I'm still a fish. 

Surely it's just for people born from this year??? I'm still the same but my mother has changed :/

As has my father, sisters, nephew and his nibbs.

Ophiuchus: Nov. 29 – Dec. 17


I don't want to be this !!!!! 


I can't even pronounce it 

Dame, I think its pronounced O-Fee-you-chus

Its a semi naked man wrestling a snake

I am so not a Capricorn im an Aquarius through and through, people can tell im an Aquarius before they even ask. this is codswallop

and now my other half is now the same as my daughter I dont need two of them to be stubborn

Mmmmmmm! 

 

thanks Rawky, it's made me feel worse, I have a phobia with snakes.... the man I don't mind though 

 and I've gone right off the bloke 

Oh, I think I'll stick with the fish! 

He has a handsome beard

He looks like he's just about the dry his buttock parting, with the poor snake. 

hahahaha he is!!!!! ohh you poor buggers who have him

I'm not changing, I'm a libra

Oh I'm not a ram any more but  a fish.

I'm sticking at being a fish !

panic over - 6th paragraph down

"However, Parke Kunkle’s discovery only addresses sidereal zodiac, that is based on constellations. Therefore this change only concerns people in the East. Westerners adhere to tropical zodiac that is fixed to seasons (equinox to equinox). In conclusion, your zodiac sign has not changed."

hope this helps

That's OK then - I like being a fish not (whatever an aquarian is) 

I seem to remember this being around ten years ago. Ophiuchus has been a constellation by rights  for some years but ignored by the horroscope industry. 

What Wiki says about it
Despite crossing the ecliptic, Ophiuchus is not included in standard astrological zodiacs, which divide the ecliptic into abstract 30-degree segments (for twelve equal signs), which are named after the constellations but do not map to the stars in the sky. If the signs did follow the stars, Ophiuchus would be a thirteenth member of the zodiac.

Makes a mockery of even the pseudo science of astrology, really.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ophiuchus_(astrology)

It's all a load of rubbish though to be fair all us Aries peeps think that.


(The old ones are the best)

I'm an Aries now. When I was little I misread the tiny text in my dictionary with the horoscopes and originally thought I was an Aries, but when I corrected myself I didn't like the Taurus cos it was a bull

I'm still a Virgo

 


And there's the proof!  

Omg I'm so getting forum bullied!!!!!!!

*** runs ***

*** swims ***

Exactamundo. I'm too old to change now

Well I'm on the cusp with Pisces so can read both signs ..Aries and Pisces,not that I read my horoscope anyway .It's all a bit of fun really.

OMG Bliz, thought I recognised you when I had my 'fish pedicure' the other day...Hope you enjoyed nibbling my feet

 You mad woman! 

Actually, you tasted a bit like Hamburger. 

Glad you enjoyed

I'm now a capricorn .... I was an Aquarian

Does it work? My feet are killing me
 
 
Ex-Libran now a born again Virgo

mines on dec 17... thats why my year has been fooked up

I refute this100%.  Even if there 'has' been a new starsign made up/discovered, it doesn't alter the fact that you were born under a particular starsign, X amount of years ago....(this new one has only just been discovered/announced so does not affect anything historical (IMO.).  If someone was born on Feb 23rd 1980 or whatever, they are a pisces, and this 'new starsign' makes no odds.  It may affect future people born, ie: a child born Feb 23rd next year could be an aquarius, because they are being born after all this but people born years ago, were born under the particular starsign of the time.  I mean, if your birthdate was March 3rd 1984, and an extra month was suddenly whacked in between January and February, your birthdate wouldn't suddenly be April 3rd 1974!

So it's a load of rubbish IMO.  Sure, make people born from now on have the 'new starsigns,' but anyone born under the old ones, gets to keep it, as that is the starsign that they were born under.  You can't just change or erase history FFS.  I am and always will be a Libra.

This is what Jonathan Cainer has to say on the subject:
______________________________________________________________

News update: There's lately been a lot of talk about 'new dates' for the zodiac signs and even a 'new sign'. This, though, is nothing 'new'. It's the same old nonsense that gets trotted out every 20 years or so by astronomers who think the twelve signs of the zodiac must be the same as the 12 constellations (or star groups). Actually, they're not and may never have been - although once they correlated more closely. 'Aha,' they think, 'Astrologers must be too stupid to notice this.' So without doing any more research, they issue a press release or write a book.

_______________________________________________________________

I still consider myself an Aries *rams thread*

I'd be a Saggy 

Agree with what a few have said on here.  This changes nothing, and I believe that people will retain the starsign that they had when they were born.

That now makes me a Capricron and no longer 50 years ahead of my time!


Husband is still Taurus the bullshitter though.