Astrology + Analytical Research

I've been thinking of ways to examine the validity of astrology. There is a lot of research out there that discredits astrology. I feel there is very little that in any way proves it. There are two possible reasons:

a) astrology is unprovable, because it is bullshit

b) there aren't many research-minded people who care for astrology.

Anyway, in determining whether the reason is either a) or b) I have decided to make some personal analytical research in a way that I feel satisfies the queries I have. I am not pleased with the majority of discrediting research that is out there, because it mostly attacks confirmation bias.

I have always thought that astrology makes up a part of people's personalities, but their life experiences lead them to repress some of their astrological personality and genetics create barriers against the expression of some of their astrological personality. It serves to very much muddy up the water, when someone is trying to be analytical about star signs.

I would also like to point out I do not have a particularly heavy conviction about astrology. I am doing this research to either solidify any doubts I have about it, or to reinforce any beliefs. As is the case with all good research

I have wanted to see if there is a correlation between certain professions and certain star signs for a long time. It only occurred to me today, watching a video about Brock Lesnar, how easy it is to tell the star signs of some fighters. I therefore though, 'because fighting is such a visceral and primal thing, you either fight or you don't, there probably are some star signs which are drawn towards fighting'.

So, because I don't have all the time in the world (dissertation looming ><), I took a small sample size of Ring Magazine's '80 best boxers of the last 80 years'.

Knowing something about the star signs, it would be fair to claim that the majority of (serious) fighters should be either:

Pugnacious, proud fire signs
Intractable, determined earth signs
Cancer. Because cancer is insecure and insecure people fight a lot!

So we should see a lot of:
Cancer, Capricorn, Taurus, Virgo, Aries, Leo and Sagittarius

The star signs that shouldn't be represented much are:

Water signs (like to avoid conflict) [MINUS cancer because of cancer's insecurity]
Personable, mutable Air signs (just not natural fighters- they are sociable and also not good at routine- so are bad for training)

so we should see very little:
Pisces, Scorpio, Gemini, Aquarius and Libra

The air signs are underrepresented. 14/80 are air signs.

The water signs, minus cancer, are the least represented. 3 for Scorpio and 2 for Pisces. Cancer, with 13, almost triples them added together.

The fire signs have a perfect distribution of 21/80.

The earth signs have a slight over-distribution of 27/80.

Also, seeing as Taurus and Cancer are the most emotional and protective star signs, they often tend to be the most violent, a lot of football hooligans are taurus and cancer; which could possibly be reflected in the fact that the most represented star signs are these two.

Pro
This chart is not remarkably one-sided, but it is fairly interesting. I think there is something in this. Air signs are not only not conflict signs, they are the signs which like variety. To become a great boxer, one needs above all else commitment.

Con
The distribution of the graph is standard. That there is a correlation between certain groups is probably just down to coincidence.

Reflection
I need a much, much bigger sample size, but I think there is something in this.

Firstly, if anyone knows of any peer-reviewed research that has been done into this exact topic, could you please inform me!

Secondly, can anyone who is interested in perhaps doing a tiny bit of research with me please PM me?

I would need you to maybe take a list of 100 greatest leaders, 100 greatest poets, 100 greatest musicians, 100 greatest inventors, 100 greatest actors or something.

I would also like someone to go further with me in fighting. I'd like a list of 100 MMA fighters and their star signs, and perhaps 'dangerous men'.

I would like to see if this sort of distribution of star signs switches according to the way it should, or completely randomly.

Some interesting nuances in the data, mostly interesting to boxing fans:
It's funny how many 'archetype' star signs there are in many boxers.

Cancer is the insecure, violent, sensitive, emotional star sign:

This is the tough exoskeleton that all cancers have to protect their soft flesh.

Notable cancers: Jack Dempsey, Mike Tyson, Jake LaMotta

Capricorn is the unrelenting, ambitious, arrogant star sign:


Notable capricorns: Pernell Whitaker, Muhammad Ali, George Foreman, Joe Frazier, Roy Jones Jr.

Taurus is the bull. It stands it ground and refuses to be budged, then charges you and you crumble like a cookie:


Notable taureans: Sugar Ray Robinson, Joe Louis, Sugar Ray Leonard, Marvin Hagler

I'm also interested to see if there's any bias towards any star sign in TL. I know there is a bias towards a specific type of Myers-Briggs personality called 'the general', which I thought was amusing given this is an RTS forum. I'm not saying that the poll would mean anything important though: