Fogging the Future

[Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)]

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, Barry Arrowsmith
<arrowsmithbt at ...> wrote:

> But take it seriously some folk do. A few years back, John Sladek, 
> irrepressibly mischievous SF writer, came up with the 13th zodiacal  
> sign, Arachne (30th Nov - 17th Dec) and published a hoax book about  
> it under the name James Vogh. None of the astrology crowd seemed to  
> get the joke - they took him seriously, pointing out that Ptomely  
> mentions Ophiuchus in his star catalogue, and so on, and so on, and 

You remind me that there was a book, more than 30 years ago, asserting
the 13th and 14th zodiacal signs, Ophiuchus and Cetus. My mother saw
the blurb that said that people born [November 7] are not Scorpios and
expressed that this should be true so that I would not be a Scorpio so
I would not be such an unpleasant person. But I leafed through the
book at the shop and saw that the personality profile for [November 7]
was just the same when the sign is Cetus as when the sign is Scorpius.

> correct, then that would make Ron a seventh son. Hmm. I wonder how  
> many brothers Arthur had? Six perhaps? Now that would be really
> sneaky.

You know JKR said on her website that Arthur was one of THREE brothers
(and Ginevra is the first Weasley daughter in several generations).
<http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/en/extrastuff_view.cfm?id=7>
I have trouble believing that the Malfoy comment that 'all the
Weasleys' have red hair, freckles, and more children than they can
afford refers to a past generation with only 3 children, so the 'all'
must be all the current generation, Arthur and his two brothers, so
where are the other two flocks of red-heads?