In science, claims made are verified in principle, and then when it comes to experiments.
In pseudoscience, there are extraordinary claims made where incredibly insufficient evidence is given. This is important for obvious reasons - if a theory is not based on evidence and cannot be verified normally, there is no way to prove that it has anything to do with reality.
On the other hand, when a claim is clearly contradictory about what we already know about the world, we will need more evidence to accept it. Why? Because if this claim is correct, then many of the beliefs we have gained are incorrect. If those beliefs are well supported by experiments and observations, then new and contradictory claims are considered "extraordinary" and should be accepted when the evidence for it exceeds the evidence we have against it.
Astrology is a perfect example of a field defined by a great claim. If distant objects in space could influence the character and life of humans to the fullest extent possible, then the fundamental principles of physics, biology, and chemistry we have already applied are incorrect. This would be great. Therefore, a lot of high-quality evidence is required before the claim that astrology can be accepted.
Such a lack of evidence, even after thousands of years of research, suggests that the field is not a science, but a hypothesis.
Picture Source: https://www.indiatvnews.com/lifestyle/astrology