It seems that a professor has studied the alignment of Earth and the stars and has concluded that the entire zodiac system is 2000 years out of date and bascially - well, wrong.
A Minneapolis astronomy professor has suggested that the zodiac system, based on "2,000-year-old information", is all wrong.
Parke Kunkle said the Earth's wobbly orbit means it is no longer aligned to the stars in the same way as when the signs of the zodiac were first conceived.
Isn't the zodiac system, where stars are grouped in arbitrary arrangements according to where they appear to be in the sky from our own viewpoint (and only our viewpoint), a prime example of early 'knowledge' which has been superseded by modern observation and analysis, a bit like the theory of the four humours or phlogiston? It can't be suddenly wrong, because it was never right. It's a myth, a story, which people used to believe but, for the most part, no longer believe.
That is funny on so many levels.
Professor Kunkle's explanation has become an internet sensation with people panicking on social network sites about what the changes mean for their star sign.
Oh noes! You mean I will have to stop being intense, passionate and secretive, and start being timid, lacklustre, and open about my feelings with total strangers? Stop being exciting and magnetic, and start being dull and repulsive? Not sure I can do that. We Scorpios are notoriously obstinate.
Shelley Ackerman, spokeswoman for American Federation of Astrologers, has been inundated with emails from concerned clients, but she advises them not to over-react.
I am sueing! No wonder I never win the lottery and I haven't gotten the promotion at work. I have been reading the wrong horoscope! That might even explain our current political situation in the US - Oh no!!! :)
ReplyDeleteI can't say I care much for the new one - 'Opiuchus'. Doesn't exactly trip off the tongue, does it?
ReplyDeleteMind you, 'Astrology guru' Rob Brezny of Free Will Astrology says the new sign is a scam.
Unlike the other twelve...
What? You mean everything I've read & believed from Psychic Bob was wrong?
ReplyDeleteThis has been known since the 13th Century. Anyone who observes the stars will see changes over time. Since the Universe began with the 'big bang' the star positions have changed second by second as the Universe expands making any attempt to read them or use them for precise zodiac readings pointless.
ReplyDeleteThey're good for crude navigation though and will get you across oceans if the GPS fails.
Oz - your current situation is caused by the Sun rising in Uranus, or something (that sounds rude in British English, not sure if it will to you), but there's nothing you can do about it.
ReplyDeleteJuliaM - I knew of Ophiucus as a constellation, but didn't know there was a new star sign. You mean there are 13 now? I must try to keep up.
Joe - yes, but on the other hand Holly Harper's agony column is the straight truth.
Don - thank you for injecting a note of reality!
That's the trouble with you Scorpions. Us Aquarians are creative and open to ideas and will find a way round this so that we can keep our sanity and wonderfulness but always in a creative way which means believing whatever suits us.
ReplyDeleteOne thing I will admit to though that has always puzzled me about our Zodiacal types. Which is the, 'You are a raving nutter who should be put in the bin and never let out. You have no redeeming features and would have been exposed at birth in ancient Rome and a good thing too.' sign. Which one is that?
Oh. No... I think suddenly I know. Does it begin with 'A' and have a 'q' in it?
This is the Dawning of the Age of Jim.
ReplyDeleteBe afraid.
Well, the ancient Greeks knew all about precession of the equinoxes in around 200 BC.
ReplyDeleteThat's the main reason that astrology doesn't use fixed stellar constellations. Each Zodiacal sign, although named for the dominant constellation when originally defined, is actually a fixed 30 degrees of the ecliptic, as calculated from the point of the vernal equinox. That marks the start of Aries the sign, regardless of where Aries the constellation is.
The other reason is that the constellations do not occupy equidistant positions and rather inconveniently overlap, so they have always been somewhat arbitrarily evened out for astrological purposes.
Hence, we are indeed about to enter the Age of Jim, where the starting of the ecliptic (which is, in relative terms, moving backwards) passes from Pisces into Aquarius.
Astrology may be a lot of cobblers, but it ain't quite dumb enough to fly in the face of basic astronomy, as this professor chap would like to make out. Or, by the sounds of it, a lot of clients who think they believe in it but haven't the first idea what a proper horoscope looks like.
PS: There is a theoretical 13-sign Zodiac that includes Ophiuchus (1st two weeks in December), but it's not widely accepted. Iirc there was also a 14-sign version (Seti or something like that) proposed that never took off.
UGGG, 8years getting my Doctorate in Astrology is a total waist.
ReplyDeleteI'm always amazed at the quality of commenters on this blog. Endo, thanks for the knowledgeable input. I expected nothing less. And Rob, you have given me a new name for my see-food diet: Total Waist!
ReplyDeleteThanks all.