The link doesn't show the story.
But yes, I have read like, wow, over a decade ago, about the 13th constellation.
I think I remember reading that if it was added, it'd bump me back a month. Instead of Libra, I'd be a Virgo.
You are born under the sign in whatever the position the stars are flashing at the time. You may want to consult an astronomer, before you consult that astrologer. The fact is that the constellations have been in a state of flux ever since the stars were formed. So this is not exactly breaking news. It takes many thousands of years for the positions of the stars to become obviously changed, and much less so to an astronomer.
There are 88 constellations visible to the naked eye, not just 12 or 13. The 13th is typically ignored by conventional astrology. Some minor smaller constellations are actually combined with other constellations, in order to meet the number of 12. The Babylonians recognized 16 constellations in their astrological charts.
It is indeed true that Virgo is not in the same position in the sky as it was 5 or 10 thousand years ago, nor will it be in the same position, or even look the same as it is now, 5 or 10 thousand years into the future.
What does this actually mean to the now existing human race?
The interesting thing to me is, even though modern astrology is relevant in some ways, particularly with the positions of the planets in our solar system and the moon, not much…. Unless you will need an astrological reading 15 thousand years from now, where your astrological sign based on star positioning today will then be obviously looking much different
If the human race is still around, and advanced astrology is still being used at that time, they will simply have to adjust their charts to where the stars are positioned at that time.
Oh well, NASA is a waste of money anyways.
"In which case instead of me being a Capricorn I'd be a Sagittarius."
The 13th is not part of the 12 constellations in the known zodiac, and I honestly do not know if there are any astrologers who may be identifying with that. I have never heard of that. It's not that I am adept in astrology, but basically. I am more familiar with astronomy, numerology, and numerology is tied to astrology in some respects, because astrology is also based on numbers, as almost everything universal is.
the 12 constellations in the zodiac rotate in an ecliptic orbit circling above the northern celestial hemisphere, and when a constellation gets into a particular position with the sun, is when you have your sun sign, so that's what would have an effect on your sign.
The constellations in the southern hemisphere are harder to track, and can only be seen at certain times of year, or when one may be within the southern hemisphere itself. where in the northern hemisphere they are visible all year long, which makes them easier to work with astrologically. Opiuchus is not charted out that way, but there is a lot more to this than just the 13th constellation, in my opinion.
the 12 are actually 14 or so, depending on how they are combined, and that is something I have data on, but need to back it up on another day, unless you can google that, it's basic astronomical knowledge. so I don't think you have anything to be concerned or confused about.
When I tried to find info on Babylonian astrology, I found very little to nothing. It would only add to the mind baffling complexity of what it would take to link a system that used 16 constellations, to a system that would accommodate 12 or 13, which could only be done by incorporating the other 3. I think it would be fascinating to have access to the Babylonian system, which apparently has been lost so far. What is claimed today is that the Babylonians discarded Opiuchus from their system, but we don’t know exactly which other ones they used.
This kind of system was devised about 4000 years ago, most likely pre Babylonian, which is a far cry from what modern astrologers claim represents the 12 signs, which are not really 12 signs anyway.
Even searching under Ashurbanipal, one of the first known astrologers who actually built and maintained an extensive library in Babylon, only more or less gives a political history of the king.
Another thing that occurs to me is that modern astrologers do not have the knowledge or even the talent to keep their charts accurate, which would require some knowledge of astronomy.
I’m not so sure that the stars have as much to do with day to day life as the planets and the moon, and I really think that charts would have to be updated and changed with the flux of the stars, to give the zodiac more credibility and accuracy, which I also believe astrologers would want as few people to know this as possible. And obviously, they are aware of it.
Scientists use this information to blow a hole in the hull of astrology, and try to sink the boat, and there is a lot to that in reality. This adds to the bogus reputation that many modern astrologers actually deserve.
I would recommend that you become your own astrologer, magician, taro card reader etc.
So, if you need more confusion of the subject, here it is:
I like that Opiuchus Zodiac, that's very cool. Wonder how she managed to squeeze that in and make it work with the birthdates and sun signs of the other 12.
Sidereal astrology is intriguing, because it has an emphasis on currently existing star positions. It is obviously true that astrology came from ancient Mesopotamia, Sumer in particular, and Egypt, and why there is no available text on this is still a mystery to me. This was said to have been derived from the Gods. Perhaps it was never found to begin with, or it is propagandized out of the mainstream by the more popular Greek and Roman astrology, which has an emphasis on planetary astrology. Even though Ptolemy’s astronomical data stood up for at least 400 years, and was ground breaking to a certain degree, modern astrologers found much of that to be inaccurate anyway, to a large degree.
It is also true that the Greek astrologers and historians such as Berossus, learned from the Babylonians, even though the Greeks devised more accurate astronomical data in relation to the earth and the sun. Planetary astrology, precession of equinoxes, and prediction of solar eclipses I think was irrelevant to the Babylonians, who relied on astrology as a tool for their elite class to predict future events, which most likely helped the Babylonians become successful politically and spiritually for at least 1500 to 2000 years. So whether the Babylonians had emphasis on planetary astrology or not, is kind of irrelevant, in my opinion.
The fact is that the modern astrologers use models that are about 2000 years old. The interesting thing about this is that I would guess that whoever devised these charts were not thinking that anyone living 2000 years into the future would be using the same data. Not that the positions of the stars change that much over a 2000 year period. It takes a lot longer than that for star positions to change significantly. At the same time, a few generations of humans would still fit into the model as far as birthdates and sun signs. Which means that even over a few hundred year span of time, there would be little change in the positions of the stars that make up the Zodiac.
But that is a problem for the current conventional models, which go beyond the time frame that star positioning would no longer be a factor. My theory is this is the very reason why many astrological projections that predict the future involving major events are simply wrong, and it seems to go largely unnoticed by the astrology buffs out there, who make better conspiracy theorists, than students of astrology. It doesn’t take much intelligence or talent to be a conspiracy theorist. You simply have to be good at denial of facts and reality.
What I have always been impressed and find very useful is the behavioral and personality information that comes from sun signs, the relevance of birthdates and names in numerology, and there are some very interesting basic astrological charts in the Alexandrian Book of Shadows that I have been hanging onto for a long time, that I think are quite useful.
So what dose the 13th zodiac sign have to do with the 13th full moon every year we call the blue moon? In my mind 13 Full Moons equal 13 zodiac signs. Makes since to me.