have had very similar traits.
The babies were originally recruited as part of a medical study begun in London in 1958 into how the circumstances of birth can affect future health. More than 2,000 babies born in early March that year were registered and their development monitored at regular intervals.
Researchers looked at more than 100 different characteristics, including occupation, anxiety levels, marital status, aggressiveness, sociability, IQ levels and ability in art, sport, mathematics and reading - all of which astrologers claim can be gauged from birth charts.
The scientists failed to find any evidence of similarities between the “time twins”, however. They reported in the current issue of the Journal of Consciousness Studies: “The test conditions could hardly have been more conducive to success … but the results are uniformly negative.”
Analysis of the research was carried out by Geoffrey Dean, a scientist and former astrologer based in Perth, Australia, and Ivan Kelly, a psychologist at the University of Saskatchewan, Canada.
Dr Dean said the results undermined the claims of astrologers, who typically work with birth data far less precise than that used in the study. “They sometimes argue that times of birth just a minute apart can make all the difference by altering what they call the ‘house cusps’,” he said. “But in their work, they are happy to take whatever time they can get from a client.”
The findings caused alarm and anger in astrological circles yesterday. Roy Gillett, the president of the Astrological Association of Great Britain, said the study’s findings should be treated “with extreme caution” and accused Dr Dean of seeking to “discredit astrology”.
Frank McGillion, a consultant to the Southampton-based Research Group for the Critical Study of Astrology, said of the newly published work: “It is simplistic and highly selective and does not cover all of the research.” He added that he would lodge a complaint with the editors of the journal.
Astrologers have for centuries claimed to be able to extract deep insights into the personality and destiny of people using nothing more than the details of the time and place of birth.
Astrology has been growing in popularity. Surveys suggest that a majority of people in Britain believe in it, compared with only 13 percent 50 years ago. The Association of Professional Astrologers claims that 80 percent of Britons read star columns, and psychological studies have found that 60 percent regularly read their horoscopes.
Despite the scepticism of scientists, astrology has grown to be a huge worldwide business, spawning thousands of telephone lines, internet sites and horoscope columns in newspapers and magazines.
It seems that no sector of society is immune to its attraction. A recent survey found that a third of science students subscribed to some aspects of astrology, while some supposedly hard-headed businessmen now support a thriving market in “financial astrology” - paying for predictions of trends such as the rise and fall of the stock market. Astrology supplements have been known to increase newspaper circulation figures and papers are prepared to pay huge sums to the most popular stargazers.
Some of the most popular figures in the field, such as Russell Grant, Mystic Meg and Shelley von Strunckel, can earn £600,000 or more a year. A single profitable astrology website can be worth as much as £50 million.
When the Daily Mail discovered that its expert on the zodiac, Jonathan Cainer, was about to leave the newspaper in 1999, it reportedly offered him a £1 million salary and a £1 million bonus to stay. He still preferred the offer at the Daily Express: no salary but all the money from his telephone lines.
The time-twins study is only the start of the bad news for astrologers, however. Dr Dean and Prof Kelly also sought to determine whether stargazers could match a birth chart to the personality profile of a person among a random selection.
They reviewed the evidence from more than 40 studies involving over 700 astrologers, but found the results turned out no better than guesswork. The success rate did not improve even when astrologers were given all the information they asked for and were confident they had made the right choice.
Dr. Dean said the consistency of the findings weighed heavily against astrology. “It has no acceptable mechanism, its principles are invalid and it has failed hundreds of tests,” he said. “But no hint of these problems will be found in astrology books which, in effect, are exercises in deception.” Dr. Dean is ready for a torrent of criticism. He said: “I’m probably the most hated person in astrology because I’m regarded as a turncoat.”
Information appearing on telegraph.co.uk is the copyright of Telegraph Media Group Limited and must not be reproduced in any medium without license. For the full copyright statement see Copyright
END