What are some interesting Astrological facts?

1. Most people think of Scorpios as promiscuous and sexual, but that's not necessarily true. Scorpios can be very traditional.

2. The real selfish sign is Leo, not Aries.

3. People with Sun in the 10th house are very hard-working and committed.

4. Leo is the most insecure fire sign.

5. Saturn in the 8th house indicates that you have fear of being committed.

6. Libra rising is the fakest rising sign.

7. People with Pisces moon are very shy.

8. Women with Neptune in the 1st house sometimes get weird stalkers.

9. People with Sun square Moon have extremely bad/unhealthy/toxic relationship with their parents.

10. Watches are Capricorns' favorite accessory.

11. Mars in Leo tend to have high blood pressure.

12. Leo moons have the potential to succeed at acting.

13. Girls with a Sagittarius Venus really like the chase and oftentimes lose interest once they get the attention they've been looking for.

14. Gemini risings are really tall.

15. Libras are good at managing children.

16. Actually, Cancer is the expert at playing mind games. (The emotional ones.)

Moon is always in the constellation of Rohini in sign Taurus on the 8th day of last fortnight of Hindu month Shravan of every year-the day Lord Krishna was born.

Well for me astrology is entertaining and despite inheriting a library of astrology data, the only thing I agree with and found interesting is that people who have mental imbalances should never delve into astrology. Possibly guilt on the writers part because they knew that some who may already be delusional or even just gullible will be looking in the wrong places for help or growth as an individual.

There are none. Astrology is BS.

"There are actually 13 Zodiac signs but for the 12 promoted, here is some information, taken from the book below, written by a man who used to draw horoscope charts, and was deeply into astrology."

This is nonsense and anyone who uses the phrase "draws horoscope charts" doesn't know very much either.

In 1920, 99 years ago, astronomers, not astrologers, added a constellation to the zodiac they use for their own purposes. The signs are not the same thing as the constellations. REPEAT:: signs are not constellations in Western Tropical Astrology. They aren't. They have the same names which is hopelessly confusing for skeptics, all of whom think if 500 hundred people are named Bill, it must be one guy because they're all named Bill..

The signs begin at the vernal point, the point in the sky where the ecliptic intersects with the celestial equator in the east, then, moving counter clockwise along the ecliptic, the apparent path of the Sun around the earth, each sign occupies 30 degrees of arc. 360 degrees divided by 30 = 12. Not 13.

Some nitwit astrologers for whom high school never ended, and therefore thinking standing out for any reason no matter how stupid, is desirable, accept the 13th constellation as a sign. They're dumb, and fortunately, they are very, very, few in number.

Here is two interesting facts about astrology: 1) no skeptic understands anything about it correctly. 2) There are people who claim to be astrologers who shouldn't be listened to. The guy who "draws horoscope charts" is one of them. Astrologers stopped drawing charts over 30 years ago when the PC became ubiquitous.

**********************************************************************************

EDIT:

I checked out the cited reference, What Your Horoscope Doesn't Tell You, by Charles Strohmer

Strohmer isn't an astrologer. He writes on religion. He needs to avoid astrology.

Almost all cultures have had some kind of astrology. Yet none of them directly contradict or oppose the attributes of the planets. Mars is always some kind of aggression. Venus is always something like love and conciliation. Saturn is always a malefic in some way or ways. Yet many if not most of these cultures never had contact with the others. So the ideas developed independently.

The authors of the book: "Hamlet's Mill" ( Giorgio de Santillana & Hertba von Dechend) argue that human knowledge was transmitted though mythology and the constellations, which, if true could explain to some extent how the cultures came to the same astrological conclusions without actual contact. It's a complex argument.

Western horoscopic astrology has an unbroken (but sometimes bent) lineage dating back to the Hellenistic Greeks. While it goes in and out of general popularity and acceptance, it has never been eliminated entirely. After Rome fell, the Arab writers picked it up and a Latin branch of the family tree was codified by Bonatti (12th/13th centuries) and developed nicely throughout the Middle Ages and Renaissance, which might be it's high point. It soldiered on until the beginning of he 18th century when it took a nap. It came back in a diluted form in the (roughly) mid 19th century, but got a little crazy when it was associated with some poorly understood Eastern Philosophies, then psychology.

In the late 20th century a renaissance of early astrology re-emerged and this and the psychological compete with each other for attention at this time. More ancient and old astrology texts are currently and more readily available then at any time in history. Astrologers complain about today's prices without realizing that books were insanely expensive only a few centuries ago. They should be expressing gratitude for the translations and easy access.

Right now there is more learning about actual astrology than at any time since the 17th century. This is possibly due to a handful of intrepid translators of Greek, Arabic, Latin, and other languages who know astrology better than any academic.

Whether astrology is accepted as valid or not, it once was and played a role in history that is only recently being appreciated.

I have nice friend with Leo ,Cancer,

Pisces here

Pisces is in Turas I'm in bed with my wife.

The Mayan had maps and tons of written work on astrology that were destroyed by Spanish Conquistadors, except for three books.

The first humans living in caves, had no television at night, they had the stars. The stars told them when to plant, when to harvest, when it would be warm, or cold. They noticed and named certain arrangements of stars, called constellations, and noticed that the people who were born, when these constellations were present, had innate similarities. These facts, not fiction were written in stone, unlike the Mayan records which were written on Mesoamerican bark paper, which can be, and were easily destroyed.

There are actually 13 Zodiac signs but for the 12 promoted, here is some information, taken from the book below, written by a man who used to draw horoscope charts, and was deeply into astrology.

The claim is made by astrologers that the Zodiac is “taken from the records of astral phenomena and reduced to a science by observing the effects of planetary influence��� More is now known about planetary influence and human response.” But astrology is not astronomy because planetary names are simply a cover for ancient Greek and Roman mythical deities.

In astrology gods are assigned control over different parts of the human anatomy and over different spheres of human activity and personality. Of course, you never hear that from astrologers talking to the public. You never read, “You have this god in the sixth house” or, “There are three gods in a trine”. It is “Mercury is in the sixth house” or “There are no aspects to this planet”.

Take the sign Taurus, representing a bull; it “was placed among the stars to commemorate the form that Zeus took when he carried Europa off to Crete.” The two fish of the sign Pisces are the goddess Aphrodite, and her son Eros, who took the shape of fish and “leaped into the Euphrates River in order to escape the monster Typhon”. Another myth: Hydra’s ally the crab “sallied from the swamp and began biting Heracles’ foot.” Heracles destroyed Hydra but the devoted crab was immortalized by the goddess Hera as the constellation Cancer. The Archer (in the sign of Sagittarius, “is said to be Crotus, son of Pan, favourite of the Muses who asked Zeus to immortalize him in the sky.”) The end result is a lure to make people think planetary influences are real, without letting on that this is all about the polytheism of a hotchpotch of Greek and Roman non-gods and myths." [quote ends]