RE: Digest Number 545

[Guest guest]

-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----

Van:

 

Verzonden: vrijdag 16 mei 2003 10:28

Aan:

Onderwerp: Digest Number 545

 

 

 

" 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:

/

------

 

There are 2 messages in this issue.

 

Topics in this digest:

 

1. Re: Re: Multiple Zodiacs

Richard <erichardg

2. Re: Re: Astrology is not a science!

Richard <erichardg

 

 

______________________

______________________

 

Message: 1

Thu, 15 May 2003 12:08:35 -0700

Richard <erichardg

Re: Re: Multiple Zodiacs

 

 

Therese,

 

Our cp wing has got it right--Sag as the piety of the Church. Pluto arrived

in

the middle of that sign to bring the whole thing to a head...a big head.

 

Hi Richard!

 

Now I understand why you assume " Astrology is not a science "

after your experience at the meeting and Francoise speaking.

I taste a detest from your email about the scholar's way

of approaching the value of astrology. The reason that they did

not succeed in research up till now is, that the tropical zodiac

is used as a tool of their work.

I have often translated their work in sidereal view. The charts

indeed shew a prominence of the waterelement. I do admire their

approach to do so much work so I offered my consolation that their

research succeeded well in sidereal view. They researched the

charts of psychology students (thousands of them) and compared

these charts with technical students'charts. Their hypothese was,

that planets in water-elements should be prominent in their chart.

The fire element was prominent; wrong thus in their condition.The

doctor psychologist/scientist was very disappointed. So much work

done in vain.

Once I heard from family/cousins, studying for psychology

pupils should have an education in mathematics beforehand. The

Gauquelins needed mathematics for their research too.

The circle of astrologers for scientific research in astrology,

in Holland, originally was broad, but one by one quitted the circle.

30 years of existence/research without succes, thanks to their tightly

bond to the tropical zodiac.

Indeed, astrologers are not exited about the " technical astrology "

no astrologer need to feel stupid about that. A scientist is supposed to

obtain the right skill/experience in their own faculty. The astrologer too,

in their own special interest. Each faculty would profit from the knowledge

of astrology. Millions of dollars would be saved in time of research.

Astrology is just a tool to gain experience and skill in every way.

We do not need to echo the words of scientist, who only keep to their own

traditional way of research.

Anny

 

Therese,

 

I have studied the charts of the Gauquelins. It is quite

interesting

to see, that both they have Mercure the ruler of the XIIth house. In

Francoise's

chart Mercurius occupies the VIIth house. In Michel's Mercurius is in IV.

I casted the Navamsa chart for both. Especially the Uranian Points are

prominent.

Now I am casting Navamsa charts for more understanding. Besides that,

Francoise

has several planets in Leo, which explains here refuse to consider the view

of

someone else. Leo is fixed element. The connection between Michel and

Francoise

is more close in the Navamsa chart. A close view might tell the real

problem.

Regards

Anny