Guest guest Posted January 16, 2003 Report Share Posted January 16, 2003 --- Terese Hamilton <eastwest wrote: > On the discussion of the Boyd chart, everyone is > missing the point. > > (A) The person who posted the data on the Boyd chart > was trying to show the > relationship between an event (Sept 11) and the Boyd > 'war' chart. > > (B) Ed doesn't accept the Boyd chart as valid. > > © O.K. End of discussion, for God's sake!! Find a > chart you can both > agree on to talk about in relation to precession. > Work with ONE chart and > aspects or progressions to that chart rather than > one event pasted on to a > chart that someone don't accept as valid. > > What a waste of energy on a dumb argument when you > could already have > looked at a number of other charts in relation to > precession. And the rest > of us on this board might have learned something! > > Terese > FYI: I wrote the information Terese and it was not simply written for Ed. He responded to it first and expressed his opinion. Done... As for you and the rest of the " group " , you have options. You can accuse us of having a " dumb argument " which sounds like the pot calling the kettle black or you could have reviewed the " tri-chart " as I suggested you do in the first place. Apparently, the noise is so loud in here that its difficult to remain focused and recognize discussions on astrological techniques. > Ed wrote: > > >My experinece with the so called " Boyd " chat is > that it is a bunch of > >nonsense, as you know because you surely have seen > me say so hundreds > >of times. > If this this sentence keeps making an appearence Ed may be found to be a prophet. Jivio > > > " 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 16, 2003 Report Share Posted January 16, 2003 At 07:44 PM 1/15/03 -0800, Jivio wrote: >As for you and the rest of the " group " , you have >options. You can accuse us of having a " dumb argument " >which sounds like the pot calling the kettle black or >you could have reviewed the " tri-chart " as I suggested >you do in the first place. Juan, the point is that there is no point in discussing a chart that some people don't believe is valid. Why not choose charts everyone can agree on? There are tons of charts out there that can be used. There's no sense in trying to convince someone of the validity of a chart if that person believes the chart ISN'T valid. It just wastes time and energy. Terese Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 16, 2003 Report Share Posted January 16, 2003 --- Terese Hamilton <eastwest wrote: > At 07:44 PM 1/15/03 -0800, Jivio wrote: > > >As for you and the rest of the " group " , you have > >options. You can accuse us of having a " dumb > argument " > >which sounds like the pot calling the kettle black > or > >you could have reviewed the " tri-chart " as I > suggested > >you do in the first place. > > Juan, the point is that there is no point in > discussing a chart that some > people don't believe is valid. Terese, I'm not here to argue with you. I simply don't share your perspective. You are creating an issue by insisting that you know how individuals should communicate on this board. For Reference this is what I wrote: I don't think so Juan... I just did the calculations utilizing Solar Fire and came up with the Progressed Boyd Moon 3 Cap 44 on 911. I utilized the Bija Rate in the calculations. The important thing though is what one sees when they view the USA " War " chart, its' progression(Sidereal with Bija Correction, Mean Quotidian and 911 collectively. A very impressive statement on validity of the mathmatics demonstrated. I'm writing to Juan but since Ed has issues with the charts validity, you believe that I should create a different scenario to accomidate Ed. Who knew? You make a claim that " some people don't believe (the chart) is valid " . Only one person(Ed) had expressed that view. One does not constitute " some " . I recall Juan Revilla's contension that it was valid. Seems the majority at this moment appreciates the charts' validity. I don't understand where you come off acting as a moderator on how discussions are to be conducted within this group. Why not choose charts > everyone can agree on? Think about that for a second.... Did you look at the charts? Do you have any interest in looking at the mathmatical inter-relationship? > There are tons of charts out there that can be used. > There's no sense in > trying to convince someone of the validity of a > chart if that person > believes the chart ISN'T valid. It just wastes time > and energy. > > Terese > I wasn't trying to convince anyone(especially Ed) of anything except to encourage " readers " to embark on a path of individual study and investigation. Alphonso made a comment recently that I feel is timely. The reference being to listening twice as much as you talk since we are endowed with two ears and one mouth. Jivio > > > " 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 16, 2003 Report Share Posted January 16, 2003 Terese Hamilton <eastwest wrote: There's no sense in trying to convince someone of the validity of a chart if that person believes the chart ISN'T valid. It just wastes time and energy. -------------------- Sorry, Terese but the point is that I want to read what Jivio has to type and he should not have to be silenced because of one person. Ed doesn't even believe in the sidereal zodiac so why is he being taken as an authority? He is bright and educated????? How would anybody other than someone with strong maternal instincts know this?? He has insulted his entire audience. I came here to learn and why should I not be able to because of one and I repeat one antagonist. I don't know if the Boyd chart is valid or not. Ed has decided that it is not valid for everyone else. Again on this policy of ignorence, I have chosen to ignore Ed but I still have read it when you or anyone still choses to respond or answer him. I have been asked not to leave the group by my friends. I have been asked to wait for Kevin's decision. I will but I refuse to lay low or end this until it is settle by booting Ed out of this group. o----------Damon------------o 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.