01-23-2011, 02:04 AM
First of all, litllady went into this in her thread on astrology: http://www.bring4th.org/forums/showthread.php?tid=1509
Here's some snippets from the first post: "A couple thousand years ago...some men found it to be wise (convenient) to 'fix' the zodiac wheel....for the use of astrology.
This caused Astrology and Astronomy to no longer walk together side by side."
"There are many blunders of 'fixing' something that is forever changing. If the zodiac wheel always remained the same....we would never have a 'changing of ages'."
"I do warn though, it may not agree with the sign you were raised thinking you are. It may bring catalysts to you, showing you what you need to work on in your life."
She also mentions how Ophiuchus has been known about since the beginning, but omitted from "modern" astrology for convenience's sake.
Actually, you can use the program she mentioned, Stellarium, to discover which constellation the sun was in at your birth. It's often the sign right behind the one you've been told all your life. My theory is that you possess and use the traits of your true birth sign to move towards/utilize the traits of the sign you've been told you have. And your "next" life will be under the sign you moved towards in your "past" life (this one), and moving towards the next sign. So, having said that, let me say that I don't mean to belittle what you've shared here, Deekun. But I think the article you linked, in addition to being an opinion piece, seems to be a little shallow, manipulative, and deceitful, and even downright ignorant in some places.
Take the first sentences: "The new zodiac signs 2011 have shaken the axis of believers. With the new zodiac signs 2011, mankind has entered a new era that they haven't seen for thousands of years."
What does that even mean? There's no basis of truth in there. We're just building excitement for the reader I guess.
"Yet for those born between Nov. 29 and Dec. 17, they now have to be assigned a new label. Thanks to the moon and its gravitational pull, the new zodiac signs have uncovered the missing Ophiuchus symbol."
They HAVE to be assigned a new label? Says who? And this "new sign" was discovered because of the "gravitational pull of the moon"? Come on! That doesn't even make sense. Ophiuchus has always been known about. The moon excuse is like a parent trying to get their kid to believe in Santa Claus. It seems like the writer is trying to pull the wool over the eyes of the reader, who is generally uninformed about Astrology.
"In the last 3,000 years, it appears that the earth's constellation has changed around without our knowledge, and has shifted our symbols."
This is a mess to disentangle. What's "our" knowledge? Is it the knowledge of the "experts"? What's the earth's constellation and how can it change around? A constellation is a grouping of stars. Furthermore, how does that change "our" symbols?
"Those who took on the characteristics of one sign may now have to take on new ones. But at the least, the 12 old favorites have established features and traits to believe in. For Ophiuchus, readers are still scrambling to figure out what it means and what it says about them."
I'm not even going to comment on that... Or the rest of the article. Although I understand why this is said like it is, it's just kind of frustrating, I guess...
Here's some snippets from the first post: "A couple thousand years ago...some men found it to be wise (convenient) to 'fix' the zodiac wheel....for the use of astrology.
This caused Astrology and Astronomy to no longer walk together side by side."
"There are many blunders of 'fixing' something that is forever changing. If the zodiac wheel always remained the same....we would never have a 'changing of ages'."
"I do warn though, it may not agree with the sign you were raised thinking you are. It may bring catalysts to you, showing you what you need to work on in your life."
She also mentions how Ophiuchus has been known about since the beginning, but omitted from "modern" astrology for convenience's sake.
Actually, you can use the program she mentioned, Stellarium, to discover which constellation the sun was in at your birth. It's often the sign right behind the one you've been told all your life. My theory is that you possess and use the traits of your true birth sign to move towards/utilize the traits of the sign you've been told you have. And your "next" life will be under the sign you moved towards in your "past" life (this one), and moving towards the next sign. So, having said that, let me say that I don't mean to belittle what you've shared here, Deekun. But I think the article you linked, in addition to being an opinion piece, seems to be a little shallow, manipulative, and deceitful, and even downright ignorant in some places.
Take the first sentences: "The new zodiac signs 2011 have shaken the axis of believers. With the new zodiac signs 2011, mankind has entered a new era that they haven't seen for thousands of years."
What does that even mean? There's no basis of truth in there. We're just building excitement for the reader I guess.
"Yet for those born between Nov. 29 and Dec. 17, they now have to be assigned a new label. Thanks to the moon and its gravitational pull, the new zodiac signs have uncovered the missing Ophiuchus symbol."
They HAVE to be assigned a new label? Says who? And this "new sign" was discovered because of the "gravitational pull of the moon"? Come on! That doesn't even make sense. Ophiuchus has always been known about. The moon excuse is like a parent trying to get their kid to believe in Santa Claus. It seems like the writer is trying to pull the wool over the eyes of the reader, who is generally uninformed about Astrology.
"In the last 3,000 years, it appears that the earth's constellation has changed around without our knowledge, and has shifted our symbols."
This is a mess to disentangle. What's "our" knowledge? Is it the knowledge of the "experts"? What's the earth's constellation and how can it change around? A constellation is a grouping of stars. Furthermore, how does that change "our" symbols?
"Those who took on the characteristics of one sign may now have to take on new ones. But at the least, the 12 old favorites have established features and traits to believe in. For Ophiuchus, readers are still scrambling to figure out what it means and what it says about them."
I'm not even going to comment on that... Or the rest of the article. Although I understand why this is said like it is, it's just kind of frustrating, I guess...