Astrology, religion, bad journalism

An article in today's Guardian seemed to be contemplating whether religion had been usurped (ah, there's a word, eh? Usurped. Penelope's suitors usurp Telemachus, Claudius usurps Hamlet, Buck Mulligan usurps Stephen Dedalus, astrology usurps religion) by the star-crossed seers. The basis for this pointless navel-gazing comes from a survey, seeming to say that two-thirds of people believe in astrology, whilst only one third believe the bible to be true.
In some bizarre abuse of statistics, the author then goes on to imply that these are two distinct groups. To my mind, they're likely to have significant overlap - anyone who believes the bible to be the work of god is likely to lack sufficient critical-thinking skills as to believe that stars determine one's destiny. And vice-versa. And if they were distinct, there'd be very little elbow room for the likes of me, who thinks they're both rather silly. The point of the article is really rather irrelevant - who cares about the internecine squabbling of various superstitions, but once again, the lack of understanding of basic maths is a telling feature. Will they ever learn?