Camilla's Data: To Jen- Rationale of prediction

[Guest guest]

Hello Jen. Sorry to disagree completely with you, but it seems to me

you are still under the influence of tropical astrology and what is

worst of solar astrology, when you are referring to them taking into

account only the sign placement of the sun. This is the only reason

why you can say that Camilla " is a cancer " and Diana " is a gemini " .

 

It is my opinion that this does not have any significance at all.

 

What it matters is the ascendant, secondly the moon's place and in

third place the sun. But mainly the overall chart.

 

The rationale of my prediction:

 

I learned to Mr Rao,a reknown hindu astrologer, to not divulgue

always the basis of our predictions.

 

Since I had always read silly things in this list, such as that the

houses do not work, I will not enter detailing which houses can be

considered as related to marriage.

 

It is your duty to find them, in case you want to learn astrology,

at least the hindu approach.

 

Alfonso Osorio

 

 

 

, " Jen " <jen@b...> wrote:

> Interesting , perhaps that both Diana & Camilla are tropical

Cancers , however , sidereally Diana becomes Gemini and Camilla stays

Cancer , what with Charles being Scorpio / Sagittarius ....

> -

> Therese Hamilton

>

> Monday, May 05, 2003 12:03 AM

> Camilla's Birth Data

>

>

> From the Rodden/McDonough AstroDatabase:

>

> Camilla Parker Bowles

> 7-17-1947 7:10 GDWT (+0:0) London, England 51N30 0W10

>

 

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Jen:

 

We happen to be colleagues, I am also an engineer but with studies

in Business Administration.

 

I have no idea why I have dedicated so much time to investigate and

read about astrology.

 

I am not sure it is worthy you continue ascending steps in learning

this discipline. When you arrive to the last steps you will find that

everybody used different ladders!.

 

This is why not 2 astrologers speak the same language. Hadn't you

noticed here that absurd peculiarity?

 

Best Wishes, Alfonso

 

 

 

, " Jen " <jen@b...> wrote:

> Alfonso , I am but a beginner , with my foot placed gingerly on the

first rung of the ladder of learning - I have a long way to go !

Jen .

> -

> alfonsoosorio

>

> Monday, May 05, 2003 12:55 AM

> Re: Camilla's Data: To Jen-

Rationale of prediction

>

>

>

> Hello Jen. Sorry to disagree completely with you, but it seems to

me

> you are still under the influence of tropical astrology and what

is

> worst of solar astrology, when you are referring to them taking

into

> account only the sign placement of the sun. This is the only

reason

> why you can say that Camilla " is a cancer " and Diana " is a

gemini " .

>

> It is my opinion that this does not have any significance at all.

>

> What it matters is the ascendant, secondly the moon's place and

in

> third place the sun. But mainly the overall chart.

>

> The rationale of my prediction:

>

> I learned to Mr Rao,a reknown hindu astrologer, to not divulgue

> always the basis of our predictions.

>

> Since I had always read silly things in this list, such as that

the

> houses do not work, I will not enter detailing which houses can

be

> considered as related to marriage.

>

> It is your duty to find them, in case you want to learn

astrology,

> at least the hindu approach.

>

> Alfonso Osorio

>

>

>

> , " Jen " <jen@b...> wrote:

> > Interesting , perhaps that both Diana & Camilla are tropical

> Cancers , however , sidereally Diana becomes Gemini and Camilla

stays

> Cancer , what with Charles being Scorpio / Sagittarius ....

> > -

> > Therese Hamilton

> >

> > Monday, May 05, 2003 12:03 AM

> > Camilla's Birth Data

> >

> >

> > From the Rodden/McDonough AstroDatabase:

> >

> > Camilla Parker Bowles

> > 7-17-1947 7:10 GDWT (+0:0) London, England 51N30 0W10

> >

>

> >

> >

> >