Astrology on news

!3*_!un@_!nc*9n!t*

Well-known member
How Come ?? .... only the writers of the columns would know that [smile] !!!

"Proof" is a relative term , a matter of personal taste.

"maybe" ... they are different astrolgers .... with different views , opinions and methods.
 

gaer

Well-known member
unukalhai said:
Newspaper astrology is essentially meaningless. You might as well roll a 12-sided die.
I'd say something stronger: I think it is utter nonsense, and it makes a joke of astrology. I really hate it!

Gaer
 
Last edited:

unukalhai

Well-known member
Agreed. I could say some pretty nasty things about newspaper astrology but I know better than to let my Scorpio Mercury and Sun-Mars square have free roam ;)
 

!3*_!un@_!nc*9n!t*

Well-known member
unukalhai said:
Agreed. I could say some pretty nasty things about newspaper astrology but I know better than to let my Scorpio Mercury and Sun-Mars square have free roam ;)

perhaps we could call this thread ..... rectitude and patience !!

LOL ... abso ~!@#$ lutely agreed ..... perhaps a mechanical "ouija board" might do better :D
 

unukalhai

Well-known member
Some of you geeks might recognize this from "Office Space" :)

office_space_kit_mat.jpg
 

smilingsteph

Well-known member
I used to work in the media/communications field myself and I know that these are made up! They just take the traits of the individual sun sign and turn it into some made up thing about the day. In order to get an accurate reading you need to have all of your eggs in a row...such as time, date and location of birth then you can look at the transits happening to your natal chart right now....
It really is a joke and just some fun reading....
Not to take seriously!
It makes astrology look bad!
 

Arian Maverick

Well-known member
I would tend to agree, but I know that some of Eric Francis' horoscopes based upon Sun sign alone tend to be accurate for me...but then again, I have my Sun, Moon, Mercury, Venus, and possibly Ascendant in Aries :rolleyes:

Arian Maverick
 

lillyjgc

Senior Member, Educational board Editor
Hi all,
I was approached a number of years ago to write a *horoscope* column for a local magazine.(It was paid work)...I have the same reservations about newspaper *astrology* as you have expressed above...but like Arian Mav I have found a particular newspaper astrologer to be very accurate.So how come this guy can be so accurate?
Well, he bases his forecast on a solar chart for each sign...eg He makes the chart for each sign, putting say sagit. on the first cusp and reading the chart from there.Its quite possible to see where planetary strengths/weaknesses are occurring. And the moon of course is a big player in daily newspaper astrology...Obviously nothing can be gauged with any accuracy but it is possible to construct such a chart and work from that.Alternatively, one could cast a horary chart for each sign. In fact I chose the former method when I prepared the column for the magazine.
The one good thing about newspaper astrology is that it raises the *profile* of astrology generally. Had it not been for newspaper columns/horoscopes etc many people wouldn't even know astrology existed.On the other hand, it only takes one *lousy* astrologer to give the whole thing a *bad name*.
Eric Francis has been startlingly accurate for me too, as has Jonathon Cainer and Tony Hyland...I think its a mistake to summarily dismiss newspaper astrology per se. Astrologers, like everyone else, have to *make a living*.
I always *read my stars*, out of interest but when I want answers I look aty my own chart, in depth.If I am a bit down reading my stars can lift my mood completely..certainly reading the stars aloud at the breakfast table inspires some lively discussion about matters that otherwise may never just *come up*....Cheers, Lillyjgc
 

gaer

Well-known member
lillyjgc said:
The one good thing about newspaper astrology is that it raises the *profile* of astrology generally. Had it not been for newspaper columns/horoscopes etc many people wouldn't even know astrology existed.On the other hand, it only takes one *lousy* astrologer to give the whole thing a *bad name*.
Lilly,

I suppose we all have to start somewhere. :) (Meaning that however it happens, if we stumble into some serious study of astrology, it's a good thing…)

But is there any way around the fact that whatever "reading" is done has to be for anyone born under a sun sign, and day during that period and for any year?

It would be cool, for instance, to have a daily "reading" for all the possible combinations of Sun/Moon/AC, but that would take 1,728 separate readings.

I started out learning about astrology to prove to myself that it doesn't work. I sent away for a computerized "reading" based not on my Sun sign only but on my exact birth data, and even though I got much the same kind of "cookbook" readings for my AC, Sun/Moon combination, other planets, it was suprisingly accurate.

That caught my interest, so I went to a library, checked out all the materials I could find, then learned how to cast a chart. I became interested in astrology by trying to prove that it was nonsense. Ironic, isn't it? :)

But I can't help thinking that anything I read in a newspaper is written to be applicable to one out of 12 people who live on this planet.

Then again, I'm one of those people who avoids newspapers, so I should probably not even be in this discussion. ;)

And on the other hand…

But…

Or looking at it from another view…

Sun and Moon in Libra can be so confusing! :D

Gaer
 
Top