More than 30 years ago, a group of like-minded skeptics published an Objections to Astrology statement in The Humanist, a philosophical journal editorially committed to rational, enlightenment-era values.  In a companion essay, Astronomer Bart J. Bok, the group’s erstwhile spokesperson, argued that logic, reason and the physical evidence (what we know about the way the universe operates) all fail to support the astrological premise.  Now that the distances have been calculated, it’s possible to see how infinitesimally small are the gravitational and other effects produced by the distant planets and far more distant stars, he claimed.    

But here we are three decades later and the idea that oceans of “empty space” effectively isolate planet earth from everything else in creation no longer resonates for scientists the way it once did.  Researchers in disparate fields of scientific inquiry (quantum physics, biology, cosmology and the new field of consciousness research) have exposed serious flaws in the arguments scientists have been using for centuries to debunk astrology.  What they’re telling us now is that the natural world they’re observing doesn’t fit existing scientific theories all that well.  It’s become increasingly more apparent that ours is not a world of separate things and events but a cosmos that is coherent, connected and “informed” in ways not previously imagined (at least not in recent centuries).  Simply put, we’re living in a world in which ancient ideas about non-linear cosmic systems are beginning to make imminently more sense.