Pluto update

[ciphergoth]

According to the latest news it looks like Pluto may be denied planet status after all. Rah!

One of these things is not like the others:

Comments

[ciphergoth.livejournal.com]

One of the great things about this controversy is the astrologers look even more stupid than usual no matter what the outcome of this is. It'll be entertaining to see them either trying to rationalize why your chart doesn't need to contain every last rock in the solar system, or give all of the thousands of them distinct meanings, and to come up with excuses why they made up a meaning for Pluto in the first place.

[mskala.livejournal.com]

Common misconception. Astrologers don't take the IAU's word for how many planets are important in a chart, for the same reason the IAU doesn't use astrological sign-degree notation to describe locations in the sky.

[ciphergoth.livejournal.com]

That depends on the astrologer. Some stick to the classical five planets, but Pluto has not been universally ignored.

[mskala.livejournal.com]

I'm not sure how that relates to what I said. Yes, many astrologers use Pluto. They didn't start just because the IAU declared it a planet, and they won't stop just because the IAU may declare it not-a-planet. Some astrologers even use planet-like things that they acknowledge do not physically exist (e.g. the "Uranian planets"). Rocks in the sky and symbols on the chart aren't necessarily the same things.

Sorry love....

[ergotia.livejournal.com]

I know you hate astrology but you are on a hiding to nothing here. Before Pluto was discovered Mars was the ruler of Scorpio, for example. The three outer planets move so slowly that in astrology they are interpreted as having effects on a generation rather than on individuals so before we knew they were there astrology did not have that level of interpretation. Ceres and Pallas are not planets but their movements are recorded and used in astrology.

Dont criticise without the date, even with junk science.

xxxxx

Re: Sorry love....

[ergotia.livejournal.com]

Data! not date, data! gaaarrgh!

Re: Sorry love....

[ciphergoth.livejournal.com]

I take your point, but I still think this means trouble for astrologers. I know that serious astrologers have endless layers of obfuscation to hide behind, but I hope that for the public, the understanding that our solar system contains an endless menagerie of objects of different sizes and that it's hard to draw a clear line between them will undercut the plausibility of attributing magical qualities to rocks in space.

Re: Sorry love....

[ergotia.livejournal.com]

I doubt it. I mean, think of what Xtians believe in spite of all science has to say...

Re: Sorry love....

[strangerover.livejournal.com]

But of course, the astrologers would have seen this coming...

I've always been tempted to stick a note on the Gypsy Fortune Teller's booth door by the harbour at Whitby...

"Closed due to unforseen circumstances"