Has your zodiac sign drifted away from the stars, and is astrology science?

Yes, your sign has drifted away from the stars, and no, astrology is not science. The first part is astronomy. Earth's axis slowly shifts direction, like the axis of a spinning top, in a cycle of about 26,000 years. This is called axial precession. It moves the equinoxes against the stars, which is why it was historically called the precession of the equinoxes, and its discovery is usually credited to the Greek astronomer Hipparchus, in the 2nd century BC.

That drift matters for the zodiac. Since Babylonian times the point of the March equinox has moved from Aries into Pisces, so the time of year when the Sun is in a given constellation has changed. The zodiac signs are distinct from the constellations that share their names, both because of precession and because the constellations vary in width. Critics note that astrologers often do not take into account basic features of astronomy such as precession.

The second part is about evidence, and the answer is plain. Astrology has been rejected by the scientific community, and scientific testing has found no evidence to support its claims. In the most famous test, led by Shawn Carlson, with a committee of scientists and a committee of astrologers, natal astrology performed no better than chance. No mechanism has been proposed by which stars and planets could affect people as astrologers say without contradicting basic biology and physics.

So why do horoscopes feel right? In 1949 Bertram Forer gave his students the same personality text, taken from a book on astrology, and more than 40% rated it a perfect 5 out of 5 for accuracy. Astrology is not science, but it does have a place in history: it has helped to drive the development of astronomy.