On a lighter note...

"Astrologers unfazed by new planet plans."

Thank heavens! I was afraid this might effect our precious pseudosciences! Hopefully scientology and creation science are also unfazed.

But really, I think 12 planets should be seen as a boon to astrologers, since that's the number of Zodiac signs and such. Why isn't the International Astrological Union doing something about this?

While they're at it, they should reform the way that signs of the Zodiac are determined to coincide with conception. I mean, it makes no sense to suggest that the womb gives us protection from the influence of the stars. And since gestation time is considerably variable (I, for one, took nearly 10 months to emerge from the womb, according to my parents), it couldn't just be a matter of offsetting things by 9 months.

Under the logic of the current conventions, what would happen if you were born into a house made of meat? Would you not acquire your sign until you left it? Perhaps the astrologer might counter that there's some kind of interference caused by the soul of the mother. Fine, but embryos created in vitro wouldn't have that problem.

Astrologers really need to get on the ball here.


Bonus Reader Poll: Which ultimate fate for the universe most appeals to you?

A. The Big Crunch
B. The Big Rip
C. The Big Freeze
D. The Big Gulp

No comments: