So instead of being a glorious hard to get along with LEO I will now be a malignant Cancer?
No I don't put allot of stock in the Zodiac thing. The stars have nothing to do with it. However it is just possible that when one is concieved...and where in Earths orbit about the sun that point is could influence them.
Different times of year means being born with different levels of Sun exposure for mama.
Different levels of sun exposure can influence hormones, vitamins, diet available during pregnancy, neurotransmitters and mood, etc etc etc ... All things which can influence a baby's developement. So While the starts plural may have nothing to do with it. The time of year could matter.
But then of course all of that would be a small influence compared to where one is born. i.e. If I were born in Haiti I would be in a world of hurt.
Well, no, I take that back. I don't care one bit in the slightest. However if this is true then it should show people who actually believe in this nonsense that maybe it's not as real as they thought. Making sudden changes to a generations-old belief system only does one thing: Destroys people's faith in that system.
Well seeing as how science is now saying I'm a Leo instead of a Virgo, I think I believe in science less. Not, lol. I pay no attention to zodiac signs, and really don't care what a girl's sign is. Just let me know when to get her a gift for her birthday. Besides, astrologers originally cut out ophiuchus because they only wanted twelve signs, not thirteen, so there's even less credibility in it than we thought to begin with.
To be honest, Zodiac sign characteristics or whatever are designed so that aspects of each apply to everyone to make them seem true. My b-day is Feb 12, so if I went by the updated calendar, I would be a Capricorn rather than Aquarius. I just read both on one website and they 'seem' very insightful and 'true', but really, people can very easily read something and adjust their perceptions of their own personalities, values, emotions, etc. to match what they are reading because they want to believe it. So, no I cannot rationally make any assumptions or judgments about a person based on their sign.
There has always been a third zodiac sign. If you were switched back, you always were. There are two different types of measuring zodiac signs: topical and sidereal. Sidereal is your ACTUAL sign (the constellation that was out on your birthday) but topical has stayed the same since the beginning of astrology.
I heard it only applies if you were born after 2009, so I'm still a Capricorn. If not I don't think I fit in the Sagittarius qualities. I really don't see why or who thought this was a good idea. To an extent yeah cause all my close relationships fit with what the zodiac says. A guy's sign doesn't matter to me but all my exes have been signs that I shouldn't be with lol.
I think it can be fun to read about all the traits and horoscopes and all that stuff but at the end of the day it's just for fun and not to be taken too seriously. I mean if things can change just like that where now my sign is the total opposite of my previous sign, you have to really think before believing it. I mean come on people just because someone was born a few hours later (meaning they're the next sign) they're no different than if they were born a day earlier. I am me regardless of the fact I was two weeks premature. My friend is still himself even though he was four days late. Signs are nothing more than something fun to look up when you're bored. (At least this is how I see it, if I offended anyone I'm sorry...scratch that people who really truly believe in this stuff need to really think about what it means.)
Actually, I'd hate to break it to you, but It was not just discovered, and You have it on the wrong days.the sign lasted only four days because of the earths tilt, so the modern system threw it out. Also the stars that they used for the zodiac have dramatically changed so The system is flawed, only the personality facts are somewhat accurate.