It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Earth Rotation Changes Zodiac Signs

page: 1
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 06:01 PM
link   


"The astronomers from the Minnesota Planetarium Society found that because of the moon's gravitational pull on Earth, the alignment of the stars was pushed by about a month."

Read more: newsfeed.time.com...


So according to this article the Zodiacs are:
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. 23-29.
Ophiuchus: Nov. 29-Dec. 17. (Yep, this one is new)
Sagittarius: Dec. 17-Jan. 20.

Read more: newsfeed.time.com...

Is this true? What will this mean from here on? I always thought I was an aquarius, possibly living in the age of Pises, possibly moving into the Age of Aquarius. Now I'm a Capricorn? I never put too much into astrology but I take it into very little consideration and now everything has changed?

Thoughts and opinions from astrologer and astronomers would be appreciated. I wish I knew what to ask, but I'm sittin here scratching my head.
Oh wait...
Why is Scorpio only 3 days long?
Why include Ophiuchus in the primary zodiacs. I knew he was always there but not paid attention to, why, I don't know.
So what does this mean for the Zodiacal age theory? We are in or going into Capricorn now?

Here's another article from FOX.
Age of Aquarius actually Age of Capricorn

Thank you everyone!!!




posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 06:02 PM
link   
This should be a very interesting thread to follow. Good find!



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 06:03 PM
link   
I always thought I was a Sagittarius and now I am something I can't even pronounce



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 06:05 PM
link   
This is only true to those born after 2009.

Lucky enough, because I seriously don't think anyone would actually really change their starsign and follow the new chart.



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 06:10 PM
link   
Nobody else finds this strange? Why all of a sudden do they make this determination and how did they arrive at it?

In astrology, sidereal zodiac and the constellation zodiac aren't the same anyway...

The Sidereal Zodiac consists of 12 equal signs, and the Constellation Zodiac has 13 constellations that include Ophiuchus, so I'm confused at what it is they are trying to tell us.

Is this an admittance that our calculation of time is off?

~Namaste



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 06:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Wildeagle
 


Thanks for the info!
How does it apply to those only born after 2009?

I don't think I would change mine, I feel more like an aquarius.



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 06:15 PM
link   
The astrological signs that modern astrologers use, are based on the charts of the skies in ancient Babylon. The way of determining your 'sign' is this: imagine the sun, and the earth circling it. And beyond that, a 'circle' of the various regions of the sky that depict each sign. Whatever sign that the earth is directly opposite the sun of, is the sign of that period of time of the year. It changes as the earth circles about the sun of course. And, because of the wobble of the axis of the earth, these positions have drifted over the 4000 years since these charts were established.



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 06:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by SonOfTheLawOfOne
Nobody else finds this strange? Why all of a sudden do they make this determination and how did they arrive at it?

~Namaste


That's how I feel. I couldn't find how exactly they came to this anywhere.

I wonder if it is just some stunt the media is using to poke and ridicule astrology? Or 2012 since some the the theories are based on a changing zodical age?The Fox news article was a little condescending.



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 06:16 PM
link   
I'm a goddamn Aries!
Not a goddamn Pisces.
Bloody annoyed not to mention the fact my famil buy commertion gifts at birth,weddings etc of star signs.
I don't care what this one group says, i'm an Aries and always will be.



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 06:19 PM
link   
Sorry OP this is a triple post the topic is being discussed www.abovetopsecret.com... Here.



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 06:24 PM
link   
reply to post by SlyFox_79
 


I'm not too sure on the details, but from what I hear, it's from when the sun entered this new constellation, which was November 2009.

Gotta love this...
''Sorry about the crippling identity crisis that was caused by learning your new astrological sign!''
edit on 13-1-2011 by Wildeagle because: Made an oopsie!



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 06:25 PM
link   
Found something interesting....



Professional astrology and author Matthew Currie contacted Salon to point out the fact that this kind of story is nothing new. Apparently, the Minnesota Planetarium Society is engaging in what Currie quickly called a "straw man argument" constructed to debunk the field of astrology.

Currie makes this basic distinction. Astrology is NOT astronomy and vice versa. The two fields diverged a long time ago and today, the very term "Zodiac" is used differently within each discipline. Currie explains the two meanings of the Zodiac:

The Zodiac, the twelve divisions of the sky made up of the horoscope signs, and the Zodiac, the band of constellations in the sky, are two different things. This is how a lot of skeptics of astrolgoy trick people to convince themselves and others that there's nothing to astrology. But in reality, we're talking about two different things.

So it might be safe to assume that the ASTRONOMERS in Minnesota recalibrated the Zodiac made up of the constellations while the ASTOLOGERS actually all agree on the twelve divisions.


www.salon.com...

Nothing to worry about????



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 07:01 PM
link   
the 'personas' of the zodiac are related more to the influence of the seasons than to the influence of the stars. the stars / constellations function as a sort of clock or celestial calendar that denoted the particular time of season... and yes, the clock might be off.


zodiac 101 (for those interested in and as of yet unawares):

the zodiac is based upon the combination of 2 seasonal principles:

the Elements: fire, earth, air, water
the Quadruplicities: cardinal, fixed, mutable

each Element has their own interpretations.
i.e. Water relates to the emotional self. Air - intellectual, etc.
(much of this elemental persona relations are also found in tarot suits, by the way).

the cycle of the Elements repeats itself 3 times in a year, so there are 3 fire signs in the zodiac, 3 earth signs, etc.

each season has a Cardinal, Fixed and Mutable quadrupility. these too, have their own personalities.
Cardinal is the first, the initiator of the season. Fixed is the season at its peek, and therefor represents a more resolved persona. mutable is the season as it changes, and represents a more malleable persona.

these repeat 4 times (one for each season).

therefore:

Spring:

Cardinal / Fire = aries
Fixed / Earth= taurus
Mutable / Air =gemini

Summer

Cardinal/Water=Cancer
Fixed / Fire = Leo
Mutable / Earth = Virgo

Autumn

Cardinal / Air = Libra
Fixed / Water = Scorpio
Mutable / Fire = Sagitarius

Winter

Cardinal / Earth = Capricorn
Fixed / Air = Aquarius
Mutable / Water = Pisces



sooo..... for Aries: the initiator, the rabble-rouser, the spark, leaping headfirst into any given situation.

Fire is the kinectic element. Cardinal is the initiatory quadruplicity. merge the two and we have the persona of the aries.... just like the energy of the beginning of spring: blammo! new life in on the scene! not yet matured and stable, but certainly vibrant and alive!

leo is also a Fire sign... kinectic and dynamic, but it is a fixed sign... less "hyper" yet more resolved in its persona. hence the regal leader (or actor). this relates to the peek of summer: proud in its growth and lushness. life at its full bloom.

etc....

the following web-page is not a bad summary of it all, though i first learned all of this in a blue satin book of antiquity called Q given to me by a rather unique korean woman, so the experience left quite the impression!!


hubpages.com...


so, long story short, even after 2009, i don't think one needs to worry if their respective zodiac sign is off... at least until this global weather phenomenon disrupts the very nature of the seasons!



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 07:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wildeagle
This is only true to those born after 2009.

Lucky enough, because I seriously don't think anyone would actually really change their starsign and follow the new chart.


Which article said that? I've been looking, but all I can find is "millennia" in terms of time-frame. (Which causes me to ask WHY HAVE THEY JUST NOW FIGURED THIS OUT?!) 2009 is actually creepier because it means it just happened less than 2 full years ago...


Anyway, this short explanation is tossed out to the sheeple on one website:

It all comes down to the 26,000-year precession of the planets through space, he said, noting that a variety of gravitational forces have changed the position of the planets in the sky over time. Bottom line, the astrological forecasts we've all been turning to may -- gasp! -- not be accurate at all, or at least they may be intended for other readers. "We're off by about 10 degrees or so, a twelfth of the way around," Kunkle said.
(....and let's pause right here and ask ourselves if the "10 degrees off" is only coincidentally numerically identical to the reported 10 degree shift in magnetic pole causing the airports in Tampa to re-paint areas of the landing strip...)

Well, for me that article raised more questions than it answered, so I go straight to the referenced Minnesota Planetarium Society which states:

Board Member Parke Kunkle and Horoscopes If you are visiting the Minnesota Planetarium Society website because of the recent news, here is the link: Star Tribune Article

...and would you know THAT article says something totally different...

The ancient Babylonians based zodiac signs on the constellation the sun was "in" on the day a person was born. During the ensuing millenniums, the moon's gravitational pull has made the Earth "wobble" around its axis, creating about a one-month bump in the stars' alignment.


Somebody wake me up from this crazy dream!!!
edit on 1/13/2011 by new_here because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 07:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by SonOfTheLawOfOne
Nobody else finds this strange? Why all of a sudden do they make this determination and how did they arrive at it?
YES, I am with you completely and totally on this freak-out moment. Your second sentence puts my exact questions into words.


In astrology, sidereal zodiac and the constellation zodiac aren't the same anyway...
See, that entire concept was gnawing at the edge of my thoughts. Thank you for posting it. This is so true. True, true, true. and all he could do in the article is poke fun at astrology to take attention away from the REAL issue at hand which is...


...so I'm confused at what it is they are trying to tell us.
Is this an admittance that our calculation of time is off?
Well, that's just the thing. They really didn't tell us anything of any real import. There's something bigger to this than the fact I may not be a Taurus anymore. The articles I've read raise more questions than they answer.



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 07:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jadette
The astrological signs that modern astrologers use, are based on the charts of the skies in ancient Babylon. The way of determining your 'sign' is this: imagine the sun, and the earth circling it. And beyond that, a 'circle' of the various regions of the sky that depict each sign. Whatever sign that the earth is directly opposite the sun of, is the sign of that period of time of the year. It changes as the earth circles about the sun of course. And, because of the wobble of the axis of the earth, these positions have drifted over the 4000 years since these charts were established.
The wobble of the Earth's axis would not change what is opposite the Sun in relation to the Earth's location in space. The speed of the Earth around the sun, maybe. Or the movement of the constellations themselves. Speaking of which, how does the earlier news of the Milky Way 'gobbling up' our real home galaxy relate to this? This is all just bizarre, isn't it?



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 07:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Raider of Truth
I'm a goddamn Aries!
Not a goddamn Pisces.
Bloody annoyed not to mention the fact my famil buy commertion gifts at birth,weddings etc of star signs.
I don't care what this one group says, i'm an Aries and always will be.


Spoken like a typical Piscean.


So emotion-driven those Pisces people.





posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 08:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by SlyFox_79
.
Ophiuchus: Nov. 29-Dec. 17. (Yep, this one is new)



Dont mean to rain on your parade, but Ophiuchus is NOT new! Its been around since Ptolemy.


the-red-thread.net...



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 08:19 PM
link   
Haha so it turns out, I'm still a virgo..
17th of September



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 08:26 PM
link   
I don't think that would affect me very much, I follow the Chinese zodiac more closely.

That new planet thing is strange and I don't really think people have come up with any personality traits for that planet so I am curious as to what those people born on that date after 2009 would think about it. But that would be quite a few years later.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join