Slashdot Mirror
Stars Remain In Their Usual Places; People Panic
asheller writes "The Star Tribune tells us the zodiac signs have shifted. Earth's wobble has shifted the signs, a new one's been added and many of us have changed signs. Formerly a Cancer, I've apparently been upgraded to Gemini and am now married to an Ophiuchus, a new sign. What's yor sign? The new Zodiac Chart is pretty interesting." Here are some priceless reactions to this celestial development. As long as the Chinese Zodiac is unaffected, I'll still be able to accurately judge people based on when they were born, so please indicate in comments your (new) sign and birth year animal, so we'll be able to know where you're coming from.
Give me Libra, or give me death!
You could care less? so in fact you do care ?
I, however, salute your attempt to care less...
for the last time it is: "I could'NT care less"... meaning it is impossible for you to care even less about something
I could care less means that you care and could actually care less, someday...
for the last time it is:
I strongly suspect you're wrong :p
Cool. I get a new personality. Just what my wife wanted for Christmas.
Prepare to be sued.
I am really not a grammar nazi, but I couldn't resit correcting your correction.
You could care less? so in fact you do care ?
I, however, salute your attempt to care less...
for the last time it is: "I could'NT care less"... meaning it is impossible for you to care even less about something
I could care less means that you care and could actually care less, someday...
While I agree with your sentiment 100%, is it really the last time? Are you never going to correct someone again?
Muphry's Law strikes again.
They say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but it's not one half so bad as a lot of ignorance. - Terry Pratchett
Of course not, being a righteous prick is what i live for :D
--
http://www.twilightcampaign.net/
It's a bit of a stretch, but science is part of news for nerds. The fact that there's a disturbingly large portion of the public who's gullible enough to buy into the most appallingly stupid idea in millennia is kind of on track.
The articles cited aren't spoofs. The AP is perhaps the world's most important news service. Depressingly, the fact that people bought into it is real news.
(Now, I could turn around and question whether the number of people who actually bought into this was significant enough to merit it being real news. So there's a separate story on whether the wire services manufactured something from a relatively small number of stupid people. But sadly, I think it's pretty clear that the dimwits have a pretty substantial caucus.)
Resit? Prehaps yuo meaned resist
The ecliptic from the Earth's perspective is constant (by definition), and the Sun's travel across the ecliptic is about as constant. Astrologers don't REALLY believe that constellations occupy precisely 30 degree chunks of the ecliptic, with Aries starting precisely at the vernal equinox. The constellations were just a conventional way to label those segments.
What's slightly more disconcerting about this article is that Astrology knew about this long long ago. They have a name for when a new constellation reaches the vernal equinox, it's the beginning of an "Age". You know, like the "Age of Aquarius"?
Astrology is a superstitious hobby of zero scientific merit, but even within its own formulation this article should have no impact on it.
I think Astrology is an interesting thing. The idea is pretty simple. The states and positions of the stars when you were born, and where they are today, affect you. That's fine. If people want to believe in burning bushes, dudes that can turn water into wine, etc., etc., etc. I hardly find it any more or less valid than anything else involved in religion and faith.
What I find particularly curious here is that an Astrologer should be an Astronomer first, and there is a backlash. Everything they do is fundamentally based upon the ability to accurately determine the states and positions of stars at a given time right? That's Astronomy.
Soooo.... Astronomy is now saying, "Hey dudes. We've been reading the "map" wrong all this time. Didn't account for this, that, and all the what have yous and stuff." Well, then wouldn't the most genuine and sincere there for an Astrologist to do is be thankful? Possibly peer review it, take it into consideration, and then use the knowledge to more accurately practice their craft?
I think that Bad Astronomy summed it up perfectly.
Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
It said "Maternity Ward"...
Clearly if he could not care less he wouldn't have bothered saying so. Now to get back on topic, this gem of a story by the star is actually popular on twitter now which means a whole ton of people ought to care less.
Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
Yup. Anyone who has taken a cursory glance at an astronomy or a biology or really any science book knows astrology is absurd. More than anything, I think this story is worthwhile for pointing out how big a place astrological signs and their "meaning" still have in our world. Hopefully this helps push it out.
In actuality, people have known this for millennia. The precession of Earth's axis has been known about since the Greeks, and is pretty basic astronomy. The wobble of our axis takes about 26,000 years to go around once, and since the current system has been around in some form for about 2,500 years, that means we've gone 1/10 of the way around. 12 signs, 10% off - that means most people change by one sign, and lo, so it is.
Additionally, constellations are not all the same size, so some should be much more common than others. More to the point, constellations do not form a perfectly connected circle, so many people are born technically between signs. What this means is that astrological signs are, at this point, completely dependent on a man-made calendrical system, which have changed throughout our history, sometimes radically.
I live in constant fear of the Coming of the Red Spiders.
SUPER old news. Like 1000+ years old. Here's Carl Sagan mentioning it back in the 70's: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iunr4B4wfDA and even then he mentions they've been wrong for 1000 years.
Maybe the article explains this, but I'm at work and can't read it. Wouldn't the stars changing only affect people born after the change(s) occurred? After all, if you were born under the sign of the Cancer, then the Earth wobbles differently, you were still born under the sign of the Cancer, but people born after the new wobble might not be. And since this is a matter of the Earth changing, they can't claim some obnoxious relativistic hocus pocus.
If you can't convince them, convict them.
Religion pisses me off more than you can imagine. But Astrology ... oh, Astrology is even worse. How can stupidity reach such amazing levels as to allow religion, astrology and such other crap to exist in the year 2011?
WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
I was a Cancer before and now I'm an AIDS. WTF?
For sale: Signature. One owner. Low miles. Always garaged. New punctuation, just installed!
Uh, yeah. You obviously have no idea how the zodiac symbols were really decided. On the day you were born the Sun is sitting in the middle of a constellation. That was how it was determined. You are also ignoring the fact that not only do the zodiac symbols rotate slowly through the calender, because of the exact same second rotational axis, so do the seasons. In 11,500 years, Dec. 21 will be midsummer in the northern hemisphere. I don't know how you'd think it has anything to do with seasons, anyway. Leave it to the superstitious to ignore any actual facts or history.
Uh, yeah. You obviously have no idea how the zodiac symbols were really decided. Western astrology has always used the tropical zodiac which is based on the four seasons, instead of the sidereal zodiac which is based on the location of the sun in the various constellations. I don't know how you'd think it doesn't have anything to do with seasons anyway, I've known that since at least middle school. Leave it to the self-righteous to ignore any actual facts or history.
See also: http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2011/01/13/no-your-zodiac-sign-hasnt-changed/?hpt=C2
You say "straw man", I say "critical research failure". For my evidence, I submit every other science-related Slashdot article ever published, of which all have at least one post starting with "I have a PhD in the field and..." followed by an in-depth analysis of all the ways the article is wrong, regardless of the subject's notoriety.
When journalism gets even the facts about journalism itself wrong, you can't expect much from them with regards to accuracy. Or as a wise man once said, "never blame malice for that which can be adequately explained by incompetence".
No problem is insoluble in all conceivable circumstances.
I happen to have paid for astrological readings many times. I don't really think astrology has anything to do with reality or astronomy, not even for a second; but I do enjoy it. It's rather like how I enjoy The Matrix even though it doesn't make any sense at all.
I happened to ask my astrologer about this many years ago (it's not like they just switched a couple days ago) and the astrologer was actually aware that the astrological symbols had changed, but assured me the Zodiac signs did not. It's been totally decoupled for decades and astrologers seem to be aware of it.
It's not like if you learned to precisely measure something (I don't know what it would be); you'd suddenly change all the symbols on your Tarot deck either. Heh. They're all complicated systems of nonsense. They don't really require further adjustments.
I'm sure there'll be TONS of new astrology books coming out because this is suddenly big news for some reason. It may even cause a schism, but it doesn't really matter which system you pick. A really good astrologer reads the man, not the stars.
Imagine if you weren't allowed to use roads because a bus company complained about your driving 3 times. --skunkpussy
I realize this is very likely the least friendly place to express these ideas, but I'll put myself on the firing line for those who may be genuinely interested in what the art and practice of astrology is about.
All the panic and hub-bub about this finding is coming from a great deal of ignorance about astrology. It's like the criticisms that came from Carl Sagan, where someone with a perspective on science is using demonstrably unscientific methods to put down or even berate (in the case of Sagan) the practice of astrology. It's no different than someone without a background in science claiming that all science is fraudulent due to a few fraudulent scientists.
Astrology makes its observations from a purely relative perspective from Earth. The sun *appears* to be in the sign of Aries on the Spring Equinox, so we say the sun is in Aries. Whether it is actually in absolute alignment with that constellation is not the claim, nor is it even relevant. Indeed, tropical astrology (what is predominantly used in the West) doesn't use the constellations at all but puts the zodiac as a fixed wheel around the Earth, so that the Spring equinox is always the first day of Aries, even though over the thousands of years since the Babylonians the constellation that aligns with the sun (from Earth's perspective) has moved to Pisces, and is now moving towards Aquarius, hence the coming "Age of Aquarius". That is of course the result of the so called precession of the equinoxes.
As for the 13th sign, that's old news. Astrologers have been debating the usefulness of Ophiuchus for decades at least.
Astrology is about understanding natural cycles, in particular the ways in which the cycles of planets and stars synchronize with the cycles of individual and collective human events. It is not about absolute claims of prediction based on absolute alignments. Newspaper horoscopes are, on the whole, a fraud, and not consistent with the true intention and purpose of astrology.
Hope that clears things up. There's no crisis in astrology, you're still who you thought you were....or not.
"Molest me not with this pocket calculator stuff."
- Deep Thought
Erm. I don't think you really need to take even a single glance at a science book to know astrology is absurd. It's just common sense. Kind of how I don't need to read a math text book to stop and say "hey, I suspect that numerology may be bullshit!".
What's horrifying is when you realize how many people out there waste their time with it as an amusement -- or worse, how many people actually believe in this shit and live their life around it. Google something like "which zodiac sign is more likely to be OCD" and you'll see long Yahoo! Answers (the biggest waste of internet use in existence) discussions that will make you want to slit your wrists.
I used to be able to say "Us Tauri don't believe in astrology", but now, apparently, I'm an Ares.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
Tropical astrology divides signs into 12 equally-sized divisions, anchored at the spring and fall equinox. (Doing this just means it's not actually based on the stars, but on where the stars were 3000 years ago.) But it doesn't change based on the calendar system being used, as you suggested.
Sidereal astrology is based on the sun's place in the constellations. Why it might be arbitrary, the entire sky is divided into constellations. Astronomers identify stars by the constellation they are located in and a number. So it's not possible to be born between constellations. The sun (and all other objects) have to always be in one of them.
Headline: "What You Need to Know About The New Zodiac Sign"
The Huffington Post is staffed by and written for idiots. No further proof is needed.
Advice: on VPS providers
From your article "That's because Western astrology strictly adheres to the tropical zodiac, which is fixed to seasons. "
that is a simple one. The seaon one is born is affects people. e.g. baby's get more light in the summer in their first 3 months when born in the start of the summer.
In school the child born in march are a half year older then thos born in august, but are put in the same class (at the age of 5 that is is a huge difference. ) and will affect their behaviour.
And yes there are real studies on this.
And yes, unless you are karma capped your karma can rise from this.
Who gives a shit? It's all bullshit.
"linux is just DOS with a UNIX like syntax" -- Galactic Dominator (944134)
This should have been filled under Idle.
The whole damned thing is based on the fact that a fool and his money are soon parted. Damn, it's depressing to see people still believing in BS like astrology, and proudly demonstrating their gullibility on a 21st Century technically oriented web forum!
No, I'm not new here; just still sick of seeing it go on and on and on. If I vetted technical hires, stuff like this would instantly disqualify applicants. If they believed in claptrap like this, $DEITY knows what other gibberish they'd use to explain their incompetence in the future.
Grr ...
"Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit
This is the difference between http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_astrology and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sidereal_astrology. It's nothing new.
Folks looking at the new Sidereal calendar and thinking their sign changed are probably wrong. In theory (since its BS anyway), what matters is what the sign was when you were born. Not the chart that applies if you were born today (or every minute like most suckers).
If I vetted technical hires, stuff like this would instantly disqualify applicants. If they believed in claptrap like this, $DEITY knows what other gibberish they'd use to explain their incompetence in the future.
And if I vetted hiring decision-makers, you would be instantly disqualified for this, because you fail to understand that a person can be a complete moron in one area, while still know what they're doing in a separate area. You still have to test them on their actual merits, you can't just throw them out because of your preconceived notions.
"16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
Who gives a shit? It's all bullshit.
That's harsh, bro. Is your Feng shui is providing sufficient positive chi?
Nothing arbitrary? The constellations themselves are completely arbitrary constructs. There are no giant star animals in the sky -- somebody just got very creative with "connect the dots" and made them all up...arbitrarily!
The ecliptic from the Earth's perspective is constant (by definition)
Its true that the definition is constant but, against the backdrop of stars, the ecliptic is anything but constant. The sun is in orbit around the galactic core so given enough time (100k years or so) you can certainly have a change where the ecliptic is compared to the background stars. Of course since those stars themselves are all in orbits too they will have also shifted relative to each other.
Astrology is a superstitious hobby of zero scientific merit, but even within its own formulation this article should have no impact on it.
I think by evidence of his post, he was in fact correct, and you got it wrong.
"Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
I'm sorry, but your last two sentences are BS. And your first sentence sounds like a lot of butthurt, honestly.
If "neutral discussion" means accepting Astrology on par with Science in a discussion, I think you have the misapprehension that all ideas have equal weight in discussions. They don't. There are good ideas with evidence behind them, and there are those that have not gathered any hard evidence in the past 3000 years. Guess which one is Astrology?
--
BMO
Hello from your fellow Ophiuchus! I was a little depressed about losing the macho points associated with having the only zodiacal symbol that was armed with a weapon until I looked up what "Ophiuchus" is. The serpent bearer, represented by a guy clutching his snake. (No, that's not a euphamism; but even if it were, it'd still be a hell of a cool sign.)
According to the definitive authority on the matter (Wikipedia):
According to Roman era mythography, the figure represents the healer Asclepius, who learned the secrets of keeping death at bay after observing one serpent bringing another healing herbs. To prevent the entire human race from becoming immortal under Asclepius' care, Zeus killed him with a bolt of lightning, but later placed his image in the heavens to honor his good works.
That's the same Asclepius whose staff (with the serpents) is the modern symbol of medicine.
I'll let others argue over whether the new Zodiac is valid (well, as "valid" as the zodiac can be...). As for me, I don't mind being an Ophiuchus. Maybe we should insist that we be referred to by its old name, Serpentarius.
Western Astrology being based upon equinoxes does not change the fact that astrology, in all its forms, is still superstition. It does not have any scientific merit or physical evidence to support its claims.
We do not have to read too much about astrology before the superstition/magic element becomes obvious.
You can change the details, but fundamentally, it is still based upon superstition/magic.
We also dump on creationism and Intelligent Design, and can't be bothered to read on them either. Take your righteous indignation and get in line behind the animists and the homeopaths.
So, I'm a Libran now? I suppose that's OK, on the balance.
I only claimed the evidence was better than for Santa Clause.
"Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
Not true. A person can display sound reasoning ability in one area, while being blind in another. People aren't uniform, they don't approach everything the same. I would be a bit concerned, and test that person to make sure they approach their job duties with some sense, but I wouldn't reject them out of hand. That's idiotic.
"16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
this guy will say it better than me you are simply spouting non sense, you haven't any evidence at ALL that astrology works beyond cold/hot reading and forer effect.
"For astrology to really work, it does require a surrender of one's bias against phenomenon that cannot be directly sensed by physical senses. "
I will let any rational person read that twice, and try to reconciliate thazt with the fact astrology pretend to make prediction on people's personality, personality *which* indubitably can directly be sensed by common sense. But hey, since astrology utter FAIL at its own prediction, that's OK i guess.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org