And the mainstream media are not likely to report it if it proved favourable to astrology.
But the sole reason for the resurgence of astrology in the 20th century was the mainstream media. The newspaper horoscope was uniquely responsible for that.
And the Daily Mail in particular is extraordinarily sympathetic to astrology and all sorts of 'parascience'. It stems mainly from the delightful dottiness of the late Lord Rothermere, but only in the Mail will you find quasi-serious articles on the Bible Code, Nostradamus and other such stuff. Patric Walker was paid a fortune both for his jobbing '12 sizes fit all' horoscopes and his personal work for Vere Rothermere. Believe me, if there was a scintilla of a suggestion that there as any scientific basis for astrology, the Mail and other mid-market tabloids would wet themselves with excitement.
As for the big why are we here question; it's totally irrelevant. There is no 'why' necessary. We do not exist in a purposive universe; all we need to know is the 'how'. The why exists only in the minds of those who seek a deeper 'meaning' than the possibly banal scientific explanation. And, in the absence of a 'meaning', we invented god.
Mind you, that banality and sleight of invention did give us J.S.Bach, Giotto, Dante and eventually Mahler, Courbet and James Joyce, so it's no small thing. So, for the wondrous nature of humanity, including its potty irationality in believing in horoscopes, perhaps we should all be thankful!