This project with the 500 athletes has been criticized for being too broad. Astrologers like David Cochrane and Courtney Roberts have claimed on their web pages that it is better to do research on a more specialized group like e.g. tennis players or
swimmers, because each sport demands different skills from the people engaged in it. I believe that is true, if the purpose of the research is analytical - i.e. to find astrological elements, which show statistical significance. An astrological element could
for instance be a sun sign or a particular aspect between two planets.
But the research with neural networks is never analytical. When combining astrology and neural networks, you always work with entire charts rather than chart elements. Furthermore
I am not trying to establish ways to predict preferences for a particular profession or branch of sport, instead I am trying to establish a link between astrology and the super categories described by Howard Gardner as multiple intelligences:
I believe such super-categories are much more useful and generic than a specialization within a profession or athletism. Furthermore,
multiple intelligence theory is broadly accepted as "good science", and establishing a general link between astrology and multiple intelligence theory is the same as establishing a link between astrology and science.
Such a link is being established
- here and now! Even though I have only carried out 44% of the planned test, and even though only 79% of the athletes have placed themselves among the 25% highest athletic scores in the random data (= swimming lane 1 and 2) these results cannot be ignored,
they can be repeated whenever wanted (for instance in a blind test), and they can still be improved, since I haven't taken all the methods of improving the the neural network's performance and capacity into use yet.