Guest guest Posted January 9, 2004 Report Share Posted January 9, 2004 At 08:26 AM 1/9/04 -0800, Juan Oliver wrote: >Use of ingress charts and using their progressions are >two seperate realities. If you are saying that he >used both, then you open up the questions of: Did he >utilize the Bija rate or the Standard Rate? Did he use >the mean quotidian or any of the other various >progression rates? These are very important points. Does anyone really know exactly how Bradley did his research?? Shouldn't the ingress chart show an event or weather condition without needing to progress the chart?...especially if the chart applies only to a month long period of time. And what about orbs and aspects? What aspects did Bradley use exactly? What orbs did he allow? >To understand how he did it requires reading the author himself. Yes. And Bradley is gone, apparently leaving us very few specifics about his research. Which means....we have to start all over again!! Statistics can lie. Scientists argue about statistics and methods all the time. This is why we can't point to Bradley's reseach as evidence for an ayanamsa anymore than we can point to a few scattered navamsa charts as 'evidence' for the favored Indian ayanamsa. Either astrology is a science or it isn't. If it's a science, we're going to have to find a way to prove it. Therese 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.