Change in astrological signs

[unteruber]

http://www.startribune.com/lifestyle...9.html?refer=y

The Minneapolis Star-Tribune reported a few days ago that the traditional zodiac scheme of 12 “signs,” is off by a couple thousand years, and fails to include a 13th sign that it should have had . Countless people were astonished by the “news” in Monday’s Star Tribune in which Minneapolis astronomy instructor Parke Kunkle affirmed that the Earth’s “wobble” has shifted the zodiac signs. The buzz has raced across the Web like a shooting star. Some people seemed angry. “I believe it’s a zodiac scam,” said Jose Arce, 38, from Fort Lee, N.J., who runs a body shop. “I’ve known myself to be a Sagittarius, I believe, since I was born. So to come up now with some new sign? It’s unacceptable!” Others who took to the blogosphere to gnash and wail displayed a mix of: Defiance: “Dude, I’m a Leo and always will be a Leo, no matter where the sun is on August 5th. Besides, this very expensive tattoo on my right shoulder tells me so.”

[roman67]

I don’t believe in all these rubbish news. This is really ridiculous. I am Virgo and I will be a Virgo always.

[wintersprite1]

Note the date of the article: Updated: January 14, 2011

This did cause a ripple over the media and cyber space. After the big uproar, everyone has forgot already. But don't worry you missed it.... someone else will bring it up in a couple of years


TK

[Moog]

Yeah, it was pretty funny.

I have an acquaintance who still refers to himself as an orphician

[byjove]

I'm afraid it's not news to us on here. Every once in a while, someone from outside the art and science of astrology reports about something that they know little about. Many of these people I've seen to be traditional scientists or astronomers and claim to have some sort of understanding of astrology. The vast majority of these individuals are stuck back in the Sun-sign times and don't know anything beyond that. So, they are generally not astrologers (I really want to say never) and this happens every two or three years. When I joined the site a few years ago, this is what I was told. Now I'm here long enough to see and repeat the same.

What does surprise me however, is how people listen to quacks who have no qualifications or experience of the profession that they talk about. Would you listen to a psychiatrist who says our understanding of spiders is all wrong? Would you listen to a comedian exclaim that Hollywood is clueless about film-making? Or what about a musician who says that modern sociology is out-of-date? Well I wouldn't! It's great to be such a varied and curious individual, but to exclaim across a country or internationally about something you have no experience or qualifications about is just plain ridiculous to me.

As for the practical details, if you try the search option, these news stories have been discussed as they happen and the science is sometimes debated. Of all claims, these never go far here, though they are debated by people actually 'in the know'.

[roman67]

I didn’t notice date there. But the thread started on 23rd July, 2012.

[unteruber]

This individual whom you are talking about is a physicist/astronomer who has much more qualification than you (unless you are an astronomer yourself) or most of the people who take astrology as a religious dogma.

Most of the replies here are disappointingly childish without present a single technical details why one should not take this into consideration. But, then this is the reflection of people who are into astrology for their own reasons which have nothing to do with intellectual integrity.

Originally Posted by byjove

I'm afraid it's not news to us on here. Every once in a while, someone from outside the art and science of astrology reports about something that they know little about. Many of these people I've seen to be traditional scientists or astronomers and claim to have some sort of understanding of astrology. The vast majority of these individuals are stuck back in the Sun-sign times and don't know anything beyond that. So, they are generally not astrologers (I really want to say never) and this happens every two or three years. When I joined the site a few years ago, this is what I was told. Now I'm here long enough to see and repeat the same.

What does surprise me however, is how people listen to quacks who have no qualifications or experience of the profession that they talk about. Would you listen to a psychiatrist who says our understanding of spiders is all wrong? Would you listen to a comedian exclaim that Hollywood is clueless about film-making? Or what about a musician who says that modern sociology is out-of-date? Well I wouldn't! It's great to be such a varied and curious individual, but to exclaim across a country or internationally about something you have no experience or qualifications about is just plain ridiculous to me.

As for the practical details, if you try the search option, these news stories have been discussed as they happen and the science is sometimes debated. Of all claims, these never go far here, though they are debated by people actually 'in the know'.

[wintersprite1]

JAMES B. (JIM) KALER
Professor Emeritus of Astronomy, University of Illinois

The second line for each entry gives the average date on which the Sun enters the constellation according to the official boundaries established in 1930 by the International Astronomical Union. They depend somewhat on the proximity of a leap year. The modern boundary of Ophiuchus (the Serpent Bearer) is crossed by the ecliptic between Scorpius and Sagittarius, making it an unofficial thirteenth constellation of the Zodiac. It has no standing as part of the classical, traditional Zodiac, however. The Sun enters it November 30.

There we go.... The 1930 International Astronomical Union does not recognize Ophiuchus as part of the Zodiac. This comes from a professor of ASTRONOMY.

Ophiuchus is mentioned when someone wants media time or used to discredit Astrology.

TK

[stainedBlue]

Originally Posted by unteruber

This individual whom you are talking about is a physicist/astronomer who has much more qualification than you (unless you are an astronomer yourself) or most of the people who take astrology as a religious dogma.

Most of the replies here are disappointingly childish without present a single technical details why one should not take this into consideration. But, then this is the reflection of people who are into astrology for their own reasons which have nothing to do with intellectual integrity.

By 'profession' I think byjove was referring to the fact that the guy in the article isn't an astrologer. The two issues he raised have been known by astrologers for quite a while, and are a non-issue to astrologers. The first is precession of the equinoxes, and the second is that signs aren't necessarily constellations. Just because the guy is a qualified physicist/astronomer doesn't mean he's qualified to take ignorant jabs at a subject he hasn't studied. We've shrugged off the article because we know how silly it is, not because we're childishly closing our eyes holding to some religious ideation.

[Moog]

Originally Posted by unteruber

This individual whom you are talking about is a physicist/astronomer who has much more qualification than you (unless you are an astronomer yourself) or most of the people who take astrology as a religious dogma.

Most of the replies here are disappointingly childish without present a single technical details why one should not take this into consideration. But, then this is the reflection of people who are into astrology for their own reasons which have nothing to do with intellectual integrity.

Okies.

Love you too

[Zogo]

All this is is the sidereal/verdic zodiac with an extra bs sign thrown into it. Though I do reflect on verdic astrology once in awhile to compare it to the themes of my natal chart. I would dismiss the 13th sign. It's just properganda

[Moog]

I use a sidereal zodiac, and I do tend to get a lot of resistance when I tell people their sidereal sun sign. Ahh, good times.

The thing is that I think somehow people feel like their sense of self is threatened by it.

But 'the map is not the territory' as some smart guy once said. It's just a different map.

[byjove]

Originally Posted by unteruber

This individual whom you are talking about is a physicist/astronomer who has much more qualification than you (unless you are an astronomer yourself) or most of the people who take astrology as a religious dogma.

Most of the replies here are disappointingly childish without present a single technical details why one should not take this into consideration. But, then this is the reflection of people who are into astrology for their own reasons which have nothing to do with intellectual integrity.

There is no need to be rude. It's sad when I see comments like that; I see no reason to knowingly offend people and insult their 'intellectual integrity' as you referred to.

You've also made several assumptions here about myself and others who come here to learn astrology, one of them directly implying we don't learn the academic details, followed by an insult. For all you know, we could be more qualified, as you say - than you are.

If you were asking real questions I'd see possible discussion, but what's just happened is you've said something and thrown knives at anyone who doesn't agree with you. No learning will take place here so I'm out of this discussion.