thoughts on those attempting to debunk astrology...

I am constantly surprised at how much energy many of those that dismiss astrology will expend to attempt to debunk it. It seems driven by either frustration or downright anger that those that see connections in astrology can't stop seeing them... that there is no way of convincing them of their error in seeing a syncronicity between the positions of planets and the seasons, with things here on earth.

From science's perspective, when it was discovered that the earth revolves around the sun instead of the sun around the earth, astrology should have quietly disappeared in shame. But, much to the dismay of many who find comfort in the solidity of science in lieu of all else... it hasn't.
In fact... it has strongly persisted like a pesky illegitimatized little brother.
Even regular bullying hasn't worked to make it disappear.

It might be a good idea to question why.
Why does astrology continue to persist despite the efforts of so many armed w/ science to bring it down?

What has not put those attempting to debunk astrology on strong footing, is that they have had a history of lacking an adequate level of knowledge on the subject they are arguing against. It has seemed that most have little more than a sun sign column awareness of the existence of astrology, and that they lack a complete realization that this is the equivalent to saying that identification of a few constellations comprises the entire study of astronomy.

If the person attempting to debunk astrology is doing so merely w/ a sun sign column level of knowledge of astrology, they are poorly up for the discussion.
Sun sign columns are but one (in my opinion, broad stroke) use of astrology.
The list of applications is long. There are medical astrologers and financial astrologers (yes, who even invest their own money based on what they see).
Of course there is the catch... to apply astrology to something such as the financial markets, one must first be an expert in both astrology as well as financial markets.
There are different approaches to astrology, and each requires more study than is realized by most to master. And as in any field, individuals hold varying levels of expertise.

Many on the side of science might say that those who "believe in" astrology must range from being slightly touched to being full blown whacky nut-jobs of the airy fairy persuasion.
Sigh... this is mere ad hominem attack, which is a common (wrong) way to attempt to dismiss an opponent in a debate.
It holds no weight toward actually dismissing astrology.

The root meaning of the word 'science' is knowledge, but at this point in time science only validates knowledge that fits into a very limited scope.
Over time, "scientific method" has been established as a way to create a consensus on "facts", and this scientific method has become the basis for the argument against astrology.
The problem with this is that it is limiting.
It actually inspires dismissal of many of the subtle patterns in life right around us that can't be appropriately limited and contained to be measured and quantified for study. In fact, if something cannot be adequately contained and controlled in order to limit the variables, it cannot even be studied by "scientific method" in any accurate manner. For this reason, science has grown quite expert at studying death, but it is not as great at studying life. Even our medical students at top universities such as Harvard and Tufts only get pieces and parts of the body to study at a time. They never approach the body as a whole, and this does mean that they are actually studying death.

Very often, 'life' knowledge is brushed off as "old wives tales" or crone's knowledge, yet it is also connected to something deeper than book knowledge... wisdom.
Although wisdom maybe yet another thing which can't be measured or quantified, somehow we know it when we see it.
I'm sorry to have to rock the security of those that consider science their god... but, there are things that are real and have validity that cannot be measured and quantified by scientific method. Love happens to be my personal favorite.

On the subject of whether to "believe in" astrology or not... informed decisions require actual investigation. I would challenge anyone to genuinely explore astrology beyond sun signs. By all means, investigate the cycles of the outer collective planets and the cycles of human history, as well as one's own personal natal chart.

Some will realize that astrology is an archetypal language which is a tool for describing the cycles in the universe around us. Some may not. Some may not be able to let go of the question of causality. Do the planets "cause" the things we experience, or is it just the synchronicity of the Hermetic law "as above so below, as within so without"?

I can only speak for myself on this subject. I see the repeating patterns and I consider the Hermetic Law like a litmus test. I'm not convinced the planets are causal, and I'm happy to leave proving or disproving such things to science. It doesn't matter in my opinion, because either way I find comfort in the synchronicity that I do see in astrology.