Falsity of astrology based on scientific view

My article on the falsity of astrology in The Sunday Times on July 29 is a rational scientific view on the topic, it is not an individual opinion, although not the point of view of the scientifically illiterate majority in Sri Lanka. Let me point out to readers of Srinath Fernando's letter to the Editor last week that

1. I never linked Palmistry with DNA. I just contrasted, that unlike astrology where one can prove the framework is 100% false, one may not be able to do so for other non-scientific beliefs like palmistry.
2. The celestial sphere is by definition a geocentric concept.
3. Rahu and Kethu are not Two Fixed points on the Ecliptic.
4. Archeoastronomy like in Angor Wat does not justify astrology.
5. Even if Dr Percy Seymour’s theory on gravitational effects of planets on the Sun, to explain the 11 year solar cycle is shown to be correct, the resulting changes in the geomagnetic fields are unrelated to the relative directions to planets as seen from Earth and do not for example change the DNA of a baby at the time of birth.

Prof. Kavan Ratnatunga, Mount Lavinia.