• Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    1 year ago

    My favorite thing is that astrologers are working with a ‘zodiac’ of stars which is so old, the stars have changed position in the sky and their zodiacal charts aren’t even accurate if you just up.

    • Jesus_666@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Also IIRC there should be thirteen astrological signs but that number was unpopular so the charts were fudged to make them fit twelve. So they aren’t accurate for any age.

        • moistclump@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          ?Ophiuchus is one of the thirteen constellations that cross the ecliptic.[65] It has sometimes been suggested as the “13th sign of the zodiac”. However, this confuses zodiac or astrological signs with constellations.[66] The signs of the zodiac are a twelve-fold division of the ecliptic, so that each sign spans 30° of celestial longitude, approximately the distance the Sun travels in a month, and (in the Western tradition) are aligned with the seasons so that the March equinox always falls on the boundary between Pisces and Aries.[67][68] Constellations, on the other hand, are unequal in size and are based on the positions of the stars. The constellations of the zodiac have only a loose association with the signs of the zodiac, and do not in general coincide with them.[69] In Western astrology the constellation of Aquarius, for example, largely corresponds to the sign of Pisces. Similarly, the constellation of Ophiuchus occupies most (29 November – 18 December[70]) of the sign of Sagittarius (23 November – 21 December). The differences are due to the fact that the time of year that the Sun passes through a particular zodiac constellation’s position has slowly changed (because of the precession of the Earth’s rotational axis) over the centuries from when the Babylonians originally developed the Zodiac.[71][72]

    • novibe@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I mean… there is sidereal astrology, which does account for the precession of the equinoxes. And tropical astrology has explanations and justifications to be how it is. It’s not just “oh dumb astrologers don’t even know the stars changed!”. Like, their whole thing is looking at stars and stuff. They sure know it.

      If you are actually interested or curious, here is a thread with explanations (it’s unfortunately on Reddit): https://www.reddit.com/r/astrology/comments/wr1iok/tropical_astrology_explanation/?sort=top

      • lad
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Like, their whole thing is looking at stars and stuff. They sure know it.

        They just don’t care 🌚

        Also, with how popular astrology now, I’d wager that more than half astrologists don’t know it and only care about some cargo cult attributes

      • WldFyre@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Like, their whole thing is looking at stars and stuff. They sure know it.

        They look at stars the same way flat earthers look at the world around them.

        That link doesn’t explain it at all, it’s like watching fundamental religious people argue about how the Bible actually makes sense and applies to today.

        • novibe@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          The link does explain it, and if you listened to fundamental Christians describe their beliefs, you’d understand them better. You don’t have to agree, but if you never have an open mind even to things you disagree with you will never understand them.