back to Jagger et al.

[Guest guest]

At 10:53 AM 12/29/1999 -0000, you wrote:

>

>Message: 1

> Tue, 28 Dec 1999 15:55:47 EST

> Aumgn93

>Sidereal vs Tropical

>

>Hello, all.

>Several weeks ago, in response to one of my defenses of the Sidereal Zodiac

>on astrology , someone said,

>

>> I've always " preferred " to drive a Chevy, but I have no problem with

>> my friends driving a Ford. You have your justifications, and I have

>> mine. In the end, it doesn't matter. My clients are all the evidence I

>> need to encourage my " chosen " path.

>

>Sidereal vs. Tropical isn't like preferring a Ford to a Chevy. It's like

>preferring a Mercedes to a one-speed bicycle.

>

[snip]

>Later, Kevin/Baraka

>Founder,

>

+Dear Kevin, yes I understand your desire for facts not opinions. I

support that. I reinterate what I said recently regarding how Sidereal

would make Jagger a Cancer (!). And that his birth chart, surprisingly,

doesn't exhibit any indications that would, shall we say, compensate for

how come he comes across so Leonian even though Sun is in Cancer

sidereally. When you ask for how Sidereal doesn't " work " for someone, I

think my point stands still rather strongly. It is just as important to be

able to see how the Ayanamsa corrects for erroneous Sun Signs in

individuals. Unfortunately in my case, changing me from a Sun in Cancer to

a Sun in Gemini isn't too revolutionary because I had, all along, that 3

planet stellium in Gemini. So one could have rationalized that such

accounted for my geminean behaviour, etc. all along. I particularly like

looking at Sun in Scorpio individuals that would, under the Sidereal

system, become Libras. Case in point, Burt Lancaster. Well that's all for

tonight. With a cold, Breck in Tucson