Re: Do you believe in Astrology
Unfortunately, its all bunkum. There isn't a shred of rationalisation behind any of it. There are so many errors and flaws with the whole thing to know really where to start.
I was born on June 19 - a Gemini according to astrological convention. Funny thing is - the sun will rise in the constellation of Taurus. So why am I considered a Gemini??? Answer - The Earth rotates around a rotating axis. This 'secondary' rotation is called Precession. This means that the pattern of stars against the rising of the Sun is slowly changing. As time progresses, this change will become more apparent over a 27,000 year cycle. Thus in the year 4600 (thereabouts) I would be an Aires.
Basic flaw with Astrology 1. - Everyone is born under the wrong given sign. When people bleat on about accurate Astrology is, how come this really major point is always overlooked. (Please look at any Astronomical chart to bear this out).
Next problem (which is conveniently overlooked by astrologers). How many signs of the Zodiac are there? If you think the answer is 12 you are wrong. Its actually 13. But its not something you will find in any Astrological chart or predictions. The Solar Ecliptic (The line in the sky which the Sun travels on) passes through the conveniently overlooked constellation of Ophiuchus. So anyone born on 30 Nov - 18 Dec are Ophiuchians - not that anyone in astrology will mention it to you, because 12 is a handy divisible number and 13 is associated with 'bad luck'. Plus they don't like to be seen as being wrong.
Basic flaw with Astrology 2. - The number of signs in the Zodiac are wrong.
There is also the problem with the number of planets, as the charts often spout such-and-such planet moving into a particular star-sign, and planets are a major astrological influence. Any astrological chart prior to 1930 didn't contain Pluto. Why? It wasn't discovered until then. Before then, charts never used to have Uranus or Neptune either. Of course Pluto is regarded as a dwarf planet and not part of the mainstay makeup of the solar system - so how come it's still used? More to the point, there are other dwarf planets of comparable size and mass. Ceres, Haumea, Makemake and Eris. Where to they fit in? Recent studies have shown there is likely to be more. If planets make up so much of the astrological map, wouldn't it be obvious to the astrologer that there was some missing influence in the charts? It won't because its not convention - which puts its credibility out even further.
Just to pour more cold water onto this, what about comets and how do they fit in.
Basic flaw with Astrology 3. - Wrong number of planets.
There are many, many more arguments which destroy this nonsense, but by far the biggest one is one of simple rationality. On the day of my birth, as the Sun crossed the horizon the closest observed star to the Sun is HIP27696, which is 802 Light Years away, which is an exploding ball of Hydrogen. Can someone please explain to me how this ball of gas all that distance away is going to 'look for unexpected help' or 'some bad news will happen today' or 'be careful of the colour red' or some such c**P? Its totally laughable.
Just because some ball of gas 'happens' to align with another ball of gas (or ball of rock), some people think 'something' is going to happen. Utterly, utterly ridiculous