Astrology Revisited

**Original Poster** · 06-15-2012 02:30 AM

In this thread I'll be analyzing three concepts

1. Personalities cannot be examined using absolute classifications
2. Astrology cannot be invalidated based on the absurdity of extra-planetary influence
3. The complexity and subtlety of reality invalidates the simplistic astrological model, and also invalidates criticism of astrology based on these parameters. Astrology must be navigated with the parameters inherent to this type of study.

1. If you look at personalities in a very categorical way, you're bound to find mountains of evidence to disprove any particular identifier. Neither modern psychology, with their checklist style analysis, nor modern astrology, with its disposition of confirmation bias, could possibly satisfy any sort of causal investigation. Personalities simply cannot be analyzed categorically, no matter what parameters are being used. It is as impossible to properly classify people as schizophrenic and not schizophrenic as it is to classify the exact place where red becomes orange on the color spectrum. All we can classify are inclinations, or as I like to call them, orbits.

When considering identifications like a solar system, only our sun is the sun and no planet can reside within that specific classification. The planets and other objects within orbit around at multiple degrees of relatively. Relating that to psychology, a mercury leveled schizo would be far easier to identify than schizos orbiting around the Oort Cloud. In the same way, you cannot pick out a single shade of red and call it the perfect example of red. It will practically always fall on either the purple side or the orange side to some degree or another. You cannot pick a specific location on a wave and call it the trough or precipice, it is always inclined on one side or another. Rational Integers are practically impossible to select in the Real World.

To conclude, it is not worth the trouble attempting to analyze astrology is a causal way. So saying "You're a capricorn, therefore you're a work-a-holic" is as fallacious as saying "I'm a capricorn but not a work-a-holic, therefore astrology is wrong"

2. To assess astrology properly one has to presuppose that there is a possible influence on our world and personalities by the stars and planets in the sky. Claiming one must prove how this influence works first before we can properly analyze it is like claiming we have to map out human genetics before we can study traits and behaviorism. It is not worth it to say we don't know exactly how molecular genetics works when one is trying to study the heredity of red hair, for instance. In the same way, even if we cannot understand exactly why astrology works, that doesn't mean there's no value in studying personalities using an astrological model. Conversely we cannot claim that just because we can prove there is an astrological influence on personality types, it is therefore not valuable to analyze how this mechanism could work. The two studies work synergistically, just as analyzing molecular genetics aids the study of traits and vice versa. The reason both studies are necessary in genetics is because it enables them to discover what is a genetic influence and what isn't. Astrology would work the same way, through proper analysis of the mechanism through which it works we could understand exactly how it influences our lives.

3. The Strawman critics of astrology most favor in attacking is as much the fault of believers of astrology as skeptics. Believers in astrology were the first to regard the study in a causal manner. In the same way, psychologists impudently diagnosing their patients are as much at fault for Scientology as "Dianetics." The only reason the misconstruction exists is because the majority of practitioners adhere to it. For us to properly analyze astrology, first we have to remember what astrology isn't. Astrology is not the presumption that planets and stars have a causal effect on earth. Astrology is the study of a correlation. It is not a means to identify personalities, it is a means to identify influences on personalities. While the organization of astrology into houses and signs was necessary to map it out, the manifestation of these influences is still subject to the complexity of reality.

It is as fallacious to say astrology is false because you love dreaming but aren't a Pisces as it is to say the Law of Attraction doesn't work because you wanted a car and it didn't magically appear. To understand this, I also need to properly explain the way the Law of Attraction works. When you think of a desire, this desire creates a feeling inside of you, this feeling can be very specific and very well knotted to the thought of that specific desire, or it can be very broad and generally make you feel excited or depressed, secure or fearful, etc. The manifestations that come into your life are going to match the feeling you broadcast, not the thoughts. And on top of that, it's going to match the feelings you generate most of the time, so you have to form the habit of sustaining that specific feeling so that you feel it (and are therefore broadcasting it) most of the time. Most of us simply do not know how to tune into such specific feelings that they can give us exactly what we want. Most of us are left with generalized, often surprising manifestations of our feelings. This means if you want a car and it makes you excited, you'll start getting all sorts of circumstances in your life that you make you feel excited in general, not just a car. If you want a car and it makes you feel anxious and doubtful, your circumstances will begin to justify that feeling as well.

Astrology would theoretically work the same way since we're dealing with correlations that would presumingly not be related to Newtonian physics. This means the way an astrological influence manifests in your life can be very broad, as long as it mirrors the type of energy that influence represents. Now remember we map out astrology in a categorical fashion but that doesn't mean the energies represented by the planets are going to represent the words we use to describe the energy without fail. So just because Neptune represents the denied aspects of our personalities, that doesn't mean everything that comes to mind when you think of the word denied comes into play regarding Neptune's influence. The words incompletely translate the shade the energy actually is, and one has to get a complete understanding of the energy beyond the words that describe it to properly analyze astrology.

With the complexity of our environments, there are an infinite number of ways in which these energies affect us, and if one wants to investigate personality types they're just as well to assess the genes and environmental factors because the knowledge will be more practical for the human mind to understand. At first glance, there is little pragmatic value in analyzing similarities between two people born at the exact same time in the exact same place because the number of variations they'll encounter will be so vast that the manner in which their astrological influences manifest would most probably appear irreconcilable.

The only function astrology serves that a more grounded, causal personality analysis wouldn't be more equipped for would be based on patterns and changes outside the reach of rudimentary causality. This is most popularly divination, where one can anticipate the oncoming influences of their life. But because the influence can only be regarded as a shade of energy, and not as a list of specific concepts, the manifestations are still likely to be very surprising, inaccurate and only functional in retrospect where one could contend that confirmation bias is at work. A much less popular function is to assess one's life path as a whole. In other words rather than divine whether one can anticipate good or bad fortune in the upcoming week, they can divine what type of growth they're going to be experiencing. If you presume we grow in a spiral fashion rather than a linear fashion, you can also presume that we will encounter different types of difficulties at different times and revisit many old obstacles over and over again. Seeing growth as a spiral helps one realize that they're not actually stuck in a rut just because they encounter a similar problem they did a year ago. It is a chance to see how much they've grown since then, and astrology can prepare you by helping you relate different circumstances in your life to the patterns in the stars. This intrinsically requires the use of confirmation bias because one is forced to analyze what different symbols mean to them personally. And in this realm, there are no rules, one's own belief system becomes the bridge builder, the only question becomes whether or not they will find their way across the river. This makes astrology impossible to study using the scientific method, and puts the entire study in the same vane as Chaos Magic. But analyzing everything scientifically is like putting meat and ice-cream in a blender and claiming that the ice-cream tastes like shit. Attempting to rebuke the story of Noah by claiming he couldn't fit two of every animal on a boat is as fallacious as taking Noah's story literally to begin with. Myth must be analyzed using the proper tools to analyze myth, as must Scientific, Transcendental and Magical Studies.

**Marvo** · 06-15-2012 04:13 AM

Hahah yeah, fuck science!

**Original Poster** · 06-15-2012 04:31 AM

Attempting to rebuke the story of Noah by claiming he couldn't fit two of every animal on a boat is as fallacious as taking Noah's story literally to begin with.

Based on what you said in the "What is Science" Thread, I have to agree with you Marvo. Fuck your sense of science. But I have much respect for the pursuit of objective knowledge. Even if the destination is impossible, the pursuit itself creates a more stable foundation to base decisions upon. It simply isn't the only God in the universe, nor the only functional method of discovery.

**Warheit** · 06-15-2012 05:15 AM

Do you have these chats with lads in real life my boy?

**Original Poster** · 06-15-2012 05:33 AM

I would have to be a pretty thick headed asshole to impose my intellect into every conversation I participate in. I tend to let others lead the conversation unless I'm drunk. That's why I love the internet. It's my thread, I made it, people aren't required by law or any rudimentary understanding of politeness to read it.

**Marvo** · 06-15-2012 10:54 AM

Originally Posted by Omnis Dei

Based on what you said in the "What is Science" Thread, I have to agree with you Marvo. Fuck your sense of science. But I have much respect for the pursuit of objective knowledge. Even if the destination is impossible, the pursuit itself creates a more stable foundation to base decisions upon. It simply isn't the only God in the universe, nor the only functional method of discovery.

Science covers all methods of attaining correct knowledge in the universe. If a method of attaining knowledge cannot be scientifically validated, all knowledge it produces is fundamentally incorrect.

We have machines that shatter atoms into elemantary particles, which we then analyze at a level beyond comprehension, with other machines that are bigger than your house.
If the position of celestial bodies, baring Sol and Luna, had any noticable effect on our day to day lifes, we would know about it.

**tsiouz** · 06-15-2012 09:42 PM

Astrological tradition in depth is the analysis of the chartography of a person.
It is a form if geometrical science.
And saturn is the planet of denial not neptune.

**Original Poster** · 06-15-2012 10:41 PM

Originally Posted by tsiouz

Astrological tradition in depth is the analysis of the chartography of a person.
It is a form if geometrical science.
And saturn is the planet of denial not neptune.

See what I mean when I say you can't get too hung up on the words use to describe the energy?

The 12th house is ruled by neptune, and the 12th house is the house of the denied aspects of our personality. Not the house of "denial" but the house of our shadow, the house containing aspects of our personality we don't even admit to ourselves that we imbue, even if secretly we'd like to.

As far a geometric science, you should explain that in greater detail. I know vaguely what you mean but you're a long shot away from explaining how astrology works by simply stating the science is geometric.

Originally Posted by Marvo

Science covers all methods of attaining correct knowledge in the universe. If a method of attaining knowledge cannot be scientifically validated, all knowledge it produces is fundamentally incorrect.

We have machines that shatter atoms into elemantary particles, which we then analyze at a level beyond comprehension, with other machines that are bigger than your house.
If the position of celestial bodies, baring Sol and Luna, had any noticable effect on our day to day lifes, we would know about it.

Your obduration would make you an admirable religious zealot. For the 3rd time I must repeat, to use science to dismiss myth is as fallacious as taking myth literally to begin with. To approach a myth like history you're already setting yourself up to for failure, and there's no other term for rebuking myth as an historian other than fallacy. But likewise, you also cannot say that if it's not history, it has no value. Myths are extremely valuable, they only lose their value when they're regarded historically.

You also cannot claim that just because we don't understand the mechanism through which astrology works, therefore it doesn't. That's like claiming because we don't understand how life began, therefore life doesn't exist. Just because you don't understand something doesn't mean it has no value. You're not that smart, so find some humility.

The fact is the scientific method makes a baseless presumption about reality that there is no transactional relationship between the perceiver and perception. This enables scientific discovery to ascertain the most statistically likely results, free of necessary interference by the mind. However, because of this, all science is intrinsically limited mostly to newtonian models of reality.

I am, of course, mostly regarding just the attitude people like you have about science. If you read "The Science of Mind" by Ernest Holmes you may learn something.

But to speak more generally, newtonian Cause and Effect is not the only form of logic. Another form of logic is the capability of seeing patterns. However because many of these patterns are based on our unique experiences of life, and a scientific observer cannot note the way in which things make you feel, there are many valuable studies which exist outside the reach of science. You are free to dismiss them. You are free to wave a sign that all non-science is blasphemy. At the end of the day you're only restricting yourself from the mountain of valuable data available.

**Photolysis** · 06-15-2012 10:46 PM

Originally Posted by Omnis Dei

I would have to be a pretty thick headed asshole to impose my intellect into every conversation I participate in. I tend to let others lead the conversation unless I'm drunk. That's why I love the internet. It's my thread, I made it, people aren't required by law or any rudimentary understanding of politeness to read it.

Just as well, because most of what you say is easily falsified and fallacious pontificating from a pseudo-intellectual.

Writing a lot of words doesn't make you especially intelligent, it just makes it so there's more to wade through whenever anyone tries to debunk your posts. And for all the jargon you've thrown about in the original post, it's just a bunch of assertions and strawmen arguments.

**Original Poster** · 06-15-2012 10:54 PM

Pot calls the kettle. If you'd like to address my claims you have to be more specific than vague accusations of fallacy mixed with ad hominem. Otherwise go pound sand.

**Marvo** · 06-15-2012 11:21 PM

to use science to dismiss myth is as fallacious as taking myth literally to begin with.

What is the point of your myth, if it's basically a wishy washy personally defined universal power? If it cannot be taken literally, that means it has zero consistency. You have no understanding of it, you cannot even explain what it is, yet you believe it. Why?

The fact is the scientific method makes a baseless presumption about reality that there is no transactional relationship between the perceiver and perception. This enables scientific discovery to ascertain the most statistically likely results, free of necessary interference by the mind. However, because of this, all science is intrinsically limited mostly to newtonian models of reality.

This makes zero sense to me. I'm assuming that what you are trying to say here, is that there is something beyond what our senses can observe. However, in saying this, you have basically made your own myth pointless. If something cannot be observed, it cannot affect us, thus while it may exist, its existence is meanless to us.

Anything that is capable of affecting our universe, can be observed through the scientific method, because science is made by humans.

But to speak more generally, newtonian Cause and Effect is not the only form of logic. Another form of logic is the capability of seeing patterns. However because many of these patterns are based on our unique experiences of life, and a scientific observer cannot note the way in which things make you feel, there are many valuable studies which exist outside the reach of science. You are free to dismiss them. You are free to wave a sign that all non-science is blasphemy. At the end of the day you're only restricting yourself from the mountain of valuable data available.

If there was any statistical evidence within your mound of poorly written and recorded data, that there might be other powers at work, science would take it seriously. All these studies make no sense in the context of each other. For that reason, there is no real reason to take any of them seriously.

**Original Poster** · 06-15-2012 11:32 PM

What I mean is that the observer can affect the observation. Because the scientific method posits that for something to be "true" it must be consistently observable by different observers, no matter what variations the observers themselves are causing, science is intrinsically limited. It is not as wide as "everything that can be observed with the senses." It disregards the way the attitude would affect reality. And if you claim that attitude can't affect reality without explaining why not, I'm afraid you'd be using circular logic. But far be it from me to challenge your faith.

You also apparently have no idea what myth is. I didn't describe astrology as myth, I was using myth and history as an example of how many valuable studies are disregarded by people who have studied them using the wrong set of parameters. If you study myth using the same parameters you study history with, of course it seems like a bunch of irrational bullshit. If you study myth using the parameters necessary to study myth (which is symbolism), you can learn about the earliest evolution of human ethos.

**Marvo** · 06-16-2012 12:18 AM

It disregards the way the attitude would affect reality.

What does this mean?

human ethos

What is human ethos?

Right now your whole argument rests on lingo that doesn't make much sense. You suggest there are mountains of evidence, I would like to see this.

**Original Poster** · 06-16-2012 01:05 AM

Originally Posted by Marvo

What does this mean?

The scientific method assumes your attitude cannot affect the results you are studying. It attempts to depersonalize reality, which would be fine if we knew for certain that there was a purely causal, objective reality we're all observing and our minds are not one of the causes for its effects. But because we do not know for certain that this is the case, science is an intrinsically limited (albeit profoundly useful) tool.

What is human ethos?

Ethos - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Right now your whole argument rests on lingo that doesn't make much sense. You suggest there are mountains of evidence, I would like to see this.

All I was arguing is that experiential evidence is beneficial even if it can't hold up to scientific verification. Obviously if you ignore logical verification completely, you drift into the realm of the deep-end. That is why I continue to stress that science and logic are extremely useful tools to base decisions upon, because if you make decisions based on what is scientifically verifiable you are increasing your statistical chance at obtaining the desired results. However just because science is designed to help us pursue objective truth, that doesn't mean objective truth is possible to achieve. The best way to use science is to stack the odds in your favor. It is not necessary as a human being to actually believe anything, whether it's verifiable or not. If you can understand this, you can understand that experiential evidence can also enable someone to stack odds in their favor. But this is something you have to test yourself because it deals with the concept that your attitude effects your observations. Through personal investigation of the patterns knitted into their seemingly random experiences, many people have come to understand occult studies and benefit from them in ways that objectivists could not begin to understand. If you wish to only benefit from evidence in an objective manner, pursuing this idea that there is such thing as objective truth, then go for it. I'm simply explaining to you that there are more tools at your disposal, and you don't have to spiral into insanity to benefit from them.

As I said previously, the only test whether or not a bridge is successful is if it gets you across the river. If people are managing to get themselves across, they have achieved functionality, and objective truth becomes irrelevant.

**Marvo** · 06-16-2012 01:16 AM

I'm having a very hard time seeing how this isn't just psychology.

**tsiouz** · 06-16-2012 08:15 AM

12 house is associated with imprisoment asylums completion ruin ect.
you going to learn that neptune peak is in the ascentant and the first house not the 12 one.
symbol is 8 horizontialy and neptune is connected with subconcious.
It represents mostly dellusions that we're causing to ourselves.
For instance neptune in 5 house in opposition with moon in 11 and ruler of the 5 is 4 then you have a woman who wants desperately a child (as the 5 is associated with children)
And her desire sabotaging her making her unfortunate for a child for no reason without a fertility problem.

Now neptune is the most negative point of an horoscope together with pluto.
By negative means female introvert and receptive as its ruler its pisces the most negative sign of the horoscope.
neptune sumbolizes the illusion that a person can bring to himself not denial.

Saturn from the other hand is the planet of pure denial.
A man with saturn unaspected is a person who constanlty denies.
Pluto is the planet of our shadow not neptune.
The description of the planet carrying aspects we don't even realize corresponds to pluto.

You're making the mistake that most people do when they start to read astrology.

**IndieAnthias** · 06-16-2012 11:11 AM

this is mostly for Marvo, it's just another way of looking at the laws of nature. If you can seriously find something to disagree with after you hear where he goes with his talk than say so, but give it a chance first (comments on divination start at about 9:00)

**Original Poster** · 06-16-2012 11:30 PM

Originally Posted by tsiouz

12 house is associated with imprisoment asylums completion ruin ect.
you going to learn that neptune peak is in the ascentant and the first house not the 12 one.
symbol is 8 horizontialy and neptune is connected with subconcious.
It represents mostly dellusions that we're causing to ourselves.
For instance neptune in 5 house in opposition with moon in 11 and ruler of the 5 is 4 then you have a woman who wants desperately a child (as the 5 is associated with children)
And her desire sabotaging her making her unfortunate for a child for no reason without a fertility problem.

Now neptune is the most negative point of an horoscope together with pluto.
By negative means female introvert and receptive as its ruler its pisces the most negative sign of the horoscope.
neptune sumbolizes the illusion that a person can bring to himself not denial.

Saturn from the other hand is the planet of pure denial.
A man with saturn unaspected is a person who constanlty denies.
Pluto is the planet of our shadow not neptune.
The description of the planet carrying aspects we don't even realize corresponds to pluto.

You're making the mistake that most people do when they start to read astrology.

I would say the same thing about you. You're falling for a logical fallacy. I argued an example to explain how you cannot start and finish you understanding of astrology with the words used to describe the energy. You apparently believe that you can.

You also failed to explain what a geometric science is, which I am far more interested in than your opinion on what the planets do.

**tsiouz** · 06-17-2012 10:02 AM

Originally Posted by Omnis Dei

I would say the same thing about you. You're falling for a logical fallacy. I argued an example to explain how you cannot start and finish you understanding of astrology with the words used to describe the energy. You apparently believe that you can.

You also failed to explain what a geometric science is, which I am far more interested in than your opinion on what the planets do.

Logical fallacy?
By the term geometrical astrology i mean a science which geometrical correlations created by positions on a circle lead to a phenomena of causality
and analyzing the chartography.

All the greek philosophers of the classical age aside from mathematics were into astrology and if you have the luck in your life
which i believe you're not, you will manage to learn the secrets of pythagorean astrology.
And the funny part is that plato ar aristotelis is not even teached in schools.
The problem is that the astrology you're describing which is hellenistic and trust me i know better is been splashed from the mediaval times as the british took her from the arabs which
took her from the greek so it is mistranslated as fuck.

You don't have to write ten paragraphs to explain the simpliest thing in order to make a debate.
Educate yourself more and im even willing to share knowledge with you,but i think this conversation is pointless.

**Original Poster** · 06-17-2012 05:52 PM

Well at least I can agree with that. This conversation is pointless. You're claiming something is a Science without explaining how it works, you're claiming something works causally without explaining how it's causal, and you've generally been pretentious about what your knowledge is.

**tsiouz** · 06-17-2012 08:38 PM

Man im not gonna type for three days in a row the aspects of pythagorean astrology so you can recognize astrology as a science.
If all the ancient mathematicians were using astrology propably there is a reason for it.
So don't start threats full of definition for methods which you don't understand how they work
If you really want to learn about astrology because you don't educate more yourself.

**Original Poster** · 06-17-2012 10:13 PM

Astrology as a "science" cannot rest on the credibility of Pythagoras alone. If it is a science you must be able to demonstrate how it works. I asked you to explain what a geometric science is and your explanation is "go find out yourself"

**tsiouz** · 06-18-2012 12:26 AM

Originally Posted by Omnis Dei

Astrology as a "science" cannot rest on the credibility of Pythagoras alone. If it is a science you must be able to demonstrate how it works. I asked you to explain what a geometric science is and your explanation is "go find out yourself"

Pythagorean astrlogy Is the peak of hellenistic and to extend in the western astrolgy.
Is an achievement for anybody wh manage to learn her.

Now for the geometrical part
every horoscope forms a correlation
created by the four points: 1st 7th 4th and 10th cusp which represents the way the soul is incarnated.
now the modern astrology takes this cross and relates him with the positions of planets through the circle.

So you have a man with sun in virgo in a triangle with mars and pluto in conjuct in capricorn to the ascendant (capricorn).
Now pluto is in harmony with sun which is the softer corner beetween them as you know so pluto is not going to "corrupt" the sun as the conjuction of sun with pluto can be very dangerous.
The conjuction of mars with pluto gonna make the person to sustain in difficult situations.

Rest of the horoscope is in harmony,not a lot f problems.
And then the person for no reason breaks down and commits suicide against the perspective that modern astrology interprets.
And then think of a person with the opposite correlations which doesen't gonna have even a problem of internal conflicts.

The first thing that an experienced astrologer recognize is that it should be a pattern below the ""surface of a horoscope" that gonna give deeper interpretation about the person.

And this thing is very difficult to explain because of the lack of knowledge you've got.
It is like im trying to explain into a person who doesen't even know what an car engine does who he supposed to fix her.

So think of it at the simpliest way.
All the big ancient cultures are carrying the traditions of astrology.
some with superstition but you cannot say that greeks were ignorant minds.
And there is an expression that says:where there is a lot of smoke there is certainly a fire.

So the problem of modern astrolgy is the same with any tradition of teaching.
For example in the 80's began the first silva group in meditation.
At that time a lot of people were informed correctly about the difficulty of meditation and show good effort to the obstacles that the self is putting.

ten years later meditation became so mainstream that you can bet,and you're going to win this bet,that most of the people who supposively "meditate"
dont have any idea of what the hell they're doing.

Same thing happened with teachings like yoga projections,even in this site you're going to see many times a lot of misinformation.

Same thing with astrology.
Take it simple.
Full moon makes waters rising.
Empty moon makes waters fall.
Your body is 78% of water so is immidiately affected.
Surgeons dont operate with full moon because the increased potential of bleeding.
When moon conjuncts sun at 0 and oppose at 180 degrees exactly you have full moon.
when 90 degrees you have empty moon.
These correlations creates tendencies.
Also the peak of moon is in the period of sun in cancer in the summer.
You have the strongest moon and the highest blood pressure.
So people who are born in the period of sun in cancer as their blood pressure is at a peak they have the tendency to express hysteria in a higher rate than other sings.

Now the simple theory of gravity.
an object put's the same gravity pressure on earth as the earth to the object.

Apart from the fact that in the near future radio astronomy is going to give us more details on the exchange of energy with other planets
something astronomers know already.

Problem with astrology is that is a tradition created by experience.
Certain patterns creates behaviours.
We know that for sure and if you pay enough attention you gonna see it as you observe a lot of horoscopes.

And below these patterns exists deeper patterns.
But astrology gives the chartography so it gives the shadow of a person.
So to personalities like buddha or christ astrology should be ignored completely
as the chartography doesen't exist in a person who faces his own shadow,thing that not a lot of people going to do.

It is not a random element that all the ancient greek astrolgers were mathematitians.
The secrets of astrology lie in deeper geometrical patterns.

The problem is that astrology is a tradition you gonna have to experience.
Same problem with meditation.
If a person says that there is no such thing as meditation you cannot argue with him.
Certainly if a person reaches theta and you put pads onto his head you can see it,but somebody can claim that as the theta getting produced in sleep so his brain "mailfunctions".

So this conversation is pointless.
If you have the insight to recognize astrology you will.
if you don't there isn't really an argument to be made.

Apart from the fact that the mainstream wave of astrology should be thrown into a bucket without further question.

**Original Poster** · 06-18-2012 06:49 AM

I beginning to think you're projecting this idea that I'm not educated enough to understand. You have no idea how long I've been researching astrology, you're making assumptions that I'm not able to get it as an excuse for your inability to explain it. And all your evidence is related to myths. Surgeons do perform surgery on full moons. Furthermore the relationship between my ability to get along with my partner would not be causally effected by the gravity of other planets. If that were so why is it that being affected by Jupiter's gravity causes manifestations in my life to reflect Jupiter's energy whereas being affected by Mars gravity twists my manifestations to take on martian energy? That's why I say the effect is correlative not causal.

**tsiouz** · 06-18-2012 10:30 AM

First of all.
In any serious hospital surgeons avoid operations at full moon except if it is not possible.
Hipocrattes himself gave that information.

Second im not gonna argue with a boy who found that his uranus is in a proximity to the ascendant maybe start searching astrology in the internet and now he calls himself an astrologer who is fishing for informations.

From the other side you've got the thirst for learning her which is good.

Astrology is based on experience.
And when you're reached that point you're gonna realize that is going to be pointless to talk about her.
That is what i know as a professional astrologer.
Now if you have truly any questions let me know.
But don't base arguments out of nothing.