|
|
|
|
|
| Science & Astrology, You aren't the sign you think you are :)
Posted: 4/2/2007 10:22:22 AM | You're talking about Sidereal astrology, yes?
If so, the technical fact of it all is that I, for example, am both a Taurus and an Aries. And not everyone has a different Sidereal sun sign anyway.
What's the difference?
The Taurus (i.e. the later one along the line) is the "normal" one. It's measured as if we were still looking at the skies seen by the Ancient Greeks.
The Aries is the Sidereal one. It's measured according to the actual placement of the signs within today's year.
The reason Ophiucus is not included is that in the ancient Greek zodiac, that constellation was not along the elliptic (which is the visual "orbit" of the sun around the Earth as we see it).
Also, it technically would have been about ten days long.
Even in Sidereal astrology, Ophiucus is ignored.
Anyway, the different meanings are such that the normal sign is symbolic of your mature self as a member of this world (meaning you go with the status quo of your destiny), while the Sidereal sign is the form of you that is purely made from your desire to be yourself.
IOW, I naturally am stubborn, and a little conservative regarding change. That's my "status quo".
But I try to create my own persona in the world, and that is exemplified by my personality on these forums.
That person essentially is much more of an initiator, is bolder, more aggressive, and less likely to back down from conflict.
Technically, that's respectively representative of Taurus and Aries.
Don't believe me? Try it yourself with whatever situation you use to break free...
~ David | |
|
| Science & Astrology, You aren't the sign you think you are :)
Posted: 4/4/2007 1:53:17 AM | I sometimes despair, when I read the statements of some who read just a little and know so much... Those who can draw up a Natal and Progressed Chart, using a simple Ethemeris... Those who can discuss all the different planetary situations, all the planets in their Zodiac Signs, all the Stem References, write books on the subject, even hold a decent conversation on the subject, understand its use within psychology, have a good working knowledge of Theology, Mythology and History (Without going into Google for another's ideas...)
If you can do and know all this... Please discuss astrology with me...lol
Starpoet. | |
|
| |
| Science & Astrology, You aren't the sign you think you are :)
Posted: 4/5/2007 5:59:22 PM | I found it liberating when I found out about Siderial Astrology about 10 years ago. I went from being a boring old Taurus - plodding, dependable etc to being an exciting Aries - an initiator,daring etc. When I tell people I used to be Taurus and am now Aries there is usually a short silence then a quizzical look. If they're interested it's handy to be able to describe the Precession of the Equinoxes in about 20 words or their eyes start glazing over.
Thanks for your detailed explanations guys. Well elucidated.
The reason (in spite of the reality of Siderial Astrology) that many people relate to their starsigns under the Tropical method is that it is often in fact their ascendant (the constellation on the eastern horizon when you were born.) The ascendant is almost as if not more important that your Star or Sun sign. As many people are born near sunrise this is why they also relate to their Sun sign as defined by Tropical Astrology.
The reason I say the ascendant may be more important than the star sign is that when you were born the constellation which is your star sign is actually being blocked by the sun ie the sun is directly in front of it. There is a theory that the star sign is the incomplete part of your personality. Any comments? | |
|
| Science & Astrology, You aren't the sign you think you are :)
Posted: 4/5/2007 6:05:15 PM | Mad Fiddler, do the dates so kindly provided by Atypical in Texas correspond to the discrepency of 24 degrees described by yourself?
I had previously thought it was a bit less than 24 degs.
Also, has anyone ever been able to work out the exact date the Age of Aquarius began or will begin or is it impossible to make an accurate calculation? | |
|
| Science & Astrology, You aren't the sign you think you are :)
Posted: 4/6/2007 3:17:49 AM | I might explain that an 'AGE' does not suddenly appear...It takes an 'Age' to wash in, as if it is almost un-noticable. The Aquarian Age began back in the Sixties, the age of 'Liberated Ideas', the burninbg of the Bra and ideals of 'Independence',, of 'Partnerships' rather than domesticated harmony and 'Ban the Bomb'...Aquarius is all about humanitarian efforts and changing the rules, the 'Breaking down of Power Houses', like the break-up of the Soviet Union'.
While on the subject of Sun-Signs... Anyone who knows about Progressions will know that the Sun moves one degree a year, within a Chart, so that anyone over thirty years old will have 'Evolved' into the next Zodiac Sign, the progression would be 'Washed in', so that it is only when one looks back, one sees and feels the change... The Taurus Sun would have evolved, not in retrograde, but forward to the positive and communicative Sun-Sign of gemini, thus feeling more lively... I was born with my Sun at 21 degrees into Sagittarius. At nine years old, my Sun moved into Capricorn and moved through that Zodiac Sign till I reached 39 years old, then it moved into Aquarius. I will be 68 this year and my Sun will move into Pisces in four years time.... The movement of the Sun has a great effect on the life and its effect will be felt wherever the ruling planet of your Sun-Sign is... Hence...
The first nine years of my life, my Sun was in Sagittarius and Jupiter, its ruling planet, sat in pisces...Thus I was quite a dreamer, a simple child and living in an orphanage.
At nine years old, my Sun moved into Capricorn, the ruler, being Saturn, was in Aries.
I went through changes, was brought to a tough area of East London and learned to fight and gain a reputation. When my Sun moved into Aquarius, at the age of 39, I was brought into Astrology and study, though, with the planet Uranus in taurus, my financial balance went haywire!
Astrology is quite simple when, as Linda Goodman pointed out, you make it simple!... Starpoet. | |
|
| Science & Astrology, You aren't the sign you think you are :)
Posted: 4/6/2007 4:17:19 AM |
In fact, thanks to a scientific occurrence called the Precession of the Equinoxes, we are all actually one sign removed from our actual sign.
-this would explain some personality disorders..heh heh
-hey you get offa my sign!! | |
|
| |
| Science & Astrology, You aren't the sign you think you are :)
Posted: 4/6/2007 5:17:22 AM |
sometimes despair, when I read the statements of some who read just a little and know so much... Those who can draw up a Natal and Progressed Chart, using a simple Ethemeris... Those who can discuss all the different planetary situations, all the planets in their Zodiac Signs, all the Stem References, write books on the subject, even hold a decent conversation on the subject, understand its use within psychology, have a good working knowledge of Theology, Mythology and History (Without going into Google for another's ideas...)
If you can do and know all this... Please discuss astrology with me...lol
Starpoet.
Geeze thats a lot of nonsence to memorize, tell me where do Zodiac signs appear as a diagnostic tool in legitimate psychology. | |
|
| Science & Astrology, You aren't the sign you think you are :)
Posted: 4/6/2007 6:45:12 AM | Indeed; it is mostly nonsense, and I always recomend that astrology should be made as simple as possible. It is also reasonable to start from the base, to get some idea of what astrology is about so one can answer any point raised... Rather like Logic, in that how can one argue, logically, if one has no understanding of sylogistics, or the Mills method.
I take it, from your question and decision that astrology is nonsense, you have a very limited understanding of its working. Legitimate psychology?...Gosh; I remember a time when Psychiatrists and Doctors laughed at Freud and Jung, for promoting outlandish ideas. Once again; any astrologer worth his/her salt, must have a good grounding in psychology along with Greek Mythology, otherwise there can be no talk of subjects like Oedipus Complex and Electra...
I really can tell you, Dr. Jung had 6 astrologers working for him (Check it out!)... And I bet, within half an hour of drawing up a chart, I can point out to the basic factors as to why a person should suffer in a certain way...And when the timing will strike...
there, you see; I can discuss psychology, can you discuss astrology? | |
|
| Science & Astrology, You aren't the sign you think you are :)
Posted: 4/6/2007 7:43:04 AM | "Geeze thats a lot of nonsence to memorize, tell me where do Zodiac signs appear as a diagnostic tool in legitimate psychology."
What do you mean by legitimate? Psychology has about as much gusto in the science community as astrology. Or do you assume that everyone believes the same about psychology as you.... | |
|
| Science & Astrology, You aren't the sign you think you are :)
Posted: 4/6/2007 10:13:22 AM | | lol... Until science can show me emotions and reasonability in a bottle, I do not have much faith in science... The thing is, science condemns without proof, while psychology prooves one needs to be condemned... Next? | |
|
| Science & Astrology, You aren't the sign you think you are :)
Posted: 4/6/2007 9:45:36 PM | ha ha ha I am not here to fight, but I do enjoy U, Starpoet ...
I always remember the line, though not the one who spoke it 1st,
'sir, I have studied it, have U?'
my father wrote an astrology column for years
I always thought that would be the toughest thing to do
(I learned the Sidereal way)
but how do U generalize for a 30 day period, when the moon has changed signs every 2 1/2 days & take into account all the Ascendent possibilities & how that all mixes together individually, plus the void moon time? hm, plus other voids!?
when I talk to people about astrology I 1st point out they are usually 3 signs & that they are likely acting more in responce to their moon sign than their more popularly known sun sign
it is easy to discount something when U know so little about it
so I do wonder why the discounters are in this forum, 'cuz' they seem to have alot to say, in respect to how little they seem to know,
as in,
if U discount the subject SO MUCH why not just find somewhere else to play
or are U just one of tha multitude that enjoys grief & wants everyone else there so U are not lonely?
 | |
|
| Science & Astrology, You aren't the sign you think you are :)
Posted: 4/6/2007 11:50:32 PM | hallo Chamelion2... lol... I am so glad you enjoy me (Something I have in common with myself!). As I have tried to make clear, with Astrology; I always make it very simple.
I have written Group Solarscopes for numerous groups and found it quite easy to do. You would know that, with one's Sun in first house, the day-to-day planets of Moon, Mercury and Venus are the ones which move with enough daily speed to be semi-accurate when 'Daily Forcasting'... If I were forcasting for, say, the Aquarian Sun-Sign; I would place Aquarius in first house then, understanding the Moon is in Sagittarius and Mercury passing Uranus in Pisces... I would write...
'Don't jump to conclusions today, or allow sudden enthusiasm for future plans to have you spending out money which might well be needed for telephone bills!'
Now; that might not work for two million readers, but it will work for a few Aquarians who, we know, love to have friends and will always look forward to new ideas. Ergo, the phone bills and sudden impulses.
Now; one can see why Astrology does not work in a casual way, but, like the church, gives those who wish to believe, some kind of faith.
Ah, Chamelion, I am the world's greatest sceptic, I even studied Astrology to disprove it. Some can be thrown away, but the basic ideas are solid, providing one does not go overboard with assertion... I love debates, but there must be some study and logic behind the arguements, otherwise you have no debate... And I do say to those who argue the case...
"Sir...Madam? I have studied it, have you?".
Starpoet... Me?...I'm sticking to Poetry in future...lol! | |
|
| Science & Astrology, You aren't the sign you think you are :)
Posted: 4/7/2007 12:44:11 AM | ha ha ha
u are so funny but true!
haven't read your poems, yet
but males are famous for 'few words'
perhaps? logically it has something to do w/the size of their vocal chords?
lol yes, i suppose, of course, U could play statistics & say that the majority of folks are 1st hse. sun's,
again, ha ha ha,
i still stand where i do
i too studied astrology to disprove it
i'm not winning
lol
however, hm, i think i hate poetry more
however, i did get an a+ on a poem i whipped up for a group project
i used an issue that was bothering me
& wrote in Shakesperean style, got the gggrrrrrr out of my system & my classmates a good mark!
lol
| |
|
| Science & Astrology, You aren't the sign you think you are :)
Posted: 4/7/2007 1:21:07 AM | Oh, dear Chamelion... lol... You really are great fun and I do so enjoy your humour.
However; it is simply because you find so much fun in life, that you would never make a good poet.
A poet has a natural affinity with sadness and emotive import. One must have a deep sense of emotive drama, a soul which becomes the 'Ink-Well', which is filled with the damp tears of sympathetic feelings, so the 'Pen-Mind' can dip into for a 'Poet's Comfort'.
It is true, the sad person can always 'Well' up soulful poetry, while the 'Happy Chappie/Chappess, writes limericks!... lol.
And...Males and v/chords?... If a man finds a lot to say, then he speaks as he finds!
Be merrily well, dear Chamelion2... Starpoet. | |
|
| Science & Astrology, You aren't the sign you think you are :)
Posted: 4/7/2007 7:54:06 AM | ah ha ha
U are soo funny
when we had to write a Shakesperean limerick, it's true that I didn't have to reach DEEP for subject fodder, for it was boiling right under the surface & came bubbling out so fast we were finished 1st!
i am rather a puzzle though Starpoet, for while I was nicknamed Smiley, I do have a Capricorn Ascendant & I do have Saturn in Capricorn in my 12th hse.
lol
however I do wink & smile on
| |
|
| Science & Astrology, You aren't the sign you think you are :)
Posted: 4/7/2007 9:04:57 AM | Ahhhh...Saturn in Cappy!... Keeps imagination down to earth and determined to climb in career, though hiding any fear of failure, masking it. I often find Saturn in Cappy with those who would sooner work under a large organisation, as an insurance, a financial umbrella, to go with the flow, rather than put themselves out as one who will be self-employed, whereby failure can be self-earned, the bucks stops at the top!
So your Aquarian Sun in 2nd. gives you a strong sense of pride, as to how you finance yourself within the future... I bet you would hate to have to beg for assistance, financially!...
I love it when you wink and smile...Here's looking at you, Kid...lol. | |
|
| |
| Science & Astrology, You aren't the sign you think you are :)
Posted: 4/7/2007 7:12:30 PM | oh darling Starpoet,
it is all more complicated than that ..
hm, think i'll grab a beer while i reveal myself ;)
Jupiter & Saturn in Capricorn conjunct, in the 12th &, to the Ascendant,
Sun in Aquarius conjunct to the Moon, Chiron, Pan & Mercury in Pisces in the 1st,
Venus in Aries in the 2nd, more or less void,
Mars in Cancer in the 5th,
Uranus in Leo & Pluto in Virgo in the 7th
& Neptune in Scorpio in the 9th
:) & ;)
yes, darlin', it's tough being me
& ha ha, am I the sign I think i am
lol :) & ;) | |
|
| |
| Science & Astrology, You aren't the sign you think you are :)
Posted: 5/5/2008 10:01:20 AM | You also must remember that the signs that the planets as well as your moon has to do with it as well i studied astrology for awhile. I also find for most people that the chinese astrology sign is more accurate. But tarot is still my top pick!!! | |
|
| Science & Astrology, You aren't the sign you think you are :)
Posted: 5/5/2008 10:38:14 AM | I think the fact that this is in the religion section rather than the science pretty much says everything that needs to be said. Is there a section for "Utter Bunk"?
lol... Until science can show me emotions and reasonability in a bottle, I do not have much faith in science... The thing is, science condemns without proof, while psychology prooves one needs to be condemned... Next?
Wow... Truly terrifying. | |
|
| Science & Astrology, You aren't the sign you think you are :)
Posted: 5/5/2008 4:06:26 PM | RE msg 1 by atypical_in_texas (the OP):
So, for those of you that take stock in astrology or have had a passing interest in Astrology over the course of your life, let me share with you the best kept secret that's not a secret. Whatever Zodiac sign you've been thinking you were born under all your life……it's wrong. In fact, thanks to a scientific occurrence called the Precession of the Equinoxes, we are all actually one sign removed from our actual sign. This is what passes for a secret amongst astronomers? This is common knowledge in professional astrological circles. Heck, I just used to work on a phone line, giving readings for entertainment purposes, and everyone knew it, and this was among people who mostly just took the job for some part-time evening work. Let me let YOU in on the best kept secret that's not a secret. Whatever is the latest astronomical discovery, people who take astrology seriously have read about it, or heard about it from other astrologers.
There are some people who claim to know about astrology, and don't know much about what goes on, I will definitely agree with that. But 99% of them have never used an ephemeris, and if they did make up a natal chart for someone, they got one off the internet. Really not good people to get a chart from, especially when you can read it yourself, and do a better job of it.
I don't hold the with the precession thing myself, because I'm such a typical Scorpio, it beggars belief, and it fits my observations of most people pretty well. But I don't just use books to understand people. I use real life as my testing ground. If it is in real life, and it's not in the books, then IMHO those books weren't written very well. But who writes books that well nowadays, anyway?
RE msg 4 by atypical_in_texas (the OP):
Man, you'd be surprised how much stock even the casual person on the street puts into their horoscope or about what magazines say about their personality based off their Zodiac. I totally agree. But have you seen how many people read their horoscope in the local newspaper, and imagine it was written just for them, when it was written for at least 5 million people in the UK alone, and about 25 million in the USA? This reminds me of when I was working for that phone line I mentioned earlier. About 10% of the callers wanted a genuine reading. 85% were women whose husbands left them, and just wanted to hear that he was coming back. The other 5% were young guys who wanted to know what their girlfriend looked like. Yet the company I worked for charged $1 a minute, and I would regularly keep these people on for 30 minutes. That's $30, just to hear whatever you wanted to be true, for 9 out of 10 people in the UK. The USA callers were far worse. I switched to a line that took callers for the USA for a few months. They were women who wanted to know if their boyfriend was cheating on them, and they had at least 1 boyfriend on the side, often 2, sometimes more. I kid you not.
This experience taught me more about people's actual views on dating that almost anything else. Most people use astrology to reassure themselves of what they believed all along. The ones who actually take it seriously, take it with a pinch of salt. Something to bear in mind, just in case it might be true, but nothing more than that.
I've mentioned this to some random people and am usually greeted with some hostility at presenting the very idea that they aren't what they've been reading about for years. Try it for yourself! I never thought people would be so disappointed at learning their true birth sign. I feel like the destroyer of worlds sometimes so I don't bother mentioning it anymore. :) Good idea. As I put earlier, 90% of people are only interested in hearing what they want to believe, anyway. You would have the same reaction if you told them that their sign isn't quite what it is painted out to be by the popular media, like that Pisces only seem to be dreamy as a way of hiding how clued-up they really are, or how Scorpios are far more obsessed with the afterlife than they are ever obsessed about sex, or how at least one book on astrology from the 1950s pointed out how many doctors were Scorpios, because it involves death, insight, and extremes of effort, all Scorpio traits.
I've never believed in Astrology and I don't think many people do, however I've learned a great deal of the population seems to really hang on to the romance of the idea and it's not to be trifled with. That is because 90% of people only want to hear what they want to believe is true. That is what popular romance is all about. Real romance is totally unromantic to most people. My sister was overjoyed when she went over to one of her boyfriend's house, opened the fridge, and found a big bag of carrots in there, all because she casually mentioned to him that she liked carrots the other week. She raved on about that all the time, long after she broke up with him. That is the sort of thing women never seem to forget. But you'll never see that in a Hollywood film, because it is just not exciting enough for an audience.
RE msg 34 by CharlesEdm:
Geeze thats a lot of nonsence to memorize, tell me where do Zodiac signs appear as a diagnostic tool in legitimate psychology. Well, I'm sure they aren't mentioned in Popular Psychology, or whatever psychologists read. But I did read a book about astrology that quoted Jung as saying that a proper astrological birth chart shaved 2 full years off the psychotherapeutic process for his treatment of patients. You don't have to trust Jung. After all, he is only the guy to come with the basis of the MBTI types that POF uses and businesses use, for some daft reason. But hey, corporations will spend money on anything. MacDonalds spent something like $20 million on designing a chair that people would naturally find uncomfortable after 20 minutes. Crazy. It works. But still crazy, eh?
RE msg 44 by CharlesEdm:
Gosh; I remember a time when Psychiatrists and Doctors laughed at Freud and Jung, for promoting outlandish ideas. Ummm they still do. | |
|
| |
|
|
Home
login 
