Guest guest Posted January 13, 2003 Report Share Posted January 13, 2003 At 05:26 PM 1/12/03 EST, Starman wrote: > Now, this secondary question which has arisen is about an 'equal' >sidereal zodiac. When people say they want to base themselves on the planets' >positions in the actual groups of stars, I can understand that-- -- -- but >that has nothing to do with 12 equal-sized constellations. Virgo is about 45 >degrees wide. Libra (as you note) less than 15. So, do people here not >practice the conjunctions of the planets with the actual constellations? Or >is there some difference of opinion between different practitioners of >sidereal astrology? Do some use the actual stars, while others use a sort of >idealized sidereal zodiac of 12 equal constellations? --------------end of quote------------------ Astrologers who use both the Tropical and sidereal zodiacs consider the conjunctions of the planets to the individual fixed stars. These have little or nothing to do with signs of the zodiac. I believe the proof (if you want to call it that) of the sidereal zodiac is in the use of the mathematical sub-divisions of the signs, such as the navamsa or 9th harmonic chart. I have done many reseach projects with the navamsa chart. The results are how I was able to zero in on the Krishnamurti ayanamsa. If there were no 'base sign,' then the subdivisions would not work in practice. Well, obviously I have to be the one to demonstrate how the subdivisions work. Stay tuned....As for sidereal signs (if they exist) having specific meanings in and of themselves, that is a harder nut to crack. No one has ever been able to prove that the Tropical zodiac exists either. All we have is a bunch of astrologers jumping up and down shouting about being an Aquarius or a Pisces, but research can't find an Aquarius or Pisces. No matter what we think a sidereal zodiac 'should' be, an equal zodiac of 12 sidereal signs was used in ancient Mesopotamia. Why not take off in your time capsule and ask THEM why they used that particular zodiac?? Terese Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 13, 2003 Report Share Posted January 13, 2003 At 04:44 PM 1/12/03 -0800, you wrote: >At 05:26 PM 1/12/03 EST, Terese wrote: >Astrologers who use both the Tropical and sidereal zodiacs consider the >conjunctions of the planets That should have been " Users of both zodiacs consider the conjunction of planets to the fixed stars... " Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 13, 2003 Report Share Posted January 13, 2003 >>No one has ever been able to prove that the Tropical zodiac exists either. ******I've proven it in practice thousands of times. >>>I believe the proof (if you want to call it that) of the sidereal zodiac is in the use of the mathematical sub-divisions of the signs, such as the navamsa or 9th harmonic chart. I have done many reseach projects with the navamsa chart. The results are how I was able to zero in on the Krishnamurti ayanamsa. If there were no 'base sign,' then the subdivisions would not work in practice. Well, obviously I have to be the one to demonstrate how the subdivisions work. Stay tuned.... ******So what are they and what do they tell you? >>>an equal zodiac of 12 sidereal signs was used in ancient Mesopotamia. Why not take off in your time capsule and ask THEM why they used that particular zodiac?? *******It was a zodiac also of the solar or tropical year at that time. That's where the 12 equal zones come from, surely--- since the constellations were never 12 equal-sized groups: in fact, it's speculated that in ancient Babylon there were only 6, as I recall. Also what's phrased as a rhetorical (unanswerable) question CAN be answered, by the use of what's known as the Akashic Records. What we experioenced in former times can be re-experienced, so it isn't necessary to throw up one's hands. It does require extension of consciousness. Dr. Starman http://www.DrStarman.net Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 13, 2003 Report Share Posted January 13, 2003 I do believe I had Starman all wrong. You are one sharp dude. But then again I never questioned his intelligence. ------------Damon-------------- DRStarman2001 wrote:>>No one has ever been able to prove that the Tropical zodiac exists either. ******I've proven it in practice thousands of times. >>>I believe the proof (if you want to call it that) of the sidereal zodiac is in the use of the mathematical sub-divisions of the signs, such as the navamsa or 9th harmonic chart. I have done many reseach projects with the navamsa chart. The results are how I was able to zero in on the Krishnamurti ayanamsa. If there were no 'base sign,' then the subdivisions would not work in practice. Well, obviously I have to be the one to demonstrate how the subdivisions work. Stay tuned.... ******So what are they and what do they tell you? >>>an equal zodiac of 12 sidereal signs was used in ancient Mesopotamia. Why not take off in your time capsule and ask THEM why they used that particular zodiac?? *******It was a zodiac also of the solar or tropical year at that time. That's where the 12 equal zones come from, surely--- since the constellations were never 12 equal-sized groups: in fact, it's speculated that in ancient Babylon there were only 6, as I recall. Also what's phrased as a rhetorical (unanswerable) question CAN be answered, by the use of what's known as the Akashic Records. What we experioenced in former times can be re-experienced, so it isn't necessary to throw up one's hands. It does require extension of consciousness. Dr. Starman http://www.DrStarman.net Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 14, 2003 Report Share Posted January 14, 2003 At 02:42 PM 1/13/03 EST, Starman wrote: >I've proven it [the zodiac] in practice thousands of times. All astrologers have. But how about approving it to people on this board? >o what are they and what do they tell you? I'll try to post some examples. >in fact, it's speculated that in ancient >Babylon there were only 6, as I recall. " As I recall! " For God's sake, Starman, if you're going to discuss ancient concepts, where are your REAL quotes from real sources? Do you even know the name of the books? I have them all, by the way. There were 17 Babylonian constellations, later narrowed down to 12 equal sidereal signs and 12 ecliptical constellations. > Also what's phrased as a rhetorical (unanswerable) question CAN be >answered, by the use of what's known as the Akashic Records. Sure. Can you read them? And remember that Edgar Cayce said to use the sidereal signs. Teresa Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 14, 2003 Report Share Posted January 14, 2003 , The Game <sher_e_khan> wrote: > > I do believe I had Starman all wrong. You are one sharp dude. But then again I never questioned his intelligence. I would think it is impossible for someone that is so intellectually challanged as you to be able to make any judgment on another's level of intellect; a blind man cannot judge a beauty contest. - > ------------Damon-------------- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 15, 2003 Report Share Posted January 15, 2003 I can keep this up just as long as you can. If you want go on and on with your cut and paste insults then by all means do so. But while we are on the subject of intellect, how exactly can you prove that you have one? You don't have the sense God gave a rock. You have no well pronounce system of morals or ethics. You have behaviour issues. I'm just wondering if you writting all this from a mental asylum. You don' t seem to be intelligent at all because you have no teaching skills. Meaning no one wants to read what you have to type. I wonder do you even have a job or a marriage. I know you don't have kids. If you do they are beaten and psychologically damaged for 6 reincarnations. Basically dude, you are stuck in " triple stage darkeness " You are deaf, dumb and blind and wouldn't know the true source of the God-Body if it came up a urinated holy water in your face and farted twelve " Hail Marys " in C - Minor. o----------Damon------------o " Ed Kohout <crumpo " <crumpo wrote:--- In , The Game <sher_e_khan> wrote: > > I do believe I had Starman all wrong. You are one sharp dude. But then again I never questioned his intelligence. I would think it is impossible for someone that is so intellectually challanged as you to be able to make any judgment on another's level of intellect; a blind man cannot judge a beauty contest. - > ------------Damon-------------- " How can Pluto be in Sagittarius when it's so close to Antares? " ----- Post message: Subscribe: - Un: - List owner: -owner Shortcut URL to this page: / Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 17, 2003 Report Share Posted January 17, 2003 >in fact, it's speculated that in ancient Babylon there were only 6, as I recall. " As I recall! " For God's sake, Starman, if you're going to discuss ancient concepts, where are your REAL quotes from real sources? Do you even know the name of the books? I have them all, by the way. There were 17 Babylonian constellations, later narrowed down to 12 equal sidereal signs and 12 ecliptical constellations. ******Perhaps you could preovide a reference for that '17'. I believe anyone can find fairly easily that in ancient Babylon the day and night were each divided into six 'hours', each of which was thus equal to two of ours. They had 12 'zones of heaven' which each were thus sixty degrees, not 30. You can find it here, for instance: http://home.attbi.com/~babylonian_astrology/Pages/Essence.htm Dr. Starman http://www.DrStarman.net Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 17, 2003 Report Share Posted January 17, 2003 On 17 Jan 2003, at 13:25, DRStarman2001 wrote: > > >in fact, it's speculated that in ancient Babylon there were only 6, > >as I > recall. > > " As I recall! " For God's sake, Starman, if you're going to discuss > ancient concepts, where are your REAL quotes from real sources? Do you > even know the name of the books? I have them all, by the way. There > were 17 Babylonian constellations, later narrowed down to 12 equal > sidereal signs and 12 ecliptical constellations. > > ******Perhaps you could preovide a reference for that '17'. I believe > anyone can find fairly easily that in ancient Babylon the day and > night were each divided into six 'hours', each of which was thus equal > to two of ours. They had 12 'zones of heaven' which each were thus > sixty degrees, not 30. You can find it here, for instance: > http://home.attbi.com/~babylonian_astrology/Pages/Essence.htm > > Dr. Starman > http://www.DrStarman.net > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.