Bias in astrological data collection?

Hillary Clinton has been making the news recently because of her negative comments about Bernie Sanders. During the last election cycle there was much debate about the accurate birth time of Hillary Clinton. Interestingly AstroDataBank (astro.com) lists two birth times: one of 8:02 AM rated as DD (“dirty” or conflicting data) and the other of 8 PM, which is not rated at all despite the fact that it is what Hillary herself quotes as her own birth time and it is supported by a 1993 article in the Chicago Sun Times. Normally when data is quoted by the person it receives an A rating, or if it is drawn from a news source it might receive a B rating. Why Hillary’s own statement of her birth time goes unrated and is put in second place in AstroDataBank is baffling. I recall Chris Brennan in one of his podcasts saying that he personally asked Hillary for her birth time at a book signing and she responded “8 PM”. Shouldn’t this time take precedence in our data collection?

Here is a copy of the 1993 article in which the reporter apparently interviewed the family and saw copies of some birth documents.

[image error]

To facilitate reading, I have highlighted the following section below:

[image error]
“Early on Oct 26, 1947” Hillary’s mother arrived at Edgewater Hospital to deliver her first child. “Some 12 hours later” she welcomed Hillary into the world.

According to this 1993 article by Lynn Sweet, based on interviews and documents from Hillary’s family, Hillary was born “some 12 hours” after an early morning time, which would mean she was born in the afternoon or early evening. If her mother arrived at the hospital around 7 or 8 AM, then “some 12 hours later” would place the time of birth around 8 PM, which is what Hillary says when she is asked, apparently from a memory of what her mother told her.

Usually astrologers believe what their clients tell them and then try to look for corroborating evidence as to the birth time. In Hillary’s case there were comments by astrologers that maybe she was lying or trying to deceive astrologers so that they could not accurately comment about her chart. To me this view is utter nonsense because Hillary probably give little credence to astrology. In fact some astrologers got caught publicly lying about having documentation of the actual birth time. The likelihood is that Hillary was indeed born around 8 PM as she maintains and as is suggested by the 1993 article in the Chicago Sun Times.

Many astrologers in 2016 chose to ignore Hillary’s own stated birth time and instead used the 8:02 AM time to forecast the outcome of the election. Most of them got the prediciton wrong, suggesting by astrological reasoning that the morning birth time is probably inaccurate.