The latest uninspired astro critique is from Slate magazine. A Brazilian science journalist, plugging his forthcoming book about why astrology is bad for you, uses a cruel attack on Linda Goodman (who died over 30 years ago) to make his point. When Linda’s daughter committed suicide, she refused to accept it (her Sun trined Neptune in the 5th house). And snatching at Andrew Ross Sorkin’s regurgitations of equally old accusations against Evangeline Adams (wherein she predicted the 1929 market would go up, which did), he illogically concludes that “Unwarranted beliefs – those without basis in reality, like astrology – are dangerous.” Huh?
The author has done some good historical research, but his one-sided arguments are familiar. He made up his mind long before his reporting, and clearly hasn’t learned anything about the practice of astrology, all while touting the scientific rigor that astrology lacks. I can no longer access the article without signing up, but you may barf to read it anyway.
Anti-astrology zealots seem united in both their prejudice and lack of creativity. They can’t find anything positive to say about their own topics, so choose to beat down something they don’t understand. But astrology does get attention, and he’s capitalizing on its popularity, as Sorkin did.
https://slate.com/technology/2026/05/astrology-science-problem-linda-goodman.html