The Great Debate

[Avarim]

Introduction: (Pierre)

The astrological study of twins and their unfolding destinies is a valuable tool in astrological research. It enables researchers to control for a multitude of astrological variables in order to gauge the effects of finely-tuned yet life transforming angular phenomena. The following is an ongoing debate initiated in January 2008 between astrologers around the world about the fundamental precepts of astrology.

Jan 7th - Pierre (South Africa)
Twin brothers born 10 minutes apart. On Sept 11th 2001, the younger one
dies in NY - he was in one of the aircraft that crashed. The other twin
was not on the plane. Why does the one die on 9/11 and the other is
still ok? (Astrologically speaking, of course.)

Astrodatabank quotes birth data as follows:

b. March 13th 1970, Boston, MA
Twin #1 - 6.58am ASC 16AR19
Twin #2 - 7.08am ASC 20AR39 (d. 9/11/2001, 9.03am, NY)

Could someone have predicted death for the one and not the other, on
this date?

Thanks, and happy new year.
Pierre

Jan 7th - Raul Davila (Mexico)
You may recall that Elvis Presley, had a twin brother who died during Childbirth.

Jan 7th - Pierre (South Africa)
There are comparatively many such cases on file - where twins are
born and the weaker one dies during or shortly after childbirth.
These are usually explained by angular phenomena.

However, there are far fewer cases recorded where the one twin dies
30 odd years down the track and the other carries on, especially
where the birth times are so close together.

In the 9/11 case the dead twin has Mars progressing over the 2nd/8th
Placidean axis. But that in itself has insufficient anaretic
magnitude to explain the vast difference in the karmic patterns.

Jan 8th - Alhena (Argentina)
hi Pierre, yes it's an interesting case. In twins (or triplets, 4plets,
quintuplets, etc) there is a theory / method ... you divide 360 by the
nr of born babies, then for instance in twins:

360 / 2 = 180, so you take for first baby born, the true hour of birth
and the first house as ascendant; but for 2nd baby born the true hour
of birth and the 7th. house as ascendant (would be first house + 180
deg). In this case, the 2nd born gets an ascendant in Libra 20 deg,
ruler Venus is in 6th house (not a sign of long life) and at 31 years
it directs (by solar arc direct) to 5 taurus, which is mean point
mars/saturn and also the point of catastrophe (we call it infortunio).
Also Venus is both ruler of ascendant and of eigth house, a bad sign.
Then his MC is in cancer and the ruler Moon is in natal eigth house of
death. If you check the day's transits at 11 sep 01 you find several
indicators, such as Mercury co-ruler of his 8th house, cjn his natal
ascendant, and saturn in his natal eighth. It can be seen now, but I
dont mean that an astrologer could have predicted it in advance

On the contrary, the 1st twin has mars as ruler of ascendant (a sign of
strength and long life), at 31 years his mars will be around 5 gem
(direct) over his moon ruler of his natal 4th house, i.e. home, family.
As mars is also ruler of 8th house, it shows both a death in the
family and also his own very sorrow experience to see his twin brother
dead. But as in the 2nd. brother, it is difficult to be sure here,
that it's not his own death but one in the family, since the IVth house
is also interpreted by many as the end also death.

I have tested this method with some quintuplets, of whom 1 was ill and
4 healthy. In that case you do 360 / 5 = 72 deg., then you build the
1st chart for the true ascendant, every following chart adding 72 from
the ascendant for the 2nd, then other 72 deg for the 3rd, etc. If the
times are unknown but the period of time is short, you simply use the
different ascendants, but to predict something you must know the order
of precedence of the born babies.

There are much more complex and precise methods in vedic.

Also a good year for you and every one in the list.

best,
alhena

Jan 8th - Raul Davila (Mexico)
Obviously in this case Location was a factor.
The time and location of the nearest Solar / Lunar Return(s)
could be an indicator. The time of day
the individual got up on the fatal day would be a factor.

Jan 8th - Ed Kohout (USA)
Hi Pierre,

With all deference to our esteemed friend Gonzo, the prediction of
"death" by an astrologer is a fruitless endeavor.

I don't think it should be a taboo, as did the Hindus, but
astrology's value is in its ability to chart the quality of life, not
the moment it might cease.

I say "might" because no astrological prediction is ever 100%.

Modern astrological thought considers astrological phenomenon to be
synchronistic indicators of human or earthly happenings, but not
directly related, or the controller of those happenings.

Mundane astrology, therefore, is easier to make predictions from, as
the chances that someone onthe planet will act on a mundane energy
is quite high. For a genethliacal chart, though, it's hard to tell.

- Ed

Jan 8th - Raul Davila (Mexico)
A friend who was a master astrologer...used to teach that the
Solar Eclipse prior to the time of death... always aspected the
asc / desc axis. either by conjunction, opposition , or square.
He used to teach that this is a 100 percent rule.

Jan 8th - Pierre (South Africa)
My quality of life is enhanced by growing my understanding and
appreciation of the correspondences between celestial patterns and human
affairs. This includes the date and manner of transition.

I disagree with you, Ed. According to my researches, death is one of
those black & white issues which is indeed possible to predict with a
high degree of accuarcy (+/- a week or so). It is much easier for an
astrologer to answer the question "when will I die?" than "will my wife
come back to me?".

I had a case a few years ago where the parents of a baby who was
suffering from leukemia approached me and wanted to know if she would
survive. These days, the statistics reveal a substantial majority of
childhood leukemia goes into full remission. When I looked at the chart,
it was clear the child was not going to make it. How does one tell the
parents something like this? I escaped the dilemma by pinpointing the
child's date of death at age 2.3 and then telling the parents that I do
not see the child dying within the next 2 years. They were happy to hear
this as you can imagine. However, the child spent the next 2 years going
through hell - potent chemo, etc., which might have been avoided if I
had been more forthcoming with the truth. So, maybe there is a case to
be made for death predictions under certain circumstances.

Jan 8th - Ed Kohout (USA)
Hi Pierre,

Surely there are death-dealing influences in astrology, but your
contention that death prediction is black and white is absurd on the
surface and I am inclined to think that you are deluding yourself.

Standard deviations of death rates and life expectancies of the many
different cultures on the planet show that environment is a huge
factor, yet we can surely agree that in every culture there will be
an even distribution of planetary combinations and cardinal points
and 8th house cusps, or whatever you might want to find. What might
kill the average Russian will not kill the average Canadian, and what
might kill the average Japanese will not kill the average Guatemalan.

The subsumption of natal charts into the larger and more powerful
influences of mundane charts makes for a myraid of extra-natal-chart
elements to take into account. One twin, in your original query,
boarded a plane doomed for destruction. The other had different
things to do that day. One stumbled into an astrological reality
that was bigger than himself, as do many who die in disasters.

For instance, your original example of the twins, while interesting,
is actually the norm -- there is no evidence that twins share death
dates, or that their individual natii are triggered into death by
similar transits. If I'm wrong, please tell me.

The date of 9/11 had some rather ugly combinations, but you didn't
mention putting up the natii of both twins against the chart for that
flight, or the chart for the US Presidency, which the 9/11 chart
seems to vigorously attack.

Furthermore, twins are not (in most cases) connected at the brain;
individuals make different choices in life and set into motion thier
own energies. Both twins may inherit half their father's fortune on
the date that Jupiter transits their shared Sun/Saturn midpoint, but
if one twin buys a vitamin store and the other buys 100 pounds of
crystal meth, guess which one will die first?

If you think astrology is the whole story of a human life, you are
out of step with the vast majority of contemporary astrological
practitioners.

Regards,
Ed

Jan 8th - Pierre (South Africa)
No Ed. I don't think astrology is the whole story. But, yes, I agree - I
am out of step with the vast majority of astrologers.

Best
Pierre

Jan 8th - Ed Kohout (USA)
Well, that's pretty cool!! Most astrologers are pretty shallow.

So, what's the punch line to the story? Why did the one twin die on
9/11 and the other one have a splendid day?

- Ed

Jan 8th - John TWB (USA)
ED wrote: "The date of 9/11 had some rather ugly combinations, but you [Pierre] didn't
mention putting up the natii of both twins against the chart for that
flight, or the chart for the US Presidency, which the 9/11 chart
seems to vigorously attack."
 
YES. I see this about the U.S. Presidency & 9/11:
 
Note the transits of the Sep 11, 2001 (08:46 hrs), Wall Street: when Mercury 14Lib17 ... Ascendant 14Lib21, and Black Moon 02ps13. Compare natal U.S. Presidency: in opposition, Mars 13ar33; in conjunction, Desc 02ps30 and Black Moon 01ps17, on April 30, 1789, Wall Street, NY @ 13:04:32 hrs [Ralph Kraum's rectification, "Astrological Americana", 1949]
 
For a look at P-2 transits of the 1789 U.S. Presidency on the 9/11 event, find these 3 P-2s: Saturn 16ps35; ASC 18ps59; Black Moon 25ps03, all nicely wrapped around the U.S. Presidency's natal Saturn 20ps04. And this natal Saturn, as well, opposed to the 09/11 event's Sol 18vi51
 
Thanks ED; Hello Pierre

Jan 8th - Pierre (South Africa)
Ed, I posted to the list for some input from you guys - if you have a
moment to look over the case.

I have not yet started unpicking it , although my first port of call
would be to see how the dead twin natus uniquely plugs into the ruling
ingresses and lunations/eclipses on 9/11 for NY. I can assure you though
- neither of them had a splendid day!

BTW, the dead twin was on United Airlines fl 175 which took off from
Logan International Boston MA at 08:14 and "is reported to have crashed"
09:02:40 into south tower.

Jan 9th - Raul Davila (Mexico)
Pierre...

Where was the living twin located on 9-11-01 at 8 AM.?

This is all about being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
If you want to look at it Existentially, the dead twin may
have been part of a "Group" soul that made the
transition from Earth incarnation for a another place as a
Cluster.

9/11/01 affected many people all over the world

Jan 9th - Pierre (South Africa)
Raul, both twins were resident in Boston. Both worked in pro hockey.
They were monozygotic twins. Even as adults, the only way to tell them
apart was a single freckle on the right ear of the surviving twin. They
played hockey together for most of their lives, both as forwards. Both
received the same award in the same year.

On 9/11, the older surviving twin was apparently in Canada on a scouting
trip. Precise location in Canada unknown. The younger deceased twin took
off from Boston bound for LA, also on a scouting trip.

What is so interesting is that they lived such parallel lives up till
this point.

I agree - the deceased twin was in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Thank you for your interest.
Pierre

Jan 10th - Dr Gonzo Tamez (Mexico)
I was just going to tell you, Ed, that although I fully agree with your
statement about how definitely FIXED the New Hampshire primaries were, I
totally disagree with every statement you made about predicting death from
the birth chart in your reply to Pierre's twins' posting. But I will not
puke out my rebuttal to you until later on, once this transiting Lillith in
Scorpio square Neptune in Aquarius partiles off in nasty peri-partile
"T"square with my natal Mars in Leo. That way I will be kinder too you, you
know... And likely keener too.

Any way, thanks a lot for your keen and kind attention. And I will have
something to say about twins soon too, as soon as I extract the juice from
some very interesting planetary pics I've seen in the twins that Pierre has
brought forth for us.

I wish you well

Gonzo

Jan 10th - Dr Gonzo Tamez (Mexico)
> If you think astrology is the whole story of a human life, you are
> out of step with the vast majority of contemporary astrological
> practitioners.
>
> Regards,
> Ed

I am very proudly out of step with the vast majority of contemporary
astrological practitioners, Ed, because one thing I have learned from just
studying charts all through my life and thinking about my observations:
every astrologer that subscribes to the absurd notions that you espouse,
like the notion that there are things that are NOT in the chart, is
fundamentally wrong as has yet to learn what astrology is all about. And as
I have told Julienne many times through the years: the notion that certain
things are in the chart and others are not, besides being fundamentally
false and logically flawed, has the immediate effect of stunting your
advance and your knowledge.

You just have not understood yet what astrology is all about.

The number of times that you are going to breath, is in the chart. The
number of times your heart is going to beat, is in the chart. The number of
times that you are going to blink, is in the chart. The number of apples
that you have eaten through your life, is in your chart, as well as the
number of apples that you are going to eat from now until the day that you
pass away. But you (we) don't yet have access to this plane of quantitative
understanding of the chart. And of course, you are never going to gain
access to these planes of understanding of the chart until you abandon your
absurd notion that there could possibly be something that is not in the
chart.

I will elaborate on this later...

stay fine though...

Gonzo

Jan 13th - Ed Kohout (USA)
Hi Gonzo,

You are joking, right?? Surely there is no way to test or prove such
statements as you make, so you are saying it with a confidence of
belief that reminds me of a Fundamentalist Christian's certainty of
Jesus.

I guess your idea of what constitues "logic" and mine are a bit
different, but it's wonderful to see such a true-believer with the
exuberance of certainty!

With every new discovery of a planet like Uranus, Pluto, Eris or
Sedna, astrology must adjust its view of whole, and thus the way of
seeing events, agreed? How many bodies do we yet have to discover?
Astrology should be able to tell us, right? Or, maybe, as far as
you're concerned, astrology is already the perfect predictive tool,
needing no adjustment? Then please explain how so many nonsensical
astrological theories and claims have been proven so throughout
history ... more than you or I could care to count.

The best and brightest astrological minds see astrology not as a
direct causal force on human life, but as synchronistic indicators
that are casually connected to our lives.

The example of the twins suggests that astrology does explain
everything, only gives us hints. We all still have freedom of
choice, aside from the force of gravity.

It's said that astrology is "science, art, and religion combined."
All we need to do is rid ourselves of the religion part, and
astrology might become something more than a pseudo-science.

- Ed

Jan 13th - Pierre (South Africa)
Hi Ed,

> Ed: With every new discovery of a planet like Uranus, Pluto, Eris or
> Sedna, astrology must adjust its view of whole, and thus the way of
> seeing events, agreed? How many bodies do we yet have to discover?
> Astrology should be able to tell us, right? Or, maybe, as far as
> you're concerned, astrology is already the perfect predictive tool,
> needing no adjustment?

I don't think anyone would argue that astrology - like every other human
discipline - is an imperfect tool which is dynamic, experiential and
subject to ongoing updates. The real question is unfortunately
hypothetical: in extremis, if we knew all there was to know about
astrology and if our application of these techniques were faultless,
could astrology predict the number of apples we have yet to eat in our
lives?

> Ed: The example of the twins suggests that astrology does explain
> everything, only gives us hints. We all still have freedom of
> choice, aside from the force of gravity.

I think what you meant to say was that the twins example suggests
"astrology does NOT explain everything"?

This may be true - I am not going to get involved in a philsophical
debate. However, in the case of these twins, there are clear indications
that Boston and NY were toxic locations for BOTH of them on 9/11. That
the one twin was in Canada at the time saved him. Speculatively, he was
in a location that did not hold as much anaretic potential for him in
the temporal environment as defined by the jurisdictional ingresses and
lunations - although we cannot be sure about this because we don't know
exactly where he was.

In 1997, Princess Diana's accident/assassination correlated with a
Neptune-Saturn conjunction shared by millions of people born in 1961,
including myself. These millions did not die spectacularly on that day.
Why was this transit so fatal to Diana and not to the rest of us? Simply
because at that time in that place (8/31/97, Paris), certain unique
(angular) qualities of her natus clicked with the anaretic components of
the "more powerful mundane astrological reality" - as you put it. It is
the same with the deceased twin. He clicked with the bad stuff on the
day.

Of course, there is always the qualitative question as to who got the
better deal? The twin who died or the survivor who to this day mourns
the loss of his soul mate, brother and karmic fellow traveler?

Take care,
Pierre

Jan 13th - Holly Avila (USA)

On this subject, which deals with fate vs free will....  If our physical 3D realm is a hologram of electromagnetic energy with a pattern and rules, and if within the law of fractals, or the concept of microcosm vs macrocosm, then the events in this matrix would have to be written on every chart, as cogs in the big saturnian wheel. I tend to agree (with the awe of someone who loves to be awed by belief systems) with Gonzo that everything would have to be in our charts. Of course, then you would have to know the truly exact moment of birth, and I suspect that the moment and place of conception would be very important, as well. Still, within the potentialities expressed by the energy of the planets, there is still some level of choice, or free will. A Saturn transit can mean death, and it can mean finally "getting" a lesson and moving up to the next level of soul evolution in this incarnation. All the factors of where a person is... or why did they choose to be in a place, would be reflected in the series of localities that influenced the energy of the chart to lead up to this event. I think that there would be some indication in the twins' charts to show why one chose to be in Boston and why one chose to be in Canada. Also, since I personally believe that the planes used in the 9 11 attack were drones on remote control, what really happened to those airplanes and their passengers is a deeper mystery, and why did one twin become part of that??
Therefore, am I safe in Pennsylvania at the end of March when I have some rough transits coming up? lol
I also personally believe that there is an intention on the part of my higher soul self, and that my free will has chosen to fulfill that intention, and that I cannot die, no matter how bad the transits are, until my soul has fulfilled her original intention for incarnation. On April 1st, 2003, there was a new moon that was within one degree of my worst square. My car spun out in the snow and came to rest on the side of the road. I breathed a sigh of relief when another car spun out in the exact same spot that I had, and hit me head on. My car was totalled, but I was unharmed. April 1st 2006, when selling my house, the deal fell through on that day and I nearly faced financial ruin. I scrambled to find a cash buyer for my home, took much less than it was worth, and walked away from the mess unharmed. I finally "get it" not to make any large plans around April 1st!.
I look back on my life and see events that nearly killed me, but did not, so I conclude that my soul has chosen to evolve through those points, and I continue to chose that evolution as I hit new points.
does that make any sense?

Jan 14th - Dr Gonzo Tamez (Mexico)
Hi Ed:

In my old postings of 12 years ago dealing with this subject of what is in
the chart and what is not and more in general with the question of what are
the limits of astrology as a tool for knowing, I used the metaphor of
likening what we currently call "astrology", be it ancient classical or
modern, to an egg. An egg?... Yes, an egg in the nest of human knowledge
of reality. Eggs are very different in shape and appearance from the
organisms that later may grow from them. So also what is now astrology is
very different from the sphinxy beast bound to eventually grow out from it.

And you know that I also compare our current state of astrological
knowledge with the state of development of Physics, particularly Dynamics,
after Copernicus, Galileo and Kepler had laid the bare foundations but just
before Isaac Newton (and Leibnitz) arrived to turn Natural Philosophy onto
an exact science 350 years ago with the development of differential calculus
and the publication of Newton's Principia. From Newton onwards, the laws of
motion were well understood and calculating, for example, a precise
ephemeris of the positions of the planets in future dates, was not any more
subject of debate or speculation but a simple application of the newly
understood principles that Newton made possible. Newton's differential
calculus turned dynamics onto the exact science that it is today. The future
state of any dynamic system is perfectly calculable thanks to differential
equations.

We forget easily that there was a time when the future position of the Moon
in the zodiac say 5 years ahead, was a wild impossibility. Now, the
position of the Moon is perfectly calculable for any future date no matter
how distant, down to the tenth of an arc minute. Once you handle any dynamic
system with the right differential equations, the future state of any of its
elements or parts can be known with complete certitude. You take this for
granted now, but it was not an easy achievement. There was a time when
physics was an unhatched egg too in the nest of human knowledge of reality.
Like astrology is today. Now physics has hatched, and modern physics bears
no resemblance to what it was in times of Copernicus 450 years ago.

When the egg of astrology hatches, predicting the future with full
quantitative and qualitative precision -and knowing the past objectively
too, will be an ease task for any one that has understood the key principles
involved. Or for anyone that has the proper software to do it. The Solar
Fire and all other softwares with an easy click will give you the number of
days and hours and minutes the person will live, straight from the birth
chart!. But you don't have the keys for it now, so all this is forbidden
knowledge. And you cannot buy yet the software that will do it for you. And
if every one thought this wasn't possible, like you absurdly believe, such
software will never be developed to begin with.

In a few more months, my knowledge of the laws governing lottery winners
will be ready to use. Predicting any future winner of any lottery will be an
easy matter with my method. A click of the mouse will give you the next 100
winners of whichever lottery you want. It will the be crowning of these last
38 years I have dedicated to the analysis of chronologically arranged
sequences of modulated winners of various lotteries. In my next posting on
lotteries you will see real examples of how the cosmic hierarchies reveal
themselves with quantitative clarity at every step in any chronological
sequence of modulated winners of any lottery. And once this hierarchy is
understood, you are ready to transpose it to other realms of prediction (or
of investigating the numbers behind past events in all kingdoms of nature)
to derive sure knowledge of many things you cannot even imagine now...

>I guess your idea of what constitues "logic" and mine are a bit
>different, but it's wonderful to see such a true-believer with the
>exuberance of certainty!
>
>With every new discovery of a planet like Uranus, Pluto, Eris or
>Sedna, astrology must adjust its view of whole, and thus the way of
>seeing events, agreed? How many bodies do we yet have to discover?
>Astrology should be able to tell us, right? Or, maybe, as far as
>you're concerned, astrology is already the perfect predictive tool,
>needing no adjustment? Then please explain how so many nonsensical
>astrological theories and claims have been proven so throughout
>history ... more than you or I could care to count.

Of course that astrology can tell how many new planets await discovery...
How do you think that the ephemeris for the TNPs were first calculated ?.
It wasn't the way that they tell you in books about history of uranian
astrology. It was through power series.

To give you a hint: consider for example Bode's Law... It's based on the
following arithmetic succession:

0, 3, 6, 12, 24, 48, 96, 192,...

If now you add 4 to each term you obtain:

4, 7, 10, 16, 28, 52, 100, 196,...

and now divide each term of this succession by 10 to get:

0.4, 0.7, 1.0, 1.6, 2.8, 5.2, 10.0, 19.6,...

If the number 1 (third term of the above succession) is taken to represent
one astronomical unit (A.U.) meaning the distance from the Earth to the Sun,
then the 0.4, 0.7, 1.0, 1.6, 2.8, 5.2, 10.0, and 19.6 predict with
good approximation the distances of the planets Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars,
Asteroid Belt, Jupiter, Saturn and Uranus. When Bode and others played with
this succession in the late 18th century, the Asteroid Belt was not known to
astronomers... It was precisely this succession marking for an orbiting
body around the Sun between Mars and Jupiter and about 2.8 astronomical
units from the Sun that astronomers were motivated to turn their telescopes
there and Ceres, Palas, Vesta, Hidalgo and the other bigger asteroids were
initially discovered. When Bode published this succession named after him
(although it is considerable older), Uranus had not yet been discovered; but
shortly afterwards, in 1781, Uranus was first discovered and when its
distance to the Sun was calculated, it was found to fit precisely the last
term of the above succession, 19.6 astronomical units. Many astronomers
were then engaged in the search for the next planet as per Bode's
succession. But when Neptune was finally discovered its distance to the Sun
turned out to be more deviant than any of the preceding planets and even
than Pluto.

There's a lot more to say about Bode's Law, and yet, it is the simplest
possible case of the possibility of using series to extrapolate parameters
of still undiscovered planets orbiting the Sun. Series and particularly
Power Series are a great deal more complex than simple arithmetic sucesions
like the above. A power series may develop so that each successive term
gives you the equation describing the motion of the next planet around the
Sun in the order they actually stand. There are other types of series where
each new term gives you the coefficients of the variables of the
differential equations that yield the ephemeris of the next planet, in order
from the Sun. Still other series provide the sizes of the planets, their
diameters, densities, inclinations of their orbs and of their poles their
nodes, etc., etc., etc.

This is why I am certain that the stories told in the books about how the
fathers of uranian astronomy found the equations to compute the ephemeris of
the TNPs (Trans Neptunian Planets) are not truthful and aimed at
mathematically naive readers. The truth is that the founding fathers of
modern uranian astrology came across some very powerful Power Series that
yield the known parameters (distances to the Sun, sizes, weights,
velocities, orbital inclinations, orb eccentricities, nodes, etc.) for the
know bodies in order from the Sun, and then they simply extrapolated the
succession of the terms of these series to obtain the ephemeris of bodies
not yet discovered further out from the Sun than Pluto. If these other
bodies exist or don't exist, it does not really matter from the astrological
point of view, because they still behave in the chart as if they existed.
Because the power series that originates them happens to be indeed a
powerful determinating relation: the planets that do obey the law are where
they are because of the law... Maybe if the primeval cloud of hydrogen from
where the Sun originally condensed to form itself and the planets (except
Pluto) had had more dough to begin with, these other cookies would have been
formed and they would orbit precisely where the power series predicts them
to be. But as there was no more dough to cut more cookies, the following
terms of the series are void of matter. But not void of astrological
import, because the astrological import (except for the Moon and the Sun)
bears no relation to the impact of the body in the chart - Pluto is the best
example of this. If you take Mars away with a mighty laser beam and just
send it away far from our system, the squares from Mars are still going to
affect you just the same in the chart. Because what matters is not Mars,
but the EQUATION of Mars motion that allows you to compute Mars position in
the zodiac for any given time. And there exist some very powerful equations
that matter even more than the planets in the chart, yet they do not possess
any material body orbiting according to the equation. Of course, since they
have no matter, the ephemeris of these inexistent bodies have yet to be
discovered. And yet, when one of these inexistent bodies squares your natal
apheta, you die. And of course, you are never going to figure out why death
came there, because you don't have the equation for this inexistent anareta
that even though it does not exist materially, has more anaretic power (to
kill a native) than any of the existent bodies of the system...

>The best and brightest astrological minds see astrology not as a
>direct causal force on human life, but as synchronistic indicators
>that are casually connected to our lives.

No problem at all with that. Although it could read better if instead of
saying "synchronistic indicators that are causally connected to our lives"
you write instead: "synchronistic indicators that are acasually connected to
our lives".

>The example of the twins suggests that astrology does explain
>everything, only gives us hints. We all still have freedom of
>choice, aside from the force of gravity.

Just don't assume so easily that what you don't know anything about does
not exist. Mathematics teaches you to be careful when you say that something
cannot be known. Everything can be known if you know how to handle it
mathematically. It's just that our mathematical knowledge is so rudimentary
as to deny us access to real knowledge about anything in the past, the
present and the future.

If we had perfect knowledge of the chart and the relevant hierarchies, we
would see that our apparent freedom and our apparent free will are illusory.
But as we don't have any thing close to perfect knowledge of the chart and
its hierarchies, so we may continue believing that we do have free will. And
even so: in the chart free will is the midpoint of Uranus (free) and Pluto
(will). And when you use your free will to escape a given fateful experience
for example, you come out of a given track of relations in the chart only to
fall onto another track of determining relations also in the chart. It's
like is you want to go from Houston to Chicago, you may take any of a number
of possible routes or itineraries, and whenever you arrive to a highway
intersection, you are free to continue along the same road of take an
alternative route. But for as long as you are driving that vehicle, you are
not free to abandon the pre-laid options of the existing roads. You must
follow an existent route suitable for your vehicle. The planets give us
different road options to go along. But besides the planets, there are
relations that are more powerful than the planetary ephemeris and of which
we don't yet know much. These non-existent planets constrain our freedom a
great deal more than the existent planets. And the time is ripe for us to
start looking into all of these non existent planets. That's where the
astrology of the future is at.

>It's said that astrology is "science, art, and religion combined."
>All we need to do is rid ourselves of the religion part, and
>astrology might become something more than a pseudo-science.
>
>- Ed

Astrology is going to be a science... It is now where physics was 350 years
ago: the first cracks in the egg have appeared and the sphinxy beasty inside
is already pushing out the shell too. It's hatching time!... My work on
predicting lottery winners is going to be like a major piece of the shell
coming down so you will be able to see the face of the sphinxy beasty inside
the astrology egg. Just hold on a little please...

Thanks for your keen and kind attention.

I wish you well

Gonzo

Jan 14th - Pierre (South Africa)
There are some who emphasise that the moment of conception is
significant in defining a karmic slot - over and above the moment of
birth.

Since it is not possible to know the moment of conception, the truth of
this assertion cannot be tested. There is the Trutine of Hermes which
postulates an inversion of the positions of Asc and Moon between
conception and birth. I have never been able to ascertain whether this
refers broadly to signs or to the specific degrees. When I played
around with this postulate 10 years ago, I put it to one side with the
conviction that it was unreliable.

However, the Daily Mail in England today reports a interesting case
which may help to resolve the debate about the relative importance of
conception chart vs the natus. Twins were born within one minute of
each other, yet were conceived 3 weeks apart. A birth time difference
of 1 minute should define fairly similar destinies. But if the
hypothesis concerning the significance of the conception chart holds
water, these two little ones will be leading very different lives.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=508025&in_page_id=1770

They grew in the same womb and were born only a minute apart. Yet
Thomas and Harriet Mullineux are not twins.

They were conceived three weeks apart thanks to an extraordinary twist
of nature.

Their mother Charlotte had been pregnant with twins when at seven weeks
she miscarried one of them. But two weeks later she discovered she was
carrying another foetus - conceived separately and still growing in her
womb.

The surviving twin and the new baby were born last May and, after a
health scare, are now home and thriving.

Mrs Mullineux, 28, and her husband Matt, a contracts manager for a
scaffolding company, were thrilled then they discovered she was
pregnant in September 2006. They had been keen to expand their family
ever since their two-year-old son James was born.

But only a week later Mrs Mullineux feared she was having a miscarriage
and went to hospital.

A scan revealed she had been carrying twins but one of the foetuses had
died and was being absorbed back into the womb.

Another blob was detected on this initial scan, but was thought to be
another egg that hadn't dissipated yet.

Mrs Mullineux, of Benfleet, Essex, was told to return in two weeks to
ensure all was fine.

"I was disappointed I had lost one of them but was more concerned about
the other one," she said last night. "Those two weeks were agony for
us. When I went back I was astonished when they said there was another
baby.

"It turned out the blob that was on my last scan picture had grown into
a baby."

Mrs Mullineux was told she was expecting two babies - one three weeks
older than the other.

It was explained that hers was a rare case of superfetation, where the
body carries on releasing more eggs for fertilisation after a pregnancy
has already started. It meant that, technically, Mrs Mullineux could
have become pregnant again each month during her pregnancy.

The pregnancy was not without a hitch. Harriet did not grow as quickly
as her brother and had to be monitored carefully.

Thomas was born at 6.32pm on May 4, weighing 5lb 6oz, and Harriet at
6.33pm weighing 4lb 1oz.

They were both taken to special care, where they remained for three
weeks before being allowed home. Harriet was desperately ill at one
stage after contracting pneumonia but made a remarkable recovery.

Thomas is described as "tall and lanky" and "very laid-back" while
Harriet is "short and stumpy" and "interested in everything".

Mrs Mullineux said: "We are thrilled to be parents again, especially
now that they are into a good routine of feeding and sleeping."

Jan 14th - Dr Gonzo Tamez (Mexico)
Dear Pierre:

 I am far from finished looking at the charts of the twins that you kindly
sent for our astrological consideration...  And I will have more to say
about this interesting case later, aiming at differentiating the charts to
explain why one twin died and the other one did not die in the terrorist
attacks in NYC on 9-11-01.

 Alhena has already told us about the technique for handling multiple
births' charts by dividing equally the ecliptic from the Ascendant of the
first born onwards in as many sections as there were different twins born,
placing each next born twin's Ascendant in the corresponding birth order
around the wheel. When its only 2 twins, the first born one gets the
Ascendant and the second twin's Ascendant is placed so that it coincides
with the Descendant of the first born twin.

 When there are two twin siblings born, it's also useful to use the draconic
chart to differentiate them: the Ascendant of one (usually the first born
but often it's the other way around) is moved so that it coincides exactly
with the true North Node of the Moon, and the second twin's Ascendant is
moved so it becomes the true South Node of the Moon. I have been using this
technique for many years and found it useful.

 Also, when there are two twins born, all opposition aspects in orb are
going to be of differentiating value: one of the twins will tend to
gravitate to one pole of the opposition and the other to the opposite pole,
taking the differentiating traits dictated by the planet there.

 And many times I have been able to differentiate identical twins by
assigning one of them the North Node of the planet ruling the Ascendant and
the South Node of that same planet to the other twin... When you use
geocentric planetary nodes, you know, the North and the South nodes are NOT
necessarily in opposition and this helps a great deal to differentiate them
further because one or more planets may aspect the north and not the south
or viceversa. Of course, fixed stars and parans to the angles is another
important way to differentiate twins.

 I myself have twin sisters and they are an odd case, because even though
they were born in two bags, which means they are the product of two sperms
fecundating two ovi, they are so amazingly similar in their physical
appearance, that no one can tell them apart easily... They are red haired
and they have many freckles: their resemblance is so staggering that even
their freckles cluster around the same spots in the same fashion. Later I
will write about my twin sisters and how their very different life
circumstances are differentiated in their birth charts.

 But coming now to the interesting case you posted of those 2 twins only one
of which (the younger) was killed in the 9-11 attacks in NYC, we see that
their Ascendants are: 16Aries18 for the older one that survived; and
20Aries39 for the younger one that died. So their Combined Ascendant
(midpoint of the two) is at 18Aries29. Mars is the ruler of their
Ascendants.

 Mars, ruler of their Ascendants is in detriment at 04Taurus36 in both
charts alike, in mutual reception with Venus in detriment at 04Aries04 in
the older twin and 04Aries05 in the younger one. That Venus and Mars are in
mutual reception and in tight semisextile, clearly relates to them being
twins. Their natal Venus/Mars midpoint is at 19Aries21, right in between one
of the twin's Ascendant and the other one's Ascendant!...  I would be
tempted to rectify their Ascendants moving the combined Ascendant to be
partile orb conjoined the natal Mars/Venus midpoint.  Following Alhena's
rule, the younger twin's Ascendant should become the Descendant of the older
twin's, hence in Venus ruled Libra.

 Since they were born with Aries rising, I go to check the geocentric Nodes
of Mars... The North Node of Mars is at 26Aries54 and the South Node of Mars
is at 28Sagittarius54. And since they have natal Pluto at 26Virgo10, we see
that the North of Mars in Aries is in tight quincunx Pluto whereas the North
Node of Mars in Sagittarius (traveling) is in SQUARE to natal Pluto (death),
accounting well for why one died violently while traveling in a plane while
the other one did not. We clearly assign then the North Node of Mars to the
older twin, and the South Node of Mars to the younger twin that died
violently while traveling. And this goes very well with the fact that at
birth they have a very tight Mars at 04Taurus36 OPPOSITION natal Jupiter
(traveling) retrograde at 05Scorpio15 in the sign of death. Death while
traveling is fitting with this tight Mars Jupiter opposition and Mars ruling
both the Aries Ascendant and cusp 8 of death in Scorpio.

 Although Mars rules their Aries Ascendants, using the classical set of 5
ancient dignities, the Sun is almuten of the Ascendant in both cases.
Interestingly, the natal Sun/Mars midpoint is at 13Aries33 SQUARE the natal
Sun/Jupiter midpoint at 13Capricorn52.

 Even more differentiating is the fact that they have their natal
Mars/Uranus midpoint at 20Cancer59, tight on Pluto's Node and in tight
square to the Ascendant of the younger brother that died (orb of 30 minutes,
alright for a midpoint). On the other hand, the older brother that survived
escapes, because this square from the natal Mars/Uranus midpoint on Pluto's
Node square Ascendant orbs 4 degrees 31 minutes: way way off for a midpoint
square Ascendant.  And of course, the Mars/Uranus midpoint on Pluto's Node
square natal Ascendant (orbed in the one that died and way disorbed in the
one that survived) is in itself quite descriptive of the type of death
encountered by the younger twin: Uranus rules surprise and airplanes; Mars
rules the Ascendant and cusp 8 of death and stands for violence and fire;
Pluto death and terrorism, etc.

 A markedly different fate is observed in another very key midpoint: the
Ascendant/Mercury midpoint. Mercury rules all twins, and they both have
their Moon in Gemini. The older twin that survived has his natal
Ascendant/Mercury midpoint at 29Pisces48, whereas the younger twin that died
has his natal Ascendant/Mercury midpoint at 01Aries58 whose antiscio is in
conjunction to natal Pluto and in very tight square to the South Node of
Mars that we had concluded signified him.

 I am not yet through with analyzing this case, but here I have already
listed 5 different sets of aspects that explain very neatly why one twin
brother died the way he did and the other one survived him.

 I will return with additional aspects and a final conclusion.

 Thanks for your keen and kind attention.

 I wish you well

      Gonzo

Jan 14th - Ed Kohout (USA)
Hi,

> Pierre: I don't think anyone would argue that astrology - like every other
human
> discipline - is an imperfect tool which is dynamic, experiential and
> subject to ongoing updates. The real question is unfortunately
> hypothetical: in extremis, if we knew all there was to know about
> astrology and if our application of these techniques were faultless,
> could astrology predict the number of apples we have yet to eat in
our
> lives?

Right, it is therefore a hypothesis that cannot be tested, meaning
that it is a belief.

> Pierre: I think what you meant to say was that the twins example suggests
> "astrology does NOT explain everything"?

Yes, I must have mistyped.

 > Pierre: This may be true - I am not going to get involved in a philsophical
> debate. However, in the case of these twins, there are clear
indications
> that Boston and NY were toxic locations for BOTH of them on 9/11.
That
> the one twin was in Canada at the time saved him. Speculatively, he
was
> in a location that did not hold as much anaretic potential for him
in
> the temporal environment as defined by the jurisdictional ingresses
and
> lunations - although we cannot be sure about this because we don't
know
> exactly where he was.

I would tend to agree that being in the location of different
overarching mundane astrological milieu would change things.

The "subsumption" of charts is not usually taken into consideration
by astrologers.

I'm so glad you started this thread -- it's helping us think.

- Ed

Jan 14th - Ed Kohout (USA)
Hi Holly,

As I see it, and I think this is reinforced by the collective
arguments for the hypothesis, the notion that every last little thing
is astrologically relevant is only a belief.

Humans have an amazing capacity to project. If you *want* to believe
that astrology corresponds to everything, then it will in your mind
and your life. Gonzo is an amazing astrologer, probably one of the
best I've ever met. Yet, this does nothing to prove his point, but
only shows his devotion to the craft.

I, on the other hand, refuse to believe that the future is already
written, and that it's merely a working out of the math.

- Ed

Jan 16th - Dr Gonzo Tamez (Mexico)
 In my reply to Ed Kohout I used the example of Bode's Law to make the point
of using math, in this case simple arithmetics, to derive factual objective
knowledge of our solar system...  In the case of the Bode's Law, a simple
arithmetic succession reveals the distances of the planets from the Sun in
order according to their actual positions, but other more complicated series
have been found... Let me quote what I wrote to Ed about how the arithmetic
succession is construed to obtain the planetary distances:


""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
To give you a hint: consider for example Bode's Law... It's based on the
following arithmetic succession:

  0,  3,  6,  12,  24,  48,  96,  192,...

 If now you add 4 to each term you obtain:

   4,  7,  10,  16,  28,  52,  100,  196,...

 and now divide each term of this succession by 10 to get:

    0.4,   0.7,   1.0,   1.6,   2.8,   5.2,  10.0,  19.6,...

 If the number 1 (third term of the above succession) is taken to represent
one astronomical unit (A.U.) meaning the distance from the Earth to the Sun,
then the 0.4,  0.7,  1.0,  1.6,  2.8,  5.2, 10.0, and  19.6  predict with
good approximation the distances of the planets Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars,
Asteroid Belt, Jupiter, Saturn and Uranus.  When Bode and others played with
this succession in the late 18th century, the Asteroid Belt was not known to
astronomers...  It was precisely this succession marking for an orbiting
body around the Sun between Mars and Jupiter and about 2.8 astronomical
units from the Sun that astronomers were motivated to turn their telescopes
there and Ceres, Palas, Vesta, Hidalgo and the other bigger asteroids were
initially discovered. When Bode published this succession named after him
(although it is considerable older), Uranus had not yet been discovered; but
shortly afterwards, in 1781, Uranus was first discovered and when its
distance to the Sun was calculated, it was found to fit precisely the last
term of the above succession, 19.6 astronomical units.  Many astronomers
were then engaged in the search for the next planet as per Bode's
succession.  But when Neptune was finally discovered its distance to the Sun
turned out to be more deviant than any of the preceding planets and even
than Pluto.
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

 ...I know that many I_Predict members lurk in the Cycles list for
physicists.  Yesterday, in the Cycles lists, Ray Tomes, the list's moderator
posted a short comment about a very new finding that gives Bode's Law a more
universal significance.  Indeed, Ray tells us, it has just been found that
the planets discovered orbiting other Suns, also fulfill Bode's Law!.  Ever
since I first learned about Bode's Law back in my high-school days, I always
thought that Bode's Law must be a universal law governing the spacings of
the planets around the central Suns in all planetary systems.  But it wasn't
until recently that astronomers were capable of detecting planets orbiting
other stars different from our Sun. To date, using various astronomical
methods of observation, over 100 different planets have been detected
orbiting around other different Suns.  But it hasn't been until very
recently that it has been confirmed that indeed planets orbiting other suns
do tend to orbit around their respective central suns following the spacing
distances dictated by Bode's Law!.  Although this finding does not surprise
me at all, it does come as a very important confirmation that reveals to us
a great deal about our universe in general. I find it very exciting. And  of
course, I am certain that as astronomers sharpen their ways of detecting
planets in distant systems, we will have more and more data supporting the
conclusion that Bode's Law is indeed a universal phenomenon and not an
exceptional freak occurrence...

 Let me quote now from Ray Tomes posting in the Cycles' list now for you:


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Here is some data from other planetary
systems which shows that quite clearly our solar system is not unique in
having a pattern to the distances.

The Star 55 Cancri has 5 planets orbiting it. Source:
http://exoplanets.org/55cnc5th.pdf
The distances are 0.038, 0.115, 0.240, 0.781 and 5.77 AU

The Pulsar PSR 1257 +12 has 4 planets orbiting it. Source:
http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/P/pulsarplan.html
The distances are 0.19, 0.36, 0.47 and ~40 AU

Note that the 3 inner pulsar planets are very close to being half our
solar system distances which would be 0.19, 0.36 and 0.50 AU. Also the
~40 AU of this pulsar and the ~38 AU of pulsar PSR B1620 -26 are also
close to the 39.5 AU of Pluto.

The Harmonics Theory derived wavelengths in AU from our solar system
(derived before these other discoveries) are:
(ratios 2 horizontally and 3 vertically with the ratio 7 between the two
groups)

120  60   30
 40  20   10    5.0
                              ratio 7
  5.7 2.86 1.43 0.71  0.357  0.179
           0.47 0.236 0.118  0.059
                      0.0393 0.0196

The last three figures were not derived from our solar system but are
extension by ratios of 2 and 3 as expected.

Compare these figures to all the observed distances and see the
remarkable accuracy of the fit. Anyone who disbelieves in universal
waves of these sizes is closing their eyes to the evidence.

Regards
Ray
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


 And as I was telling Ed: there are more complex series, including power
series, that unfold to provide all other planetary parameters in the proper
order so that they allow us to know what is there beyond Pluto.  I am
convinced that this is how the founding fathers of modern uranian astrology
were able to derive the knowledge to construct the ephemeris of the Trans
Neptunian Planets.  And I have also explained why I think that whether these
planets actually have physical existence or not, is immaterial from the
astrological point of view. What matters is that in the horoscope, these
planets behave as if they were physical bodies like the known classical
planets or the outer astronomical planets.

 In the past I have written extensively about a couple of other of these
relations, like Bode's Law, that yield not only the planetary distances from
the Sun, but also their diameters, densities, and other planetary
parameters. But these relations are mathematically more complicated. One of
them was found by Theodore Landscheidt and is called the Morphogenetic
Determinant, because it resorts to a simple matrix formed by the 4 initial
prime numbers, to obtain a great deal of information not only about the
spacings of the planets around their central Suns, but also about the
spacing of the electrons around their atomic nuclei. I will save this
subject for another posting later.

 Thanks for your keen and kind attention

   I wish you well

         Gonzo