Astrology - Is it for real?

There are countless different zodiacs, which can be categorised in three groups; astrological zodiacs, animal zodiacs, and other zodiacs.

This page looks up at the sky to see the basis of the first two groups which have roots in constellations and celestial observations

Both Western and Eastern astrology are deeply entwined with ancient celestial observations. Where the main Western zodiac places strong emphasis on constellations and planetary aspects, the main Chinese zodiac integrates astronomical observations with philosophical concepts like the five elements and yin-yang, and uses distinct animals to represent various traits.

Here's a question: Whether Western or Eastern, do celestial bodies - planets, moons, stars, etc. - conveniently align themselves to reveal who would be your best soulmate?

Adherents believe that the alignment of distant planets on their birth date can affect their lives. Maybe it can, but compared with what's happening on this planet, while we're living our lives now, must surely have infinitely more impact on our lives than astrology.

And yet people change their actions according to some ancient sage's interpretation of distant planets. Very strange behaviour.

Let's look at some fundamental flaws:

Orientation:
Astronomers of old had a geocentric belief that Earth was at the centre of the Universe, and the heavens rotated around the inside surface of a gigantic spherical ball; quite different from the observations of today's scientific astronomers.

Today's astrologers, however, retain the ancient and patently false geocentric concept when postulating their predictions.
Calibration: The zodiac used today was formulated some 2,500-3,000 years ago and since then, the moon's gravitation has pulled the Earth's tilt (by about 30° westward) as it revolves around the sun. Its axis no longer points to where it did when the Babylonians and Chinese mapped the heavens.
So if the solstice points were remapped when you were born, your birth date's "star sign", calculated millennia ago, would differ. And that's even before we factor in chaos theory.
Celebration:
When is a birth date? When do we become living beings? Or souls? Why should the zodiac be based on the time we take our first breath of fresh air? Are we not a being before that? At conception perhaps?

Twins share the same 'birth sign', yet often have different personalities and talents. And, of course, different luck.
Rationalisation:
Why should the position of distant planets on our birth day, have any effect at all on our lives? Why not genetics, the weather, the local level of xenon gas in the air, or any other of the countless components of our very first environment? Why should we accept that the local environment has no significance, yet the position of stars thousands of years ago and billions of miles away dictate our future? The only force distant stars and planets have is their own gravity, which has negligible effect on Earth.

Horoscopes are based on astrology, which claims that the positions of celestial bodies influence human personality and events. However, there's no scientific evidence supporting this idea. Numerous studies have tested astrology's claims and found no measurable correlation between zodiac signs and personality traits, life outcomes, or behaviour. Unlike scientific theories, astrology doesn’t follow the scientific method — its predictions aren’t testable, repeatable or falsifiable.
Cognition:
Horoscopes often rely on something called the "Barnum effect". This is where people believe vague, general statements apply specifically to them. For example, “You are a kind person, but sometimes you feel misunderstood.” This could apply to almost anyone.

It's natural to focus on parts that resonate, and ignore the rest, making horoscopes feel accurate even though they're designed to be universally applicable.
Contradiction:
Astrology is not even consistent within itself. Different cultures have different zodiac systems (Western, Chinese, Vedic, Kabbalistic, Celtic...), each assigning different traits based on different calendars and celestial interpretations. If astrology were universally true, these systems would logically produce similar results — but they don’t.

This inconsistency weakens astrology’s credibility as an objective system.

With that in mind, since horoscopes rely on vague language, unproven claims, and outdated systems, taking them seriously as a guide for life decisions lacks rational, scientific grounding.

Thousands of years ago planets were considered gods, and their mystery and brilliance in the night sky gave people astrology. We've now lost touch with these gods, but some people still hang on to the ideas.