Zodiac Signs

[Ioke]

I just learned about the new zodiac sign changes...and literally, I have to learn about who i am based on my zodiac. Each sign has it's own unique attributes and personalities that you or other people tend to fashion themselves based on their signs. I used to be a Taurus or The Bull, who are supposed to be earthly, stubborn, and are ill-tempered but is associated with art and beauty. And now, I'm an Aries. I didn't even know that Aries is The Ram or what characterizes them.

With the zodiac signs changed 2011 announced yesterday, many are wondering if the new astrological signs are for real or a hoax? What about sidereal astrology. What?

Here’s the scoop on the zodiac signs changed business – astronomer Parke Kunkle said the new astrological signs are a result in changes in the Earth’s alignment, which impacted the dates of many zodiac signs.

Also? A 13th zodiac sign, Ophiuchus, has been added.

Here are the zodiac sign changes for 2011:

Capricorn: Jan. 20 – Feb. 16
Aquarius: Feb. 16 – March 11
Pisces: March 11- April 18
Aries: April 18 – May 13
Taurus: May 13 – June 21
Gemini: June 21 – July 20
Cancer: July 20 – Aug. 10
Leo: Aug. 10 – Sept. 16
Virgo: Sept. 16 – Oct. 30
Libra: Oct. 30 – Nov. 23
Scorpio: Nov. 23 – Nov. 29
Ophiuchus: Nov. 29 – Dec. 17
Sagittarius: Dec. 17 – Jan. 20

BUT… is the astrological sign change for real or a hoax?

Sidereal astrology needs to be considered… the sidereal zodiac is based on constellations, so this new zodiac signs change news from yesterday really only applies to people in the East.

Westerners follow the tropical zodiac that is fixed to seasons (equinox to equinox).

http://tv.popcrunch.com/zodiac-signs...eal-astrology/

Personally, learning about the zodiac is just a fun means to learn about yourself, your future or who you're compatible with. I don't follow it religiously or take everything it says by heart. I suppose it's one of those things you're so used to, when people ask what your zodiac is, I would automatically say Taurus, and now I have to ask if they were referring to the new or the old zodiac.

Did your Zodiac sign change? And what are your attributes that are compatible with your new or old zodiac?

[Day Tripper]

Astrology is make-believe. Horoscopes seem to be accurate based on the combination of the Forer effect and confirmation bias

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Dp2Zqk8vHw

[CWF]

The OP is justified in discussing this personality theory in my opinion and it can't be any worse than many of the hair brained race theories that are regularly pimped and it might even make more sense.

Having said that, there are no Zodiac sign changes. The story originated from an interview with an astronomer who made mistakes in distinguishing the constellations and signs attached to those constellations. It was a story that burned out of control once printed. You can go back to being your normal sign again.


No new zodiac sign, says Astrology Federation (and rocket science backs that up)

Continue reading on Examiner.com: No new zodiac sign, says Astrology Federation (and rocket science backs that up) - National Astrology | Examiner.com http://www.examiner.com/astrology-in...#ixzz1B8BKVM00

http://www.examiner.com/astrology-in...-backs-that-up

---------- Post added 2011-01-15 at 12:45 ----------

Astrology is make-believe. Horoscopes seem to be accurate based on the combination of the Forer effect and confirmation bias

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Dp2Zqk8vHw

Astrology and horoscopes are two different things. Astrology has a basis as a theory. Horoscopes are what you are really criticizing not Astrology.

[birko19]

Astrology is pretty bullshit lol, in any case, I was a Taurus before the change, still a Taurus after the change, I guess I'm just too stubborn to give my sign up

[daraccount2]

Yay, I'm now pisces!

Aries suit me better.

It's all crap beyond crap anyway.

[Helios]

Of course Zodiac signs are bullshit. They are just a fun time-waster for people, if you treat them seriously you are making a big mistake.

[omm 'e m.e.r.d.a.]

Nothing has changed, Ophiuchus isn't new, it's just that the astronomical community has made the layman aware of the Sidereal zodiac, which is there to reflect the actual sign that is in the sky during particular periods. I have a feeling they did this to confuse and break the superstition, but ironically people have actually reacted as if it was an established science. Kind of funny actually, and ironic because I was watching Kabalistic astrology class where it was dealt with as a science, and not one person asked a question, I wonder what they said when they found out the the signs no longer rest in the same places they use to, and there is a 13th constellation. Anyways, most western astrology is based on the Tropical zodiac, not Sidereal so you have nothing to worry about:-)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...diac-sign.html

[Day Tripper]

Astrology and horoscopes are two different things. Astrology has a basis as a theory. Horoscopes are what you are really criticizing not Astrology.

What aspects of astrology are valid, then? The Mars effect, which some have demonstrated to be statistically insignificant?

[omm 'e m.e.r.d.a.]

What aspects of astrology are valid, then? The Mars effect, which some have demonstrated to be statistically insignificant?

Astrology and horoscopes are two different things. Astrology has a basis as a theory. Horoscopes are what you are really criticizing not Astrology.

If you guys are interested in the "science" of astrology you may want to check out this site:

http://www.astrologyresearchjournal.org/

I haven't found anything terribly convincing yet, though it is definitely fascinating. In my opinion, astrology as a system seems to be based more on the Seasons and Earth phenomena, than what happens in outer space, a system of arch-types. Though I'm not sure I'd call it scientific, it does offer a decent, introspective look into the psychology of various personality's. I'm currently writing about the subject.

[birko19]

If you guys are interested in the "science" of astrology you may want to check out this site:

http://www.astrologyresearchjournal.org/

I haven't found anything terribly convincing yet, though it is definitely fascinating. In my opinion, astrology as a system seems to based much more on the Seasons and Earth phenomena, and it serves as a system of arch-types though I'm not sure I'd call it scientific, it does offer a decent, introspective look into the psychology of various arch-types. I'm currently writing about the subject.

Let's be serious here, there's nothing scientific about Astrology.