Natal chart of deputies and politicians

Harmelia

Well-known member
I understand that 1-2% statistically significant increase in anything is impractical in astrology, but that is the only actual research available. I recommend taking an online course in statistics or reading a textbook, might find something useful to use in your study, like phi coefficient - http://www.astrology-and-science.com/D-rese2.htm


I took a course in statistics but I don't have a mind for it. I have to go after it in other ways. Maybe there's a statistics book for non-math folks. Just curious why you thought to mention that 1-2% isn't statistically significant an increase. What were you referring to? Oh and thanks for the link! That's helpful and interesting!
 
Last edited:

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
YES! You've stated the primary difficulty with astrological research. Unfortunately, to do large studies, you have to use astrodatabank - at least, this is the biggest pool of charts I know of.

I also get some charts off of forums and facebook, etc.

but these can be wrong too.

So we must accept that a few charts will be incorrect.

But, you will still get the gist of where the planets fall - and the really high numbers will likely be at least high and the really low numbers will likely still at least be low.
These numbers just point to trends - that are only part of a bigger pattern.
Well yes, and Wikipedia can be wrong about dates too. At least astrodatabank says whether the birth certificate is in hand or not.

Birth times on birth certificates can be wrong too!

My birth certificate says 4 pm and my baby book says 4:05 pm.
I've settled on 4:03 pm rectifying it for myself, but
honestly, it hasn't been a big deal one way or the other when I test it with events.

Out of curiosity, what method(s) do you use to rectify charts?
If you do it for every client, you must have a fairly quick way to do it.
Or not? If you don't mind sharing, I'm all ears!
It takes me too long when I do it!
Sometimes I feel I've really nailed it and sometimes not
. . . so I need to improve.
everyone has their methodology

petosiris posted the following on ANIMODAR method

sourced from the following thread link:smile:
https://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/showthread.php?p=1017195#post1017195


11-30-2019, 06:00 AM
petosiris
user_online.gif

Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 2,621


Re: Animodar

I have found a method that is more physical than this and does not involve the preceding syzygy or numerology.

Quote:
36. Nativities
When the moment of nativity is known, it can be examined instead of the moment of conception, the hours must be determined with knowledge of accidental qualities, and with one of the planets in perfect configuration with the Hour-Marker or the Midheaven at every conception and nativity
So, let the Ascendant or the Midheaven be in perfect conjunction, sextile, square, trine or opposition with one of the seven planets regardless of other factors.

We might theorize why this is so - conceptions and births of humans are powerful moments in nature that require the strongest influence of a planet on angles.
UPDATE :smile:
Yes, nowadays I ignore the syzygy and focus on the planet which makes the closest exact aspect to the Asc (and Dsc) or the Mc (and Ic). A major technical difference between this and the Ptolemaic Animodar is that mine requires a planet to be at the angle or in aspect, while Ptolemy seems to allow it to be disjunct, only requiring the numeric degree it has passed within its sign to be the same (it is like an exact semi-sextile or inconjunct modern ''aspect''). This does not seem physical to me, but rather numerological and uncharacteristic of Ptolemy's intentions of astrology.

So I recommend that one follows a more limited approach with regard to aspects, but more broad approach with regard to rulers. Often, the two methods (the Ptolemaic Animodar and the Petosiris Animodar) will give the same results, since they are based on similar physical reasoning.

I recommend one step - a planet in conjunction, sextile, square, trine or opposition with an angle. Take for example the chart of Ptolemy's second biggest fan (after me) - Girolamo Cardano - https://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Cardano,_Girolamo

There is no planet in aspect with an angle at 18:29 when the Ascendant is at 6° 22' Taurus. But noticing that Jupiter is nearby, we can put him exactly at the Ascendant giving us 18:20 time, or a 9 minute rectification. Jupiter rising rather than declining may better explain his life and fame.
consider using the foregoing
instead of the following

1. Examine the preceding syzygy, whether it was a new moon or a full moon.
2. If the preceding syzygy was a new moon, observe its degree at the time of the nativity.
3. If the preceding syzygy was a full moon by night, we observe the degree of the syzygy. By day, we observe the degree opposite the syzygy, which is the degree of the luminary above the horizon (in that case the Sun).
4. Observe the degree at the approximate time of the nativity, and give a point to any of the following planets with rulership over the degree at the time of birth (see http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Ptolemy/Tetrabiblos/3A*.html#note9)

OJUpA8e.png


5. Give a point to any planet in the same sign as the degree or in sign with some aspect (sextile, square, trine or opposition) to it.
6. If one star is familiar with the degree in all or most of these ways, whatever degree of its sign it is passing at the time of birth, the same numerical degree is rising (Asc) or culminating (Mc) at the time of birth.
7. If two or more stars are predominators, observe the one that is closer to the approximate time. If it so happens that we do not have the nearest hour of birth, we can establish it through combination of accidental qualities. The foregoing rectification is for time with approximate hour.
 

petosiris

Banned
I took a course in statistics but I don't have a mind for it. I have to go after it in other ways. Maybe there's a statistics book for non-math folks. Just curious why you thought to mention that 1-2% isn't statistically significant an increase. What were you referring to? Oh and thanks for the link! That's helpful and interesting!

I meant that small increases in very large samples that are statistically significant are nevertheless impractical in common astrological practice with a client. Like having Mars in the 12th or 9th in relation to eminent athletes - how do I use the Mars effect in any meaningful way for a random person?
 

Harmelia

Well-known member
I meant that small increases in very large samples that are statistically significant are nevertheless impractical in common astrological practice with a client. Like having Mars in the 12th or 9th in relation to eminent athletes - how do I use the Mars effect in any meaningful way for a random person?


Thank you! Yes, I agree. You cannot apply findings in a study to client readings.
 
Last edited:

Osamenor

Staff member
Like having Mars in the 12th or 9th in relation to eminent athletes - how do I use the Mars effect in any meaningful way for a random person?

If the random person is asking whether they have potential to become an eminent athlete, and they're young enough and able bodied enough for that to be a realistic possibility, you can tell them about the Mars effect. Otherwise, that particular meaning of Mars in the 9th or 12th probably isn't relevant. Instead, if you're looking at their Mars, you'd be thinking about the other meanings of Mars and which ones do seem to apply to them.

Also, most people experience eminence on a small scale. Maybe this random person doesn't become a world famous sports star, but they do become the star of their local league. Local fame is much more common than world fame, and the astrological markers would be the same.
 
Top