In this time of uncertainty, millennials are turning more and more to the answers of astrology, reports The Guardian with nothing more than a string of anecdotes to back up its astounding claim.
As if that's not bad enough, the article then goes on to suggest it's all a matter of debate whether astrology is really just quantum physics in disguise.
"(Sceptics will say that it is not science-based; practitioners will argue roots in astronomy and connections to quantum physics)," the author wrote, neglecting to include even a shred of explanation for what that exactly means (and between brackets nonetheless).
"Sceptics will say that it is not science-based; practitioners will argue roots in astronomy and connections to quantum physics." Oh dear lord. 😖— Katie Mack (@AstroKatie) March 11, 2018
So, let's be really clear here. Quantum physics is a fundamental scientific theory - developed from over a hundred years of observations, calculations and hard data - that uses the behavior of tiny particles to explain how nature works.
Astrology, on the other hand, is an unsubstantiated hunch that the positions of celestial objects can somehow explain and even predict what is going to happen to individual people here on Earth.
Yet, despite what The Guardian would have readers believe, there isn't a shred of physical evidence to suggest that the position of planets and stars can influence, say, the personality of a newborn.
"roots in astronomy" - It's the other way around. Astronomy grew out of astrology, not vice versa.— Katie Mack (@AstroKatie) March 11, 2018
"connections to quantum physics" - Waving your hands and saying "uncertainty" and "everything is connected" is not the same as having any comprehension at all of quantum physics.
Instead of interviewing an astrophysicist like Katie Mack, who could have shed some scientific light on the dubious idea, the author decided to interview a string of astrologists and astrology fans instead.
"They [skeptics] think that anybody who follows it is away with the fairies, because it's just so generalised," said one astrologist.
Now, the astrologist continues, there's an articulate and informed discussion going on based on the massive expanse of knowledge people have at their fingertips.
Never mind that nowhere in the article does the author bother to expand upon what that "informed discussion" looks like or what that "massive expanse of knowledge" actually contains.
To be fair, the author does dedicate one sentence to those that are skeptical of astrology, but that inadequate reference is immediately followed by a rebuttal: "... you have to extensively engage with astrology to see how it might relate to your life, and most sceptics won't do that."
Even though the author only bothered to explore one side of the argument, she convinced herself the trend was a worthwhile pursuit.
"The reading was uncannily accurate and I have thought about it every day since it happened," she gushed, after getting her birth chart read by a local astrologist.
"She offered clear and precise pictures of the kinds of people I am drawn to, as friends and as partners, and why that might be."
To top it all off, the article ends with a promotional list of astrological apps and books - just in case the reader was beginning to think the piece was just a little too objective.
I'd be impressed if there were any actual research behind any of the claims in the piece.— Katie Mack (@AstroKatie) March 11, 2018
Science AF is ScienceAlert's new editorial section where we explore society's most complex problems using science, sanity and humor.