Download Are the Signs of the Zodiac Wrong? Is Ophiuchus

http://www.astrologer.com/tests/precession.htm
Are the Signs of the Zodiac Wrong? Is Ophiuchus the 13th sign?
From time to time, rookie journalists report on an "amazing new discovery" ... the signs of the zodiac are
wrong or misaligned or that there are missing signs! It's a story that makes headlines every few years,
but it is a hoax.
In 1995, this 'dramatic news' broke in London from a publicity stunt. At the time I was running the
Astrology Shop in central London, I briefly had the attention of the world's media. After a series of
interviews, I started to receive calls from friends and customers around the world telling me that they
had seen me interviewed on the main news on CNN, ITV or their local TV station.
Then again, like a virus that reinfects, the story broke in January 2011 and again in March 2014. In 2011
an astronomy professor 'revealed' to the Minneapolis Star-Tribune that the Earth's "wobble" has shifted
the zodiac signs.[1]
Now in 2015, comedian and amateur scientist, Dara O'Briain has fallen for the hoax and posted it on the
BBC iWonder information page.
It is a simple gaffe. They confused the signs of the Tropical Zodiac with the constellations of the Zodiac.
Journalists who do not know any better spread the story through the networks.
Since the facts are significant for astronomy, the history of science and for astrology, it's important to
set the record straight.
The 12 Sign Tropical Zodiac has remained unchanged for two thousand years!
Simple Explanation:
Western astrology is based on the position of the planets measured within zones defined by the path of
The Sun as seen from Earth rather than the apparent pattern of the more distant stars.
About 2,500 years ago a proto-type of the modern twelve sign zodiac was identified by stargazing
scholars in the region around what is today, Iraq using the position of the stars within the constellations
at the time.
The stars appear to be are slowly creeping backwards out of line with the Earth's seasons and year in a
process known as the Precession of the Equinox. So to establish a stable measuring system, Ptolemy in
the second century in Alexandria, firmly established the Tropical Zodiac starting from Aries at the
position of the Sun at the March Equinox. So, the Tropical Zodiac is static and not affected by shifts in
the Earth's axis. However, Ptolemy kept the old names for the signs in his updated system which were
the same as the artificial constellations.
Meanwhile, Indian astrologers retained a star based (sidereal) zodiac. This resulted in two different
zodiacs with the same sign names. However, both zodiacs have remained accurate and consistent
measuring devices for nearly two millennia.
Claudius Ptolemy, astronomer & astrologer
When the two zodiacs shift to a full sign apart, we will enter what is described as the Age of Aquarius.
More technical Explanation:
Western astrology is based on the planets and their motion relative to our year (the Earth's annual orbit
of the Sun) and not on the distant stars. Before astrologers started to compile planetary tables, the
backdrop of the distant visible 'fixed' stars proved to be most consistent system for measuring the
positions of the 'wandering stars', known as the planets in our solar system. The 12 sign zodiac was
defined by the stars within chosen constellations along the ecliptic (the apparent annual path of the
Sun) in Mesopotamia at the end of the Iron Age (around 500 BC). Though the Babylonians used stars and
constellations for measurement, they were also using zones which start from the position of the Sun at
the March Equinox which was, is and will always be the start of the sign of Aries in the western system.
The problem with the old visible star based measurement is that the stellar positions are slowly moving
backwards relative to the Earth's seasons and year at the rate of approximately 1º every 72 years. This
slippage is known as the Precession of the Equinox and it is why some believe that we are in the Age of
Pisces and moving into the Age of Aquarius. Though precession was probably identified long before, it
was first known to have been measured by Greek astrologer and astronomer, Hipparchus (ca.140 BC).
Astrology became defined by time rather than by (outer) space
Three hundred years later, Ptolemy, astronomer, astrologer and cartographer in Alexandria fixed the
Western Tropical Zodiac to the Equinoxes and Solstices to prevent it slipping significantly out of
alignment in centuries to come. This mathematical construct enables astrologers to position planets by
celestial latitude within the original astrological zones known as the signs of the Zodiac. Confusion now
comes from the fact that Ptolemy kept the original sign names which were based on the archetypally
inspired yet scientifically artificial constellations.
Since then the Tropical Zodiac has proved to be a reliable and accurate measuring system used by both
astrologers and astronomers. Even though astronomers now mainly use the equatorial system, they still
use tropical coordinates in what they call the ecliptic coordinate system (yes! - the same western zodiac
measured in degrees from Zero Aries or the Vernal Equinox Point) to track the Sun, Moon and planets.
Three Systems: Tropical Signs, Sidereal Signs and Astronomical Constellations
Meanwhile in India, Hindu astrologers retained the sidereal (star) based zodiac and in 1930, the
International Astronomical Union (IAU) defined the boundaries of 88 constellations. [3] An important
difference between these two star oriented zodiacs is that the sidereal zodiac divides the signs into
twelve equally spaced sections of 30°, while the IAU boundaries are based strictly on the stellar
arrangements. In the IAU definition a constellation such as Virgo is many times larger than the
constellation of Aries, for example.
Just because the three different celestial positioning systems use the same labels and origin, it does not
mean that only one is correct. These are different measurements for different models. It's like saying
that because the US gallon and the Imperial gallon are different measurements, they can't both be right.
This is a false criticism of a series of homonyms.[4] Or if a foot is a measure of twelve inches or 30.48
centimetres, can a foot also be the part of the body at the end of a leg below the ankle. Since a human
foot varies in length - is only one correct? Comparisons between the sidereal and tropical zodiac are
more like comparing two languages, French and German - it would be nonsense to claim that only one
language is valid.
Astrologers have known this since before the year zero and any astronomer who has studied the history
of their field should also know this. It is a straw man argument.
"In Western astrology, the astrological signs are determined by the position of the Sun in the sky, not
the absolute positions of the constellations. Refuting a doctrine that astrologers don't hold seems, at
best, ancillary and probably irrelevant to any attack on astrology," ~ Professor Darin Hayton Science
Historian
Why the constellation of Ophiuchus is not zodiacal material:
The Astronomical Case:
Depictions of Ophiuchus show the giant wrestling with a serpent with one and sometimes both feet
crossing the ecliptic. This incursion is reflected in the constellational borders as defined by the
International Astronomical Union (IAU).
Since the western zodiac signs are based on archetypes that evolved from pre-historic times that were
projected onto constellations and not vice-versa, astronomical arguments that Ophiuchus should
become a Sign of the Zodiac are irrelevant.
If it was based on astronomy, there are several other constellations around the ecliptic that could
have been included in the Zodiac. The most obvious candidate is Orion with a rich mythological history
and, as proposed by astronomer, Neil de Grasse Tyson, the constellation of Cetus also touches the
ecliptic.[5] A Belgian astronomer, Luc Désamoré has shown that the orbit of Venus passes through 25
constellations.[6]
One of the problems is that the IAU imposed strict artificial boundaries despite overlaps between
constellations - you can clearly see that Ophiuchus' left foot is on top of the Scorpion. But all this detail
is a red herring, this zodiac is more about designation than position.
If a spectator of a football match has his foot on the pitch just over the touch line, does that qualify
him as a player? Of course not!
Historical Precedent?
The historical argument in support of Ophiuchus, made by an author promoting his book on the 13th
sign, is that the constellation was mentioned by Ptolemy. That is correct, but so were 48 constellations
listed in Almagest and Tetrabiblos but only 12 were allocated by Ptolemy in the Tropical Zodiac.
Numerical Symbolism?
A symbolic case for a 13th sign is based on 13 rotations of the moon around the Earth per year.
However, astrology has more emphasis on Lunations (A complete Lunar Cycle starting at a New Moon)
and there are never more than 12 per year. Lunations are Soli-Lunar based on the cycle of the Sun and
the Moon.
Another problem with 13 signs - it simply does not fit the model. Every astrologer knows the value
and importance of the matrix of 3 modes by 4 elements forming the unique blend of twelve signs.
Ophiuchus has been twice suggested for the Zodiac by astronomers, who know no more about
astrology than the average reader of sun sign columns. I know - I met Jacqueline Mitton who proposed
Ophiuchus in 1995 in a Press Release promoting a new BBC TV series on astronomy. Mitton, an
astronomer and delightful lady told me she and her husband enjoyed reading their 'stars' "for a bit of
fun" in the newspapers! The 13th sign was a hoax in 1995 then and it remains a hoax.
Though this outline is accurate to the best of my knowledge, this is only part of the story. My own take is
that the mythology of the surrounding constellations are part of the archetypal nature of the sign. So
Ophiuchus is really the healing, heroic part of Scorpio, Cetus is related to Aries/Taurus, Orion to Taurus
and Sextans to Leo. I hope to publish the full story as soon as I have completed my research.
~Robert Currey
References
If you are ever confused about astrology, seek advice from an expert in the field. Don't rely on the
media, magicians, sceptics and now after these debacles, not even astronomers. Unless they have
studied astrology, they remain amateurs.
More reliable Press Reports on the subject came from the BBC and CNN, simply because the journalists
bothered to consult astrologers.
BBC: Have the Zodiac and star signs changed?
CNN: No, your zodiac sign hasn't changed.
Articles from experts who know their field:Deborah Houlding (2015) Understanding the Zodiac. And Why there REALLY are 12 signs, not 13.
Frank Piechoski: Astrology 101 - A Zodiac Explanation
Rob Brezsny: Here We Go Again with the Ophiucus Scam
Eric Francis: Attention All Astronomers — The World is Flat
The Inner Wheel: 13 Sign- Not
Jonathan Cainer: Is the Zodiac wrong?
Prof. Darin Hayton (2011) Science Historian Questions Need to Ridicule Astrology
Footnotes
Ward, Bill (January 2011) Sign of the times: Astrology story soars like a comet. Minneapolis Star
Tribune. "Countless people were astonished by the "news" in Monday's Star Tribune in which
Minneapolis astronomy instructor Parke Kunkle affirmed that the Earth's "wobble" has shifted the
zodiac signs. The buzz has raced across the Web like a shooting star." Had Kunkle explained that
there are three celestial positioning systems and that it it is not the Signs that have changed, but the
constellations, he would not have caused such misunderstanding. The Tribune adds "Kunkle, meanwhile,
is ready to brush off the whole brouhaha. 'This has been,' he said, 'an exhausting hoot.'" However his
blunder left some followers of astrology confused and astronomers looking as if they are ill-informed
about the basics of their subject and out of touch with the world-view of others. One commentator on
the Huffington Post wrote: "It is disingenuous - This is a hoax. Let's promote knowledge of history
instead of ignorance and confusion about it."
Homonyms: words of the same pronounciation or spelling but with different meanings. The signs and
constellations are also heteronyms: the same spelling but different meaning.
Eugène Delporte originally listed the 88 "modern" constellations on behalf of the IAU Commission 3
(Astronomical Notations), in Délimitation scientifique des constellations. (Delporte, 1930)
"The fourteenth constellation in the set is Cetus. It is a large constellation that dips into Pisces. The
Sun passes through Cetus briefly as it ambles through Pisces, but you are not normally informed of this
in the horoscope pages." Tyson, Neil de Grasse (1994) Universe Down to Earth Columbia University
Press. In a well written article published in 2009 on the Astrology News Service site entitled "Tyson's
Zodiac: Are There Really 14 Signs?". Diana K Rosenberg deftly shows that Dr Tyson is in error even on
purely astronomical grounds.
Luc Désamoré (2011)"My calculations showed that ... Venus passes (not often) through Auriga, Canis
Minor, Serpens and also Aquila." Quand les planètes quittent le zodiaque Le Ciel, Octobre 2005, Vol.67,
pp.302-316 Also, Aquarius, Capricornus, Crater, Leo, Orion, Ophiuchus, Pisces, Scutum, Virgo.