Lately there's been a barrage of articles questioning astrology's vailidity. One could think this is a "media conspiracy". But keep in mind that the media, like sharks in a frenzy feeding, often focus on a topic that will attract attention, and confusion is one way to get readers and viewers.
     What is being questioned is the difference between the signs' dates derived from the traditional constellations that astrology was based on almost 2,000 years ago and present day signs.
     Those writers and speakers' comments are not directed at the complexities to be found in an individual's chart, but what is called "Sun Sign Astrology", which is a truncated popular form, which is not what astrology fully is. To be sure, there is an art to interpreting and writing Sun sign analyses, and those who write it shouldn't be taken lightly.

     First, regarding this "new" sign Ophiucus, it has be asked, how can astronomers - The Minnesota Planetarium Society, for example - define what astrology is? I don't doubt that they know what constellations are, what a star is, what the temperature of the Sun's surface is. But if they haven't calculated and interpreted a chart, what do they know about astrology? Astrology is not a measurement of temperatures, distances between celestial bodies, or what they are composed of. It is a means to understand the celestial corpus's potential influences and what choices we can make accordingly.
     Astrological differences are said to be indications of its inconsistencies, yet divergent concepts are in any human field of intellectual activity, Sciences, the arts, religion, diet, hey, politics too!
     The zodiac of sidereal astrology, is constellation-based. It was defined around 2,000 years ago when their positions were in synch with the seasons. Then, zero degrees Aries was at the "beginning" of the constellation Aries, and the Spring Equinox. However, because of the Earth's wobbly polar axis relative to the stars, there is no longer that synchronization.
     The zodiac of tropical astrology is based on the Sun, and maintains the same time - or sign - relationship that it always had. Thus, zero degrees Aries is at the Spring Equinox, and zero degrees Cancer is the beginning of summer, etc.
     These two zodiacs brought on debates as to which was relevant; however, this is now a non-issue for astrologers. And most astrologers these days use Tropical. If the season's cycles are connected to the structure of the solar sytem, our celestial body, the stars are our celestial environment.
     I began my studies with the Tropical system, it has the most literature. As I understood astrology more, I preferred the Tropical system because it is Earth Centered, and the nature of the signs is based on how the seasons manifest. This is also found in the Earth's relationsihp with the planets, as they all spin in elliptical orbits around the Sun, forming a disk, having cyclic relationsips, seasons. Sidereal harkens back to a time when the Earth's relationship to the heavens was different, it's relevance has changed. Fixed Star astrology is another thing altogether; knowing and observing the aspects from the fixed stars can be very helpful, and their meaning has not changed.


A Sample Chart
MALCOLM X      

     Yes, he was a "Taurus". However, an astrologer (not an astronomer) would look at this chart and as far as the Sun-Sign goes, it is "Taurus on the cusp of Gemini". But to understand the uniqueness of this individual, all the other points or factors must be considered: the Ascendant is Capricorn; Moon in Aries; and Midheaven Libra on the cusp of Scorpio for example. Then the aspects between planets and points are studied. Such as: Moon conjunct Mercury, and opposite the Midheaven; Mars, the Moon's and the 4th House's ruler, conjunct Pluto in the 7th House, and the Moon's 165 degree angle to Saturn, the chart's ruler, all describe or relate to the upsets in his childhood, his ruptured relationship with his mother, and some of his social conflicts. If you read any Sun-Sign blurbs about Taurus, stability, material comfort, earthiness, sensuality, are emphasized. These configurations do not. And there is still much more to analyzing this chart. For those interested in my analysis of Malolm's chart, click here