Is there a correlation between birth month and disease risk?

[Evo]

I am very open minded, I am not a scientist, but I do have common sense. As I mentioned, I looked into astrology years ago in my teens. I came to the conclusion that it didn't make sense.

Astrologers want us to believe that some distant object has the power to design our personalities and predict events. Ok, let's say that a physical object such as a planet has the incredible power to do this. We are on a planet. I would say that any effect a planet millions of miles away would have would be pretty much over ridden by Earth's properties.

I'm sorry, I just cannot believe that a ball of rock or gas millions of miles away can determine what kind of person we are or predict events in our life.
Until I see some credible evidence, I have to put this in the same category as prediction based on animal entrails - the jury is still out.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

First, Kerrie, I'm sorry that I don't get it. I do my best but I was trained and am naturally inclined to think in analytical, quantifiable terms.

Evo, one of my main points in this is that we shouldn't judge a claim based on alleged explanations. Maybe something about astrology actually works but for reasons completely different than believed. This sort of thing has happened before.

 

[Kerrie]

I am very open minded, I am not a scientist, but I do have common sense. As I mentioned, I looked into astrology years ago in my teens. I came to the conclusion that it didn't make sense.

Astrologers want us to believe that some distant object has the power to design our personalities and predict events. Ok, let's say that a physical object such as a planet has the incredible power to do this. We are on a planet. I would say that any effect a planet millions of miles away would have would be pretty much over ridden by Earth's properties.

I'm sorry, I just cannot believe that a ball of rock or gas millions of miles away can determine what kind of person we are or predict events in our life.
Until I see some credible evidence, I have to put this in the same category as prediction based on animal entrails - the jury is still out.

sorry to say evo, this perception of astrology is again incorrect. i don't think you looked into astrology as deep as you could have or you read books such as Linda Goodman's sun signs-books that destroy any understanding of how it can work. can you bear the thought that science has yet to discover how the theory of astrology works with tangible evidence? a ball of rock or gas millions of miles away does not have an effect on us, but astrology suggests that the universe is one giant organism and the geometrical aspects of these balls of gas and rock reflect our tendencies, not predict our personalities.

i say to anyone who has disbelief, (and please not everyone!) I am willing to interpret your natal chart on what an astrologist would consider a general scale, but to you might be much deeper then you are used to understanding of astrology. I need birthdate (month/day/year), time of birth and place of birth. Of course, if you decide to swap information, please realize I am intrepretating for this time and date.

 

[Evo]

Evo, one of my main points in this is that we shouldn't judge a claim based on alleged explanations. Maybe something about astrology actually works but for reasons completely different than believed. This sort of thing has happened before.

I totally agree. I really do believe that there are many things that we have yet to understand. I'm not saying astrology isn't possible, I'm saying that I can't rationalize it.

I'm more inclined to go with the seasonal aspect than the relationship of planets. Astrology is still too much of a stretch for me. But I may be proven wrong.

 

[Kerrie]

Ok wait, so is it what you are saying, that personality is composed of many things. There are astrological influences, there is the free will, there is the environment. Say there are only these three components. Now, these three components come together and form a personality.

People study astrology and can deduce from the moment of birth what the personality tendencies are. This is then mixed, altered and modulated by the free will and by environmental factors.

Astrologers don't claim and are inherently inable to predict how this mixing will take place. They acknowledge that from the timepoint of mixing the theory of astrology no longer holds truth. Right? Only if they were able to factor in all the influences of free will and environmental factors will they be able to regain footing. Which, they claim cannot be done, because influences such as free will are not measurable and can thus not be corrected.

Thus, if mercury goes retrograde, it won't be possible to measure its effect on human beings. There might still be an effect, but since it is overshadowed we'll never be able to find out.

To get back at the weather, it is like a butterfly which is creating a current but will never be able to overpower a storm. If the butterfly were alone though, it would be able to set off a storm itself.

This is actually quite accurate to the practicing astrologist Monique. They do realize astrology is not the entire indicator of personality , free will and environment are huge, there is no denying this. But their claim is that there are personality tendencies that one can have (like having the gene for Down's syndrome as I do in my family, but that doesn't mean I will have a child born with Down's) doesn't necessarily mean one will be this way. What astrologers have found is that those who fit their astrological profile fairly close are those who fall into these tendencies because of their lack of awareness of them.

For me personally, I use astrology as a general tool, but not as the entire outlook on people, as I know people can choose who they ultimately are. But I find for the most part from my own personal experience and knowledge (sort of my own study and analysis I have done for the last decade) that it matches up about 65% of the time.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Never assume that general news agencies supply correct information on scientific topics

Not to divert the thread, but since I was making a claim of sorts...

The news agencies are usually just quoting the experts. Granted, you have to be careful about exactly what was reported. I expected the report that I heard to surface on the web but I haven't spotted it yet. I did find this. My point is that the bottom line answers are not always so clear; even in mainstream science. A question like whether or not HDLs are good or bad, or whether we should consume as much as possible seems to me like a question that is orders of magnitude less complex than a subject like astrology.

What is HDL (high-density lipoprotein) cholesterol?
This type of cholesterol is known as the "good" cholesterol, and is a type of fat in the blood that helps to remove cholesterol from the blood, preventing the fatty buildup and formation of plaque.
You want your HDL to be as high as possible. Some people can raise HDL by:
• exercising for at least 20 minutes three times a week
• kicking the cigarette habit
• avoiding saturated fat intake
• decreasing body weight
For others, medicine may be needed. Because raising HDL is complicated, you should work with your physician on a therapeutic plan.

http://www.muschealth.com/news/heart/september2003/

…Dr. James Cleeman, coordinator of the National Cholesterol Education Program at the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
HDL levels should be 40 milligrams per deciliter or higher, LDL levels should be less than 100 and triglycerides should be less than 150. Under the new guidelines, adults are advised to have their cholesterol levels checked at least every five years.

Several years ago, some research suggested that once you're past a certain age, cholesterol levels might not have to be watched so closely. But Cleeman and another expert, Dr. Daniel Lee, say more recent research refutes that notion.

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/living/Healthology/HS_hicholesterol_030917.html

Dr. Henry Ginsberg of Columbia University says that’s why HDL is not as well understood as LDL. “If you can raise your HDL, everything we know suggests that’s good, but the bottom line proof is not there yet.”

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4541673/

 

[Les Sleeth]

Oh no, you are wrong. If you notice it was from the following post by Kerrie that I shifted gears: "again monique, you will see astrology as incorrect because you are a scientist try not applying the scientific theory to astrology because it is not a science". That is because in these words she is disproving her own belief. I have given several examples where for analogous situations scientific theory HAS been able to show correlations.

I hadn't read your opening comments, so I apologize for the remarks I made before I did a full read. You might be very open minded about things, and I might be misinterpreting your meaning. I suppose if you are someone dedicated to science and working in science, then your standards for evidence are going to be strongly oriented in that direction.

I proposed a test already, you tell me how the test is biased to disprove astrology. . . *sigh* why not? tell me why. What is this influence of personality, how does it influence astrology? Is it the free will you are talking about? People have a free will, so even though they are supposed to be introvert according to astrology.. they are extrovert? So if this is the case, how does astrology hold up?

First, I agree with you that if there really are "tendencies," then a study done properly should show us something. The problem is getting the proper test set up. I like hypnagogue's approach of, "experienced, well-regarded astrologers working in concert with experienced, well-regarded scientists to conduct a controlled, double blind, large scale statistical analysis with a methodology that is widely agreed upon by both astrologers and scientists alike to be fair and accurate. Another critical factor would be the extent to which practitioners on both sides of the table are truly unbiased and willing to let experiment determine results, rather than having an agenda to prove things one way or the other."

The thing is, no such test has been done, yet we still hear you saying, "I still find it strange that a science minded person would believe this stuff.. you really believe it?" . . . You are telling me that astrology is not measurable by statistics, thus it is false. Clear as daylight. . . . Thank you Kerrie, you have once and for all proven that Astrology is a waiste of time to study, holds no truth at all, and cannot tell anything about a persons tendencies" (and you are downright nice about it compared to what most science-minded say).

Why do you say this? To me it seems like you say such things because you are already closed to the idea.

I never said things can be proven in a black/white fashion. If you propose though that you have a theory by which you can 'feel' a person's personality by whatever theory, don't you feel yourself that such a 'feeling' should be verifiable? And if it is not verifiable, is the 'feeling' correct?

Actually, I don't think Kerrie is saying personality tendencies are only felt, but rather the interpretation of those tendencies in specific situations requires good intuition (correct me if I am wrong Kerrie).

Myself, I am pretty sure I've noticed the "tendencies" Kerrie speaks of, but I haven't a clue as to what causes them. If a study failed to show a relationship between personalities and the position of the constellations or being born at certain times of the year, I would still want to know why I've noticed what I have. I am not the slightest bit attached to astrological explanations, but I am not ready to deny what I really have observed either.

Getting back to my criticism of your position, it's that it seems knee-jerk, like most of the reactions I've seen by the empirical-minded. They want to pounce on the astrology idea and rip apart every aspect without looking at it openly to see if there might be something real buried in there. If someone is postulating an aspect of external reality can be predicted, then yes, it should be verifiable. But you have been rejecting the possibility of a tie between personality tendencies and cycles out of hand.

For me, the problem with that is what is happening to the value of "feeling." You yourself say, " if it is not verifiable, is the 'feeling' correct?" Part of the value of feeling to knowing is that it gives us clues of where to look, even in empirical investigations. Your attitude suggests (to me) that you look down on feeling/intuition, etc. Are you sure you've understood all that feeling is capable of, including types of knowledge and understanding it brings?

 

[Les Sleeth]

. . . Maybe something about astrology actually works but for reasons completely different than believed. This sort of thing has happened before.

Yes . . . I think that is a good, no great, principle to keep in mind for all investigations and contemplations.

 

[Monique]

I like hypnagogue's approach of, "experienced, well-regarded astrologers working in concert with experienced, well-regarded scientists to conduct a controlled, double blind, large scale statistical analysis with a methodology that is widely agreed upon by both astrologers and scientists alike to be fair and accurate.

In fact I proposed that first in this thread.

The thing is, no such test has been done, yet we still hear you saying, "I still find it strange that a science minded person would believe this stuff.. you really believe it?"

Because we are born with logic thinking, which is especially clear in a scientists mind. This world behaves according to laws, which can be found out. I find astrology just as strange as the Atkins diet, but if someone comes with either a good logical explanation or with proof of some kind I have no problem with changing my mind.

". . . You are telling me that astrology is not measurable by statistics, thus it is false. Clear as daylight. . . . Thank you Kerrie, you have once and for all proven that Astrology is a waiste of time to study, holds no truth at all, and cannot tell anything about a persons tendencies" (and you are downright nice about it compared to what most science-minded say).

Why do you say this? To me it seems like you say such things because you are already closed to the idea.

As I already said, it was a reaction to Kerrie's claim that I should shed the scientific method. Before that I already posted a method by which astrological effects could be distilled (showing my open mind, because I have been saying all along, if astrology holds true, you will be able to test it). If an expert in astrology says (without giving an explanation) that it cannot be tested.. then.. what..?

If I say: "everyone! I have found a gene that causes Down syndrome. uh.. sorry.. no, you can't test all the Down's people to see whether they have the gene. uh.. sorry.. no, you can't use it to see which mothers are at higher risk to giving birth to a Down's child either. In fact, you will never be able to find out whether I found the gene or not. How I found the gene myself?..."

Actually, I don't think Kerrie is saying personality tendencies are only felt, but rather the interpretation of those tendencies in specific situations requires good intuition (correct me if I am wrong Kerrie).

That is why I put it as the undefined term 'feelings'.

Getting back to my criticism of your position, it's that it seems knee-jerk, like most of the reactions I've seen by the empirical-minded. They want to pounce on the astrology idea and rip apart every aspect without looking at it openly to see if there might be something real buried in there. If someone is postulating an aspect of external reality can be predicted, then yes, it should be verifiable. But you have been rejecting the possibility of a tie between personality tendencies and cycles out of hand.

I rather feel this thread is a knee-jerk towards the scientists. I expressed my feeling that I don't know how the planets would influence a person, but I never said that because I can't understand it, it can't be true. I also mentioned the fact that bloodvessels themselves have a circadian rhythm and through my work I believe they are controlled by circadian genes, which then leads to the increased risk of aneurysm rupture in the morning.

As I said, and you also:
If someone is postulating an aspect of external reality can be predicted, then yes, it should be verifiable.

The fact that all astrologers fight for their right to say that astrology cannot be proven, I draw the conclusion that thus the theory cannot be true. Solely based on their opinion.

 

[Saint]

look at this, 20th March is Pisces.
So, who is right ?
http://www.astrology.ca/horoscopes/daily/pisces.html

 

[pelastration]

possible explanation ...

... but if someone comes with either a good logical explanation or with proof of some kind I have no problem with changing my mind.
...
The fact that all astrologers fight for their right to say that astrology cannot be proven, I draw the conclusion that thus the theory cannot be true. Solely based on their opinion.

Hi Monique.

I like you looking for concepts behind astrology.
I don't agree at all with Kerrie's no-science approach.
We should always keep looking for deeper layers of knowledge and never stay satisfied with an actual level.
But the most important is that one starts with a concept.
Please check my approach. You will find out that I point to a possible relationship of planets/milky-ways, cosmic radiation and the first cell dividing of the embryo.
You will notice that some of the posters there even mix up an embryo with a baby.

https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=33460&postcount=75
https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=34577&postcount=83
https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=34730&postcount=90
https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=36238&postcount=104

Maybe these show you that indeed there are possible logic entries in this stuff.

If you provide me with your day of birth, hour and location I will send you your personalized theme made by my computer.

Dirk

 

[Monique]

https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=34730&postcount=90

Here, this is something I can work with and is actually quite an interesting idea AND it is testable in the lab..

 

[pelastration]

Here, this is something I can work with and is actually quite an interesting idea AND it is testable in the lab..

Thanks Monique. Go to that Lab ... but you will need ephemerides (tables with stand of planets) or astrology software.

 

[Kerrie]

Hi Monique.

I like you looking for concepts behind astrology.
I don't agree at all with Kerrie's no-science approach.
We should always keep looking for deeper layers of knowledge and never stay satisfied with an actual level.
But the most important is that one starts with a concept.
Please check my approach. You will find out that I point to a possible relationship of planets/milky-ways, cosmic radiation and the first cell dividing of the embryo.

pel...astrology is not a science, it is a tool to understand people and events in cycle with the energies that move everything from the sun to tiny cells within life...the reason i am saying it is not a science is because it is not 100% accurate but in my experience, i have found it to be 65% (or about there) true...this is with about 13 years of reading and studying, and i will admit i still have a long way to understand.

..as mentioned before, you have to factor in environment and not soley rely on astrology in pinning down a personality...this is often why astrology has been regarded as pseudoscience. the intepretations of astrology are at the intuition of the interpreter, which is a human's deepest feelings and understanding of the human being. the science part of astrology has to do with the geometry and astronomy, can we link these with human intuition to understand tendencies of people?

 

[Kerrie]

If you provide me with your day of birth, hour and location I will send you your personalized theme made by my computer.

Dirk

i am willing to do one too, then we can compare a human interpretation vs a computer interpretation and have someone that knows Monique very well be the judge.

 

[pelastration]

i am willing to do one too, then we can compare a human interpretation vs a computer interpretation and have someone that knows Monique very well be the judge.

;-)
Kerrie,
the computer one is only the start. Of course there is a need to have human interpretation. As I told you before: I do astro for more then 40 years.

 

[Les Sleeth]

In fact I Because we are born with logic thinking, which is especially clear in a scientists mind. This world behaves according to laws, which can be found out. I find astrology just as strange as the Atkins diet, but if someone comes with either a good logical explanation or with proof of some kind I have no problem with changing my mind.

We probably agree more than we disagree. Thirty-five years ago I was a dedicated debunker, and astrology was a favorite idea to go after. One day I found out that by some coincidence an unsually large percentage of my family were born under the sign of Taurus. Then I married one, and had employees who were. Because I'd been around it so much, when I found out about some of the predicted personality traits of a Taurus, I saw immediately the generalities of the group I'd known.

Now, I had to admit I saw them even though I'd put astrology down for decades. Being curious, I started looking to see if there were general personality traits under other signs, and I believe I saw it some there too. I do not see them well, but I haven't put very much effort into studying astrology either.

Something I do not see at all is using astrology to make predictions, whether it's for personalities or for world events. That's because what I've seen as a "tendency" seems so flexible it is easily molded by one's environment and individual will, or by the momentum of physical reality. So with the information I have now, I don't buy anything about astrology other than there seems to be very general tendencies, or personality "leanings," in people born at certain times of the year. What does that have to do with feeling? More below . . .

In fact IAs I already said, it was a reaction to Kerrie's claim that I should shed the scientific method. Before that I already posted a method by which astrological effects could be distilled (showing my open mind, because I have been saying all along, if astrology holds true, you will be able to test it). If an expert in astrology says (without giving an explanation) that it cannot be tested.. then.. what..?

I don't want to put words in Kerrie's mouth, but I felt I knew what she meant and it wasn't that you should shed the scientific method. I'll imagine that I answered you as Kerrie did, and tell you what I would mean by it.

I think to get what's going on you have to take into account two things. The first is that there hasn't been the sort of studies done which both scientists and competent astrologers can agree properly reflect what astrology is or is not capable of. So how can I answer your demand for a convincing study? Am I going to go out and conduct it myself? Of course not, which brings us to the second thing, which is how to answer you when you want to know why ". . . a science minded person would believe this stuff. . ."

I am a science-minded person, but I since I cannot cite studies that haven't been done, all I have left is what has convinced me. In my case, it is the subtle, very general tendencies I've noticed. Those tendencies are not very apparent, they are often buried beneath a lot of conditioning and obscured by the activity that characterizes most people's lives. So without a battery of tests to put someone through, what I rely on is my intuition. I use it to try to "feel" how (or if) the general tendency has influenced someone.

If you demand scientific proof of the effectiveness of my intuition, I will answer that intuition is not something that reveals itself under empirical investigation. You don't think with intuition, you feel with it. So when you say . . .

The fact that all astrologers fight for their right to say that astrology cannot be proven, I draw the conclusion that thus the theory cannot be true. Solely based on their opinion.

. . . it seems unfair.

I rather feel this thread is a knee-jerk towards the scientists. I expressed my feeling that I don't know how the planets would influence a person, but I never said that because I can't understand it, it can't be true. I also mentioned the fact that bloodvessels themselves have a circadian rhythm and through my work I believe they are controlled by circadian genes, which then leads to the increased risk of aneurysm rupture in the morning.

I don't know about this whole thread, but I might be guilty of over-reacting. For that I apologize again.

My short fuse is because since I've participated here at PF, I have run into what I'll call the "science critique" many times. The science critique is to evaluate empirically any and everything you can think of or imagine. Built into the science critique is an assumption that if something can't be empirically demonstrated, then it isn't worth consideration. I believe you have given us a bit of that attitude in this thread.

The purely empirical view might be right, but my experience with both myself and living convinces me that while empirical thinking is effective in its own realm, it doesn't work for everything. In fact, I find it doesn't work at all for some very important things. For one thing, if I were to chose to be exclusively empirical, there is a way of knowing I'd have to do without.

What is that "way of knowing?" It is to feel, to be sensitive with all of one's being, and then see what you pick up on. By "feeling" I'm not talking about how hormones can affect one's sensitivity to create emotions, but rather a neutral kind of sensitivity. I like this sort of sensitivity because not only do I detect pretty subtle stuff, but that heightened sensitivity allows me to experience things more deeply and so enhances my overall enjoyment of life.

One of my objections to the science critique is that it seems to be becoming a philosophy that's preached to the "ignorant masses." With the powerful status science has attained in society, the science critique is becoming more and more prevalent in the various media adults and children are exposed to. The philosophy of the science critique acts a filter, filtering out anything which isn't empirically verifiable. Here at PF I've seen it almost as a sneering, condescending attitude the science-critiquing mind gives off as it discounts everything non-empirical. I don't think you were like that, but part of my reaction to what you've said is the little bit of it which did seem that way.

Another of my objections is the physicalism that is resulting from the science critique. Since God, the soul, life, consciousness and such are all things which must be felt to know, the science critique says those things are contraindicated by research.

So you might say I am somewhat of a champion for the cause of sensitivity and feeling, for not allowing our infatuation with our brain's computing skills to turn us into robots who go around doing nothing but analyzing stuff, and for encouraging a view of the being human as both feeling and rationality.

 

[Monique]

pel...astrology is not a science, it is a tool to understand people and events in cycle with the energies that move everything from the sun to tiny cells within life...the reason i am saying it is not a science is because it is not 100% accurate but in my experience, i have found it to be 65% (or about there) true...this is with about 13 years of reading and studying, and i will admit i still have a long way to understand.

Kerrie, if you were to make a random judgement on a person.. how high would you estimate the change that the judgement is accurate? Would it be lower than 65%? Or would it be 65%?

What makes you think that science has to be 100% accurate? The only reason that something cannot be predicted with full certainty, is because you don't know all the factors involved. The EXACT same thing is dealt with everyday in science.

The disease I studied only manifests itself late in life, on average around the age of 49. Not every person who should get the disease, get it though.. it is called a low penetrance. Also, not every person who gets the disease gets diagnosed. Also, there are many factors that influence the manifestation of the disease, things like barometric pressure, binge drinking, age, gender. You can see it is very complex. To complicate the matter, the inheritance is not mendelian, that means there is more than one gene involved. Even though that, we are able to extract information from these people and find the general location on the genome that is involved in increasing the risk of these people for developing the disease.

I really don't understand what you mean when you say astrology is not a science, people have been developing the theory for 5000 years.. you'd think they came up with some substance in that time..

Even if the success rate is 65%, if it is higher than the random chance.. you have got something that can be studied, and should be.

 

[Kerrie]

"I really don't understand what you mean when you say astrology is not a science, people have been developing the theory for 5000 years.. you'd think they came up with some substance in that time.."

Many good books have been written on the subject, and there is now a college in Seattle that offers 4 year degrees on astrology. A favorite book of mine that I highly recommend is by Kevin Burk, who has obtained a level IV NCGR certificatication in astrological counseling called Understanding the Birth Chart. This book is a textbook in studying for these certificates which in the astrological community are highly regarded so you can be assured that they are not published by a fly-by-night New Age publisher. I think there has been a lot of damage done to the reputation of astrology by those interested in using it to predict the future as oppossed to using it as a tool to understand humanity.

"Even if the success rate is 65%, if it is higher than the random chance.. you have got something that can be studied, and should be."

I agree, however it is my opinion that astrology is not given the chance it deserves because of the reputation it has undeservedly. There was some extensive studies that I found were done by a French scientist and I highly encourage you to read this link about the Mars effect (planet of action/energy) and it's powerful placement in the athlete's chart. Perhaps this may give you the proof you are seeking?

http://aquamoonlight.uku.co.uk/gauquelin.html

I am interested to know what you think.

Pel..."the computer one is only the start. Of course there is a need to have human interpretation. As I told you before: I do astro for more then 40 years."

I haven't completely delved into your posts I apologize, time doesn't lend itself generously to me these days. I think the need to have a human interpretation is highly important because of the need for judgement and complex understanding. Do you have a certificate or degree after all these years of studying? It is my goal someday to begin earning my NCGR certificates when I have the time and money.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Okay, this must be what I heard about.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2004-03-28-medical-edit_x.htm

sorry again, don't mean to interrupt..tip toes out of the room...

 

[Les Sleeth]

..tip toes out of the room...

Right behind you . . .

 

[skywise]

Wait Wait! Before everyone takes off, I was hoping someone better informed about these things could shed some light for me as to wether or not there is anything to this..

"I must call the reader's attention to the well-known correspondence between the sun-spot periods and the mortality curve. The connecting link appears to be the disturbances of the Earth's magnetic field, which in their turn are due to fluctuations in the proton radiation from the sun. These fluctuations also have an influence on "radio weather" by disturbing the ionosphere that reflects the radio waves. Investigation of these disturbances seems to indicate that the conjunctions, oppositions, and quartile aspects of the planets play a considerable part in increasing the proton radiation and thus causing electromagnetic storms. On the other hand the astrologically favourable trine and sextile aspects have been reported to produce uniform radio weather." -Carl Jung


Do the the planets affect radio waves differently according to their position??

 

[Monique]

Wouldn't the radiowaves from you phone/radio/television be more influentional?

 

[Kerrie]

monique, what do you think of the challenge i proposed of interpreting your chart and having a 3rd party that knows you well to make the judgement call of how close the chart is to your personality?

 

[pelastration]

... now a college in Seattle that offers 4 year degrees on astrology. A favorite book of mine that I highly recommend is by Kevin Burk, who has obtained a level IV NCGR certificatication in astrological counseling called Understanding the Birth Chart. This book is a textbook in studying for these certificates which in the astrological community are highly regarded so you can be assured that they are not published by a fly-by-night New Age publisher.

...
Pel..."the computer one is only the start. Of course there is a need to have human interpretation. As I told you before: I do astro for more then 40 years."

I haven't completely delved into your posts I apologize, time doesn't lend itself generously to me these days. I think the need to have a human interpretation is highly important because of the need for judgement and complex understanding. Do you have a certificate or degree after all these years of studying? It is my goal someday to begin earning my NCGR certificates when I have the time and money.

No in Europe we don't have something like that college in Seattle. What we have is a number of private groups teached by well-known or experienced astrologers. But no official certificates. I am not particular interested in certificates, but it can be useful for the new generations of astrologers. It was never my intention to make it my profession. I started when I was 14, and made thousands of themes. I judged astro to give other information that otherwise was not available, not a systeem that could give the only truth. It's an interesting analytic tool. It shows a number of hidden patterns and dynamics. Astro indicates personal positive and negative area's or cycles which may be repetitive. Knowing them can help us to understand what happens to us and how we can better control our personal system and energy.

Maybe I should add here for people new in astro that there are several types of horoscopes:
(1)Radix horoscope (Birthdate) which is like the type of vehicle that you start with,
(2)The progression horoscope showing your progression or evolution in your life (or the location of your vehicle on it's road, topology of the area) and
(3) the Transit horoscope (the influences of the actual planet positions on your vehicle, cfr. the quality of the road, weather on that location, etc).
Comparing partners and lovers in a combined horoscope: The synastic horoscope.

But as I said before, I want to know why, how, if, can it ... . And my experience is that it is all related to spacetime geometry and non-local communication. The steps between: cosmic radiation influencing the first basic cell-dividings + the moment of birth = moment of the first independent living of the born.

 

[Monique]

monique, what do you think of the challenge i proposed of interpreting your chart and having a 3rd party that knows you well to make the judgement call of how close the chart is to your personality?

That would be fine by me.. but why have a 3rd party interpret my personality and you directly giving the astrological examination

Since you know me rather well through these forums, you are not objective in your opinion and are biased in reading the charts in a manner that applies to me. And I don't think that a 3rd party would know my true personality as well as I would myself..

But if you don't think it would be a waste of time, I'd be interested to find out :)

 

[Ivan Seeking]

How are you to gauge your own objectivity?

 

[Monique]

I think I know myself pretty well.. how would I be not objective?

 

[Ivan Seeking]

I think I know myself pretty well.. how would I be not objective?

It just seems like a highly subjective approach. Wouldn't a sophisticated personality test be a better reference?

 

[Kerrie]

monique, i think ivan has a point...i want to prove how astrology works which would mean me being as objective as possible, and no, i don't know you very well through these forums as far as your deeper personality goes, only the outside stuff which astrology does not point out...i think it is much more difficult for people to be objective of themselves, and that is why i suggested someone who knows you personally to assess the human generated birth chart.

 

[pelastration]

Before I suggested that cosmic ray's may be shielded by planets and/or that that there will be Einstein lens effects. Changes in X-rays may influence the starting conditions of cell dividing and also the dividing conditions during the growth of the embryo (three basic layers: endoderm, ectoderm and mesoderm).

On next link you can see how that happens. Here it is a rare event but this happens all the time with our planets.

http://chandra.harvard.edu/press/04_releases/press_040504.html

Quote: "A rare celestial event was captured by NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory as Titan -- Saturn's largest moon and the only moon in the Solar System with a thick atmosphere -- crossed in front of the X-ray bright Crab Nebula. The X-ray shadow cast by Titan allowed astronomers to make the first X-ray measurement of the extent of its atmosphere.

On January 5, 2003, Titan transited the Crab Nebula, the remnant of a supernova explosion that was observed to occur in the year 1054. Although Saturn and Titan pass within a few degrees of the Crab Nebula every 30 years, they rarely pass directly in front of it.

"This may have been the first transit of the Crab Nebula by Titan since the birth of the Crab Nebula," said Koji Mori of Pennsylvania State University in University Park, and lead author on an Astrophysical Journal paper describing these results. "The next similar conjunction will take place in the year 2267, so this was truly a once in a lifetime event."

 

[MagneticEnergies]

Astrology has been a hobbie of mine for 4 years now...it is somethign that i believe is a guideline for human thought and emotions...u can't judge a book by its cover but if u read the back u have an insight as to what it may offer you... also the goal for any human is self realization.. astrology has opened me up to myself..if u are skeptical u ought to read up on your signs and see if u can relate...if not then maybe it isn't meant for u..ive tried convincing people about its legitimacy,but some people are to tarnished by our "logical" society...its not about predicting the future..its about knowing thyself and others

 

[i_wish_i_was_smart]

according to astrology, this year is my year the year of the VIRGO

 

[Moonbear]

Did anyone ever answer the original question here? There's about a three day "gray area" called a "cusp" at the beginning and end of each sign's month. People born in those few days are supposed to have some characteristics of both signs. I'm born right between Libra and Scorpio, which means I get to like both red and blue :-) It's all good entertainment. Sometimes when I'm having a bad day, I go read my horoscope for a pick-me-up...they always say things will be better than they are.

 

[pelastration]

Did anyone ever answer the original question here? There's about a three day "gray area" called a "cusp" at the beginning and end of each sign's month. People born in those few days are supposed to have some characteristics of both signs. I'm born right between Libra and Scorpio, which means I get to like both red and blue :-)

You can check the ephemerides on this site: http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/jekyll/75/fm.html
If I remember well the changes are due the changes in the angle of the Earth axis rotation. An identical interposition (of all 10 "planets") takes about 16,000 years.