Reuters is reporting that five astrologers who attended the United Astrology Conference 2012 in New Orleans over the Memorial Day weekend insist the stars are lining up in favor of Obama rather than Republican nominee Mitt Romney.
Chicago astrologist and corporate lawyer Nina Gryphon said her study of the Aries ingress (the exact time when the Sun enters the sign of Aries) is what made it obvious that "Obama stays where he is without a change in status."
Denver astrologer Chris Brennan charted the public profiles of both candidates and found that Obama will be in a peak period at the time of the election while Romney's peak will start to peter out a few weeks prior to November 6.
Brennan also found a warning in the stars that indicates the 2012 election might turn out like the 2000 contest which took weeks to settle.
"We should all be aware of the Mercury retrograde that will occur on election day," he said, explaining that a retrograde is an optical illusion that can make a planet appear to reverse direction temporarily.
"Most astrologers are pretty certain that this could cause problems similar to what happened in the 2000 election," Brennan said, and "seems to imply that there's something up in the air about the election until sometime later in the month. It's possible it won't be finished for Romney until the last week of November."
If all of this sounds a little hokey to you, it is!
Astrology (which is not associated with the scientific study of the universe known as astronomy) is one of the biggest and oldest scams in human history. It is believed to have originated with the Chaldeans who observed the orderly movement of the planets, assigned them godlike characteristics and powers, and eventually began to worship them as gods. Astrologers would then interpret the pattern of the planets as omens or signs of what was to come.
According to Father Mitch Pacwa S.J., author of Catholics and the New Age and a former practitioner of astrology, astrology has no basis in fact.
For instance, he points out that the ancient system of astrology was based on the five planets known to exist at the time – Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn. Did anything change when Uranus, Neptune and Pluto were discovered?
No, says Father Pacwa. These previously unknown planets “are considered to have unknown influences,” he writes. “This lack of knowledge lets each astrologer make up his or her own interpretation of these planetary influences. As my Bahai astrology teachers often said, ‘Where there is confusion, there is possibility.’”
He goes on to explain that the actual zodiac is an imaginary circle around the ecliptic of the earth’s annual trip around the sun. Astrologers artificially divided it into 12 equal sections of 30 degrees each even though astronomers know this is not the case. The actual degrees of the constellations range anywhere from 7.0 to 37.5.
“This unevenness means the month ascribed to each ‘sun sign’ in newspaper columns does not correspond to the easily verified scientific data about the real amount of time the sun lies within the constellations,” Father Pacwa writes. “This too, is a bogus element in astrology.”
And, according to astronomers, because the actual belt (ecliptic) of the zodiac has altered its former relationship to the earth by about 36 degrees west, “Everyone’s astrological sign is different from the claims of the newspapers and books,” Father Pacwa writes.
“This means that everyone needs to change the astrological sign under which he or she was born. Whatever date the newspaper gives for your sign, move it back one whole sign, because that, in fact, is your real sign.”
In other words, these people can't even get your birth sign right let alone predict who's going to be president.
If you're a betting person, you might want to stick to horses.
To read more, check out my book on astrology in our Learn to Discern series.
Send your New Age question to newage@womenofgrace.com
