Chill. Chill. Double Chill.

For the LOVE OF BUDDHA, if I read one more tweet or facebook status about people having self-identity crises over the change in their zodiac sign ...


Okay, I actually love some of those people who have tweeted or face-placed about it, but CHILLAX.  Because guess what?  YOUR SIGN HAS NOT CHANGED.  


Why the Minneapolis Star Tribune felt the need to shake up the world over nothing is beyond me.  People have been trying to calm the masses ever since.


Astrologer Jeff Jawer explains, "the tropical zodiac – which is fixed to seasons, and which Western astrology adheres to – differs from the sidereal zodiac – which is fixed to constellations and is followed more in the East, and is the type of zodiac to which the Star Tribune article ultimately refers."


He also explains that this whole "two zodiac" thing is no news, and periodically someone will publish something about it and act like it is newsworthy, but it does nothing to change astrology as Westerns know it.


"When we look at the astrology used in the Western world, the seasonally based astrology has not changed, was never oriented to the constellations, and stands as … has been stated for two millenniums," Jawer said.


Plus, most scientists think you are lame for believing in the zodiac anyway. (Then explain why I am a stubborn creature of comfort if not for the fact that I was born under the sign of the Taurus!)


The Minneapolis Star Tribune also wrote an article today that basically said "Oh, sorry we wrote that." and, interestingly, the original article is no longer available online.  How queer.


Whatevs.  Once a Taurus, always a Taurus.  Rock on, fellow bulls!