Astrologers' Community  

Go Back   Astrologers' Community > General Astrology > Natal Astrology

Natal Astrology A place to discuss yours and others' birth charts (after you post your own birth chart interpretation). Includes psychological and relocation astrology, houses, aspects, and planetary dignity and debility.


Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #176  
Unread 02-02-2012, 05:49 AM
dr. farr dr. farr is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: los angeles california
Posts: 12,474
Re: Sidereal Astrology is More Accurate

In my opinion the Hitler sidereal delineation was very accurate: BUT SO IS THE EXTENSIVE HITLER TROPICAL DELINEATION,found in several of his books, by pioneer Modernist Charles Carter. In fact, there a numerous points of agreement between the tropical Carter delineation (done in the 1930's and further with progression analysis, in the 1950's) and the sidereal anaylsis found in this thread. Why do both contain much accuracy, if one matrix is right and the other matrix is wrong? ANSWER: because neither is right and neither is wrong, because IN EXPERT HANDS correct indications can be determined through EITHER whole system model (my opinion)
Me? I prefer the tropical model, but I simply have seen to much + evidence to knock the sidereal model.

And, with that, I withdraw from participation in this thread....

Reply With Quote
  #177  
Unread 02-02-2012, 12:37 PM
intense_M intense_M is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 15
Re: Sidereal Astrology is More Accurate

Im Capricorn both in tropic and sidereal
__________________
[/chart][/chart]

Last edited by intense_M; 06-10-2012 at 08:47 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #178  
Unread 02-02-2012, 03:55 PM
retinoid's Avatar
retinoid retinoid is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Boston area
Posts: 1,648
Re: Sidereal Astrology is More Accurate

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rebel Uranian View Post
@retinoid - Moon and Venus are the "watery" or cold and wet planets, so look how powerful they are to know how watery you are.

I wish I could say that I was my tropical chart, but I'm not and anyways I sufficiently like who I am.
They're both in sagittarius (in tropical and sidereal) and both are posited in the 8th house conjunct each other and Uranus. So Idk how 'watery' that is.
Reply With Quote
  #179  
Unread 02-02-2012, 04:38 PM
Munch Munch is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Seattle, Wa USA
Posts: 1,152
Re: Sidereal Astrology is More Accurate

It occurs to me that almost any and all systems of astrology will be accurate if you actually use it correctly. All charts have major themes that will jump out repeatedly in different ways. Maybe you just catch these themes via different methods but its always there. Just a thought.
__________________
I am what I am. - Popeye



Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Munch For This Useful Post:
serafin5 (06-05-2014)
  #180  
Unread 02-02-2012, 04:49 PM
kennedyrosewhith kennedyrosewhith is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Pennsylvania, USA
Posts: 117
Send a message via MSN to kennedyrosewhith
Re: Sidereal Astrology is More Accurate

I agree, Munch. I think that the solar system and universe has its own pattern, and these various systems of astrology are just ways to define that pattern. Every system should come to the same conclusion, because they're all trying to describe the same pattern, but since they do it in different ways, they reach that same conclusion in different ways.
Reply With Quote
  #181  
Unread 02-02-2012, 09:56 PM
Rebel Uranian's Avatar
Rebel Uranian Rebel Uranian is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: My natural habitat
Posts: 2,090
Re: Sidereal Astrology is More Accurate

Quote:
Originally Posted by kennedyrosewhith View Post
I agree, Munch. I think that the solar system and universe has its own pattern, and these various systems of astrology are just ways to define that pattern. Every system should come to the same conclusion, because they're all trying to describe the same pattern, but since they do it in different ways, they reach that same conclusion in different ways.
...The problem is that they don't, hence the title.
Reply With Quote
  #182  
Unread 02-03-2012, 02:49 AM
kennedyrosewhith kennedyrosewhith is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Pennsylvania, USA
Posts: 117
Send a message via MSN to kennedyrosewhith
Re: Sidereal Astrology is More Accurate

We haven't reached a conclusion on that, have we?
Reply With Quote
  #183  
Unread 02-03-2012, 05:29 AM
Munch Munch is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Seattle, Wa USA
Posts: 1,152
Re: Sidereal Astrology is More Accurate

No, we haven't. Not empirically anyway. Not yet.
__________________
I am what I am. - Popeye



Reply With Quote
  #184  
Unread 05-28-2012, 10:02 PM
antago antago is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 7
Re: Sidereal Astrology is More Accurate

First, I'd like to point out that heliocentric sounds interesting—when you take into account it represents objects encircling the life force of the solar system.

However, suggesting that a geocentric belief system is what caused the initial interpretation of astrology to begin with is not the case—just because you can equate a geocentric ideology with a marking of celestial positions in the sky encircling the earth the day you were born does not merit the idea that the positions these objects are in, relative to your physical body, are somehow untrue.

Astrology is a mapping of the rhythms the various placements of gravitational and energetic patterns imprinted into the evolution of life on earth; when you are mapping an astrological body to a particular constellation, it is higher art form of the superconscious species—the spirit manifest. Here the subconscious and soul begins to orient itself to the patterns and stories being told; first by subjecting itself to studies, interpretations, myths, ideas, and actual patterns with facts. Secondly, it subjects itself to living tales, tries and truths, and the explosion of practice. Thirdly, it initiates systems which themselves become their own form of art—or a fashion of personality ... A fashion of meaning, purpose, and the soul. And finally, the evolution and progression of ideas within these systems become opportunities for the spirit before entering into this realm via the cosmos—subjecting itself to the subconscious art and styles of the species itself.


I would say, living in the west, a man is subject to three systems: One, a local, ancient system nearly superficial but deeply powerful. You could call this tropical. Two, a man is subject to a global system, more accurate and in rising above to modern times. This more of who he actually is, although he possesses and embodies both. The dominant signs themselves become like cosmic genes of sorts, intermixing and overlapping at times the weaker signs. As with the eye color of the physical body, a recessive blue with a dominant brown will be expressed Blue under Brown; when you laser the brown layer of cornea off, your eye will appear blue underneath. It is the dominant pattern which is the ultimate image and power. Or with skin color, they tend to just blend.

I'm sure you can imagine all sorts of beautiful expressions and magnificent cosmic patterns, just as some black people are born with bright green eyes, sometimes the cosmic gene pool of signs expresses strange, abnormal beauties.

Still, sidereal itself is out of date—and you'll find there is also a much more accurate method of discovering the true placement of astrological bodies. The title? Good old astronomy itself. There is an astronomy website which outlines the boundaries of each constellation and displays the moon, planets, sun, and stars in their rightful positions relative the viewpoint of earth given the date and time you input along with your latitude and longitude:
http://www.fourmilab.ch/cgi-bin/Yoursky

Using realtime astronomy will give you the universal aspect of your cosmic self. There are some humans whose souls are explicitly local—the global and universal chart is weak for them, so they stick precisely to western tropical zodiac because that is what they are able to comprehend. There are some humans which are strictly global—they deny western and universal; they need order and they need a system ... yet they believe in a more accurate or eastern philosophy, so they identify sidereally. Then there are those who are universal—they know the true placement of objects and are concerned about it. They realize the patterns in collective consciousness and accept all the systems, delving into them and appreciating what each one truly says about their selves. They know that whatever they choose to express, who they choose to become, or what creations they spread on this planet will all be born from those energetic powerhouses beaming within the rhythms of the galaxy and far beyond, outlined in the constellations.

Last edited by antago; 05-28-2012 at 10:07 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #185  
Unread 05-29-2012, 03:23 AM
dr. farr dr. farr is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: los angeles california
Posts: 12,474
Re: Sidereal Astrology is More Accurate

Some followers of anthroposophy do use astronomical parameters in their approach to astrology (anthroposophical astrology)
Reply With Quote
  #186  
Unread 06-02-2014, 11:44 PM
Arena Arena is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 1,138
Re: Sidereal Astrology is More Accurate

Quote:
Originally Posted by JUPITERASC View Post
Thank you for your kind words Raquel! I personally would not classify myself as a teacher so I regard this as a great compliment and I am grateful to you for it! I have a tremendous interest in the subject so I love to read the many different ideas relating to it and I am happy to have discussion with anyone in order to clarify the many intriguing puzzles of astrology not only for myself, but also for all parties to the discussion
I'd like to tell you the same thing as Raquel because I agree with her.
You do appear in this forum as a teacher and your approach is very "teacherishy".

I see from older posts that you've also been looking for your own ASC sign (as I am) and I am guessing you've found it by now - may I ask you what was your conclusion and how you came to it?

Last edited by Arena; 06-03-2014 at 12:13 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #187  
Unread 06-03-2014, 12:34 AM
The Ram's Avatar
The Ram The Ram is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: The outer limits
Posts: 413
Re: Sidereal Astrology is More Accurate

The interesting thing to me is that they both work and are both accurate. The real issue is figuring out which system works better for what.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to The Ram For This Useful Post:
JUPITERASC (06-03-2014)
  #188  
Unread 06-03-2014, 12:52 AM
JUPITERASC's Avatar
JUPITERASC JUPITERASC is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 50,385
Re: Sidereal Astrology is More Accurate

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Ram View Post
The interesting thing to me is that they both work and are both accurate.
The real issue is figuring out which system works better for what.
Wise words
__________________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82p-D...eature=related Hippocrates Let food be your medicine: let medicine be your food. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvz9uSK3zXo Rosencrantz & Guildenstern are Dead Tom Stoppard http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KchhSIVwMdY Every exit is an entrance to somewhere else. VETTIUS VALENS FREE http://www.csus.edu/indiv/r/rileymt/...s%20entire.pdf
Reply With Quote
  #189  
Unread 06-03-2014, 01:00 AM
Arena Arena is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 1,138
Re: Sidereal Astrology is More Accurate

The red writing in the quote is all mine.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shanti View Post
Thanks for the link Jupiterasc..
I have not seen the site before.


This is an interpretation of sidereal Aries Sun (Hitler).

Quote:Jim Eshelman site:

http://www.solunars.com/interp/signs/sun.htm
  • YES PROBABLY - ACTION-ORIENTED. Active, dynamic, impatient. Perpetual adolescents.
  • WE SIMPLY DO NOT KNOW IF HE WAS Cyclothymic or cycloidal (manic-depressive), though not necessarily financially (as was suggested by Manilius)....but here is an interesting article about him possibly being manic-depressive: http://articles.baltimoresun.com/199...tyrants-stalin
  • OH YES INDEED HE WAS Political. Power-hungry, rather than like Sagittarius social climbers. Need to control and play leader.
  • YES PROBABLY - At home in business/commercial world of “money-power.”
  • OH YES INDEED HE WAS THE TYPE THAT Must be a leader in whichever situation, either highly orthodox or highly unorthodox. Many disrupt the status quo, revel in their nonconformity, and boost their own egos by causing social disturbances. Capricious.
  • YES PROBABLY HE DID -Express opinions unhesitantly, honestly, and frequently. Polemical. “Bold in their opinions” (Firmicus). Will not mince words. “Unhindered by modesty” (Manilius). Directness may leave hurt feelings at times.
  • HMMM - IF SOME HISTORICAL FIGURE HAD THIS TRAIT IT WAS HITLER : Often lack the capacity for empathy, thus insensitive to the feelings or moods of others.
  • PROBABLY HE DID HAVE AN “Image problem” expressed either as overt insecurity or blatant overstressed ego. “Uncertain hearts in trembling bosoms” (Manilius).
  • INDEED HE WAS Very sensitive to criticism. Rarely admits own mistakes. Slow to retreat or apologize.
  • I CAN'T SAY - “Hates to be under an obligation” (Gleadow). Fears indebtedness, does not want gratitude to be expected of him/her.
  • HE PROBABLY WAS VERY Analytical, objective, utilitarian. “Immediacy with a practical touch.” Theory must be made practical. Resourceful.
  • NO DOUBT ABOUT THIS ONE - Violent deaths, suicides, accident-prone.
  • I WAS NEVER IN SUCH CLOSE ENCOUNTER WITH THE MAN SO CAN'T SAY IF HE WAS, BUT IT WOULD NOT SURPRISE ME AT ALL - Many are romantically aggressive, “wants action.” – Once settled, very faithful.
  • HIS FAMILY SENSE WAS PROBABLY DESTROYED WHEN HE WAS A CHILD GROWING UP IN HIS VIOLENT HOME - Strong family sense. Takes great pride in own children. May lean toward extravagance with loved ones.
It is indeed interesting to read so many threads in this forum and being sometimes surprised to see how people can actually "see" things differently.

I am currently looking into and studying what I can find online about sidereal just to see if it does makes sense to me and I prefer now to study other people's charts because in my own chart I might find more difficulties. I just studied a close friend of mine and sidereal seems to fit her better than tropical. I need to study more charts.

Currently I am looking into my partner's chart and I've not yet decided. I need to study more charts.

BUT in the case of Hitler, I find it actually a very very very strange thing that people can look back at history and the time Hitler came to power and actually come to the conclusion that he was NOT Arian/Marsian. If anybody in the history of last century would have been likely to have an Aries stellium of personal planets like he does in his sidereal chart - it would have been Hitler. I am not saying that he had no other traits than Arian, it is well known that he loved arts and did express that. Neptune gives artistic talent and interest, being placed in Venus' sign of Taurus could well explain artistic inclinations.

I am not putting up a fight about Hitler here, I am just putting forward the view I have of this historical figure - and knowing the dark side of Aries/Mars the great malefic and seeing that it squares Saturn, the other great malefic in the chart does not surprise me at all. And it would not surprise me to find many people in the astro world agreeing that his Mars is more likely to be at home in Aries and therefore having Venus under it's control ... rather than like the tropical suggests, that Mars is ruled by Venus in tropical chart. Those are just logical assumptions, not because I want to advocate one system over the other. I am just capable of being objective as I have not yet decided on a system and want to keep my eyes and ears and all senses open to them both for the time being.

Last edited by Arena; 06-03-2014 at 01:05 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #190  
Unread 06-05-2014, 12:11 PM
greybeard greybeard is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Rural Idaho
Posts: 3,527
Re: Sidereal Astrology is More Accurate

This, posted by Jupasc, is inaccurate information:

"There are two zodiacs. The Sidereal zodiac is a physical reality depicting commonly acknowledged pictures made up of groups of stars used by astronomers, Vedic and Sidereal astrologers.

The Tropical zodiac is a mathematical construct used by astrologers only.
"

The constellations are used by astronomers to identify stars [e.g., alpha Centauri], but the zodiac used by astronomers the world over is the tropical, not the sidereal.

If the tropical zodiac is a mathematical construct (it is), then so is the sidereal. The sole difference between these two systems of measurement is in their point of beginning. In all other respects they are the same. The sidereal zodiac is not a "physical reality," nor is it "a group of pictures."

[deleted attacking comment - Moderator

Here's what http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zodiac#In_modern_astronomy says:
The zodiac is a spherical celestial coordinate system [i.e., a system of measurement]. It designates the ecliptic as its fundamental plane and the position of the Sun at Vernal equinox as its prime meridian. [The "designation" is arbitrary].

In astronomy, the zodiacal constellations are a convenient way of marking the ecliptic (the Sun's path across the sky) and the path of the moon and planets along the ecliptic. Modern astronomy still uses tropical coordinates for predicting the positions the Sun, Moon, and planets, except longitude in the ecliptic coordinate system is numbered from 0° to 360°, not 0° to 30° within each sign. Longitude within individual signs was still being used as late as 1740 by Jacques Cassini in his Tables astronomiques.

Unlike the zodiac signs in astrology, which are all thirty degrees in length, the astronomical constellations vary widely in size. The boundaries of all the constellations in the sky were set by the International Astronomical Union (IAU) in 1930. This was, in essence, a mapping exercise to make the work of astronomers more efficient, and the boundaries of the constellations are not therefore in any meaningful sense an 'equivalent' to the zodiac signs. Along with the twelve original constellations, the boundaries of a thirteenth constellation, Ophiuchus (the serpent bearer), were set by astronomers within the bounds of the zodiac.


Note: The Wikipedia article is wrong in saying that "the zodiac is a spherical celestial coordinate system." The zodiacal signs (degrees) are one element of a bipartite system, not the system itself. In order to locate a celestial body using a coordinate system, you must have not only celestial longitude (zodiacal sign and degree), but also celestial latitude. Two other commonly used celestial coordinate systems employ right ascension/declination and azimuth/altitude. The latter two systems "designate" the equator and the local horizon (respectively) as their fundamental planes, rather than the ecliptic.

All three celestial coordinate systems specify the location of a celestial body very accurately and equally well (taking into account the frames of reference), in exactly the same way that both zodiacs do (in regard to longitude). I will say it again (and again and again): A zodiac is a system of spatial measurement, long and short. That the signs have acquired "astrological meaning" is quite apart from the original purpose, which was as a system of measurement. All systems of measurement, celestial or otherwise, must rely on at least one arbitrary measurement. In the zodiac(s) that arbitrary measurement is the point of beginning (zero Aries). Modern astronomers use right ascension as their preferred measurement of celestial longitude -- and right ascension is measured from tropical zero Aries, not sidereal. [http://csep10.phys.utk.edu/astr161/l...rdinates.html]

And here is a Stupid Question, directed at those folks who advocate the heliocentric system for natal astrology. If we establish a colony on Mars and a baby is born there, should we use a geocentric, a heliocentric or a marticentric chart for this baby's birth?

Last edited by wilsontc; 06-05-2014 at 04:01 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #191  
Unread 06-05-2014, 08:34 PM
JUPITERASC's Avatar
JUPITERASC JUPITERASC is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 50,385
Re: Sidereal Astrology is More Accurate

Quote:
Originally Posted by greybeard View Post
This, posted by Jupasc, is inaccurate information:

"There are two zodiacs. The Sidereal zodiac is a physical reality depicting commonly acknowledged pictures made up of groups of stars used by astronomers, Vedic and Sidereal astrologers.

The Tropical zodiac is a mathematical construct used by astrologers only.
"

The constellations are used by astronomers to identify stars [e.g., alpha Centauri], but the zodiac used by astronomers the world over is the tropical, not the sidereal.

If the tropical zodiac is a mathematical construct (it is), then so is the sidereal.

The sole difference between these two systems of measurement is in their point of beginning.

In all other respects they are the same.


The sidereal zodiac is not a "physical reality," nor is it "a group of pictures."

[deleted attacking comment - Moderator
It is the above comment that contains misleading information

THIS THREAD IS AN ASTROLOGICAL DISCUSSION

and

Specifically is a discussion on
SIDEREAL astrology
as compared with
TROPICAL astrology


THE TROPICAL ZODIAC IN USE BY ASTROLOGERS

differs from
i.e.
is NOT 'the same as'

THE SIDEREAL ZODIAC IN USE BY ASTROLOGERS


MY COMMENTS ARE EASILY VERIFIED
by simply creating a Tropical chart for the first day of Spring
using the Extended Chart Selection Page of astro.com

and making a comparison with

a Sidereal chart for the first day of Spring

and noting the obvious differences



0º Aries as understood by Tropical Astrologers
is incontrovertibly based on the following premise:

i.e. that

'The moment when the Sun crosses the Equator
whilst moving northbound along the Ecliptic'
recurs each year at the same degree of
0º Aries

HOWEVER

It is patently obvious if
- while using suitable eye protection -
one views the actual local skies from any vantage point located anywhere on planet Earth on 'the first day of Spring'
AT THE PRECISE MOMENT THE SUN APPARENTLY CROSSES THE EQUATOR WHILST MOVING NORTHBOUND ALONG THE ECLIPTIC
that the constellation rising AT THAT MOMENT
is most definitely NOT the constellation of ARIES
but instead
DUE TO PRECESSION
is in fact the constellation known as PISCES

in fact
it is only approximately every twenty six thousand years
that
the Sun crosses the Equator whilst moving northbound along the ecliptic at 0º Aries



so
it is only
every twenty six thousand years
that the Tropical and Sidereal Zodiacs temporarily are aligned
and BOTH show the sun crossing the Ecliptic at 0º Aries

HOWEVER

thereafter
for another twenty six thousand years approximately
with reference to the Spring Equinox
The Tropical and Sidereal Zodiac continue to 'drift apart'


Check out “HISTORY OF THE ZODIAC”
- an in-depth exploration of the origins of the Babylonian Zodiac and its location in the ecliptic -
which reveals that the division of the ecliptic into tropical astrological signs
was originally a derivation of Euctemon's tropical Calendar of Seasons (432 B.C.)



QUOTE

"...dividing the solar year into twelve equal months
commencing with the vernal equinox
in which each solar (tropical) month
is named after one of each of the twelve signs..." Dr. Robert Powel
l
http://www.amazon.com/History-Zodiac.../dp/1597311529


TROPICAL ZODIAC is SEASONAL CALENDAR
the key point being that the signs of the original sidereal zodiac
each thirty degrees long
coincide closely with the twelve astronomical constellations of the same name
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82p-D...eature=related

Quote:
Originally Posted by greybeard View Post
Here's what http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zodiac#In_modern_astronomy says:
The zodiac is a spherical celestial coordinate system [i.e., a system of measurement]. It designates the ecliptic as its fundamental plane and the position of the Sun at Vernal equinox as its prime meridian. [The "designation" is arbitrary].

In astronomy, the zodiacal constellations are a convenient way of marking the ecliptic (the Sun's path across the sky) and the path of the moon and planets along the ecliptic. Modern astronomy still uses tropical coordinates for predicting the positions the Sun, Moon, and planets, except longitude in the ecliptic coordinate system is numbered from 0° to 360°, not 0° to 30° within each sign. Longitude within individual signs was still being used as late as 1740 by Jacques Cassini in his Tables astronomiques.

Unlike the zodiac signs in astrology, which are all thirty degrees in length, the astronomical constellations vary widely in size. The boundaries of all the constellations in the sky were set by the International Astronomical Union (IAU) in 1930. This was, in essence, a mapping exercise to make the work of astronomers more efficient, and the boundaries of the constellations are not therefore in any meaningful sense an 'equivalent' to the zodiac signs. Along with the twelve original constellations, the boundaries of a thirteenth constellation, Ophiuchus (the serpent bearer), were set by astronomers within the bounds of the zodiac.


Note: The Wikipedia article is wrong in saying that "the zodiac is a spherical celestial coordinate system." The zodiacal signs (degrees) are one element of a bipartite system, not the system itself. In order to locate a celestial body using a coordinate system, you must have not only celestial longitude (zodiacal sign and degree), but also celestial latitude. Two other commonly used celestial coordinate systems employ right ascension/declination and azimuth/altitude. The latter two systems "designate" the equator and the local horizon (respectively) as their fundamental planes, rather than the ecliptic.

All three celestial coordinate systems specify the location of a celestial body very accurately and equally well (taking into account the frames of reference), in exactly the same way that both zodiacs do (in regard to longitude). I will say it again (and again and again): A zodiac is a system of spatial measurement, long and short. That the signs have acquired "astrological meaning" is quite apart from the original purpose, which was as a system of measurement. All systems of measurement, celestial or otherwise, must rely on at least one arbitrary measurement. In the zodiac(s) that arbitrary measurement is the point of beginning (zero Aries). Modern astronomers use right ascension as their preferred measurement of celestial longitude -- and right ascension is measured from tropical zero Aries, not sidereal. [http://csep10.phys.utk.edu/astr161/l...rdinates.html]

And here is a Stupid Question, directed at those folks who advocate the heliocentric system for natal astrology. If we establish a colony on Mars and a baby is born there, should we use a geocentric, a heliocentric or a marticentric chart for this baby's birth?
The SIGNS of the ASTROLOGICAL TROPICAL ZODIAC
are defined in relation to the vernal point
and so
now have no direct relationship to the corresponding zodiacal constellations
having drifted westwards
and
the Vernal Point is currently visible at Sidereal Pisces
NOT Tropical Aries
owing to the precession of the equinoxes
__________________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82p-D...eature=related Hippocrates Let food be your medicine: let medicine be your food. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvz9uSK3zXo Rosencrantz & Guildenstern are Dead Tom Stoppard http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KchhSIVwMdY Every exit is an entrance to somewhere else. VETTIUS VALENS FREE http://www.csus.edu/indiv/r/rileymt/...s%20entire.pdf
Reply With Quote
  #192  
Unread 06-05-2014, 10:05 PM
greybeard greybeard is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Rural Idaho
Posts: 3,527
Re: Sidereal Astrology is More Accurate

I am aware of the effects of precession.

I can walk outdoors tonight and show you, without hesitation, the constellations of Gemini, Cancer, Leo, Virgo, Libra and Scorpio, along with the planets Jupiter, Mars and Saturn. I can visually trace the ecliptic so that you will be able to envision it. I can show you the location of the MC and the Asc. I tell you this so that you will understand that I know the sky through a half-century of watching it, its motions, its wonderful beauty. Although books helped me learn about the sky, I learned about it by looking and pondering.

I know the difference between tropical signs and constellations. I can show you both in the actual sky. It is an interesting fact that the ancient astronomers learned about the sky in much the same way that I have.

All I did was point out inaccuracies in your quoted statement. I provided "authority" other than my own for reference. I stand by my claim that your statements are inaccurate and mislead beginning students of astrology -- making claims for the sidereal zodiac that are simply not true.

It is not my purpose or intention to engage in argument with you or any other siderealist. I have said repeatedly that both zodiacs are legitimate -- they both work.

The constellations and the sidereal signs are not the same. You apparently believe they are.

And you don't understand precession and how it is taken into account by both sidereal and tropical zodiacs....or you would not adopt such a dogmatic stance.

I use the tropical zodiac for reasons both astronomical and philosophical. Over 40 years of hands-on experience have demonstrated its reliability in delineation.

The title of this thread is "Sidereal Astrology is More Accurate", which is not true. If you wish to prove that it IS TRUE, I would be quite happy to engage in an "interpretive competition" with you. I will use the tropical zodiac and you the sidereal, and we will interpret the chart of someone unknown to us both...and see if sidereal astrology is more accurate. [deleted attacking comments - Moderator]

Last edited by wilsontc; 10-13-2014 at 04:33 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #193  
Unread 06-06-2014, 12:11 AM
JUPITERASC's Avatar
JUPITERASC JUPITERASC is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 50,385
Re: Sidereal Astrology is More Accurate

[deleted quote of previous posting - Moderator]

These dubious INFERENCES
are based on your skewed interpretations
and are opinions based on matters you have misunderstood
Quote:
Originally Posted by greybeard View Post

I use the tropical zodiac for reasons both astronomical and philosophical. Over 40 years of hands-on experience have demonstrated its reliability in delineation.
And long may you continue so to do
although
quite clearly
you are aware that many astrologers with an equal number of years of experience as yourself
prefer to use the Sidereal Zodiac
Nothing wrong with that
Astrologers differ
Each to their own

Quote:
Originally Posted by greybeard View Post

The title of this thread is "Sidereal Astrology is More Accurate", which is not true.

If you wish to prove that it IS TRUE,
I would be quite happy to engage in an "interpretive competition" with you.
I will use the tropical zodiac and you the sidereal,
and we will interpret the chart of someone unknown to us both...
and see if sidereal astrology is more accurate.
It's called "putting your money where your mouth is."
Are you game?
By the way
notice that
the OP of this thread is Rebel Uranian

Rebel Uranian no longer posts and has not posted for some time

Clearly
it is Rebel Uranian's contention that Sidereal Astrology is More Accurate


I simply have contributed to this thread
on an interesting subject
and highlighted the differences between Sidereal and Tropical

and
the reasons for those differences



You apparently view this amicable discussion as some form of competition
and have a need to prove that you are 'right
'



If you are so keen to prove your argument
then check out
Jim Ershelman
- here's a link to a sidereal forum where you can debate the issue
http://solunars.net/


Keep in mind that on 29 January 2012,
more than two years ago,
I posted a thread at
http://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum...ad.php?t=45515 on which I commented as follows:

Quote:
Originally Posted by JUPITERASC View Post
IMO it is common knowledge that at that ancient time when most people thought the universe was a living being,
it was "The Norm" to imagine tiny points of light they saw in the night sky as being grouped into separate, distinct sets of 'Images'.

These 'Images' were made up of separate stars which
- in the opinion of the ancient people of this planet -
seemed to be grouped together.
Thousands of years ago, on various parts of the planet Earth,
different cultures imaginatively 'connected the dots' of the tiny points of light that they thought were close to each other
and personified them as 'Mythical Beings'
and narrated stories about the lives of these Mythical Beings.

The Mythical Beings and the stories of their lives varied from culture to culture.
Different cultures imagined different images in the patterns of the stars of the night sky.
The ancient people of this planet did not know that these tiny points of light were hundreds
- perhaps even thousands -
of light years distant from each other
.

THE FOLLOWING IS A QUOTE FROM WIDIPEDIA

Former constellations are constellations that are no longer recognized by the International Astronomical Union for various reasons. Many of these constellations existed for long periods of time, even centuries in many cases, which means they still have a large historical value and can be found on older star charts.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Former_constellations


THE FOLLOWING ENCAPSULATED INFORMATION MAY BE FOUND AT
http://www.physics.csbsju.edu/astro/...ation.faq.html


The oldest description of the constellations as we know them comes from a poem called Phaenomena written by Greek poet Aratus 270 B.C. and it is clear from the poem that the constellations mentioned originated long before Aratus' time. Some detective work reveals a plausible origin. Firstly, Aratus' constellations excluded any near the south celestial pole because that was always below the horizon of the ancient constellation-makers. From the size of this uncharted area of the sky, we can determine that the people responsible for the original constellations lived near a latitude of 36° north which is south of Greece and north of Egypt but similar to the latitude of the ancient Babylonians and Sumerians.


Because of a "wobble" of the Earth's axis of rotation, the position of the celestial poles changes slowly with time - which is a phenomenon known as precession. The constellation-free zone is not centered exactly on the south celestial pole, instead the uncharted area is centered on the place in the sky where the south celestial pole would have been around the year 2000 B.C. This date matches the time of the Babylonians and Sumerians. So it seems likely that the Greek constellations originated with the Sumerians and Babylonians. From there, knowledge of the constellations somehow made its way to Egypt - perhaps through the Minoans on Crete who had contact with the Babylonians and settled in Egypt after an explosive volcanic eruption destroyed their civilization, and from there early Greek scholars first heard about the constellations and wrote about them.

When most ancient cultures looked at the night sky they saw 'pictures' aka 'Images' in the stars. The earliest known efforts to catalogue the stars date to cuneiform texts (i.e. Sumerian/Babylonian/Assyrian texts and artefacts
)and artefacts dating back roughly 6000 years. These remnants, found in the valley of the Euphrates River, suggest that the ancients observing the heavens saw the lion, the bull, and the scorpion in the stars.

here's a link to an interesting British Museum web page regarding the origins of writing in Mesopotamia

http://www.mesopotamia.co.uk/writing/story/sto_set.html
Quote:
Originally Posted by JUPITERASC View Post
QUOTE


'…..man did not see pictures in the night skies
and then circumscribe the constellations
according to artistic vision.
Instead
man noted that people born when certain groupings of stars were rising
or setting
or directly overhead
exhibited certain characteristics in common


These characteristics seemed animalistic,
bird like,
aquatic
heroic
or ultra humanistic.

Once this correlation was made,
the symbolic mind of man
assigned SHAPE to groupings of stars
for easy reference.

Some shapes were earthly, human

some creative fantasies

but each shape or constellation
represented symbolically
THE OBSERVED EFFECTS OF THAT GROUP OF STARS
when manifested in the life of a person...' Robert Huntz Granite
__________________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82p-D...eature=related Hippocrates Let food be your medicine: let medicine be your food. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvz9uSK3zXo Rosencrantz & Guildenstern are Dead Tom Stoppard http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KchhSIVwMdY Every exit is an entrance to somewhere else. VETTIUS VALENS FREE http://www.csus.edu/indiv/r/rileymt/...s%20entire.pdf

Last edited by wilsontc; 10-13-2014 at 04:34 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #194  
Unread 10-12-2014, 08:53 PM
heycutie heycutie is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Choe View Post
What's really absurd to me is that astrology uses the geocentric theory, sidereal or tropical whatever,the astronomical truth is that heliocentric theory is the science,and yet astrology is based on geocentric! That's the whole comedy.

I'm not sure though, maybe Vedics or other astrologies use heliocentric?
Because the natal chart is about our existence on planet earth. Since we live on the planet earth, it makes sense for it to be geocentric. Heliocentricity only makes sense if we live on the sun.
Reply With Quote
  #195  
Unread 03-27-2018, 08:56 PM
JUPITERASC's Avatar
JUPITERASC JUPITERASC is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 50,385
Re: Sidereal Astrology is More Accurate


Meanwhile back at the ranch
six years have passed
since RebelUranian commenced this discussion
on 01-19-2012 at 09:31 PM
and today
for those with an interest in the topic
we have the following UPDATE
with a comment for which many thanks to petosiris

Quote:
Originally Posted by petosiris View Post

Argument 1: Appeal to Antiquity
• The Sidereal Zodiac was the original form of sign division.
• Also the dominant form of sign division for the first thousand years of western astrology.
• Virtually all of the Babylonian and most of Hellenistic astrologers in Antiquity used it.
- Nechepso and Petosiris, Thrasyllus, Teucer of Babylon, Balbilus, Manilius, Dorotheus of Sidon, Vettius Valens.
• Even used by late Hellenistic and early Persian and Arabic astrologers
- ''Palchus'', Masha’allah.

Argument 2: Many Core Sign Significations Are Derived from the Sidereal Zodiac
• Since it was the original system, many of the core significations of the signs were originally developed within the framework of the sidereal zodiac.
• Even though many of these significations are still attributed to the signs today due to tradition, many of them only make sense conceptually in the context of the sidereal zodiac.
• This is due to the connection between the signs and the constellations, as the signs clearly originate after the imagery of the constellations.

Argument 3: The Shift to the Tropical Zodiac Was Sudden and Not Well-Considered
• ''Palchus'' and Masha’alah still used a sidereal zodiac.
• Ptolemy is the originator of the tropical zodiac who is definitely not nearly as cool as the ancient Babylonians and Egyptians.

Why Did Ptolemy decide to implement the Tropical Zodiac In Astrology?
• Almagest (Geocentric and Northern Hemisphere Temperate Climate) naturalistic thinking which today is proven beyond any doubt to be total BS conceptualization of how the universe works.
• The two zodiacs roughly coincided at his time which made it easier to mislead, like a Trojan Horse.

Argument 4: Solves a Longstanding Dispute
• The media and scientists no longer troll astrology.
• Astrologers frequently have poor reasons for favoring the tropical zodiac.
– “It works for me.” or “It is the one that Rudhyar/Alan Leo/Lilly used.”

Argument 5: Easily Testable
• Such radically different approach is very easy to test.

Argument 6: Still the Primary Form of Sign Division in India
• Hellenistic astrology was transmitted to India in the 2nd century CE.
• Merged with the indigenous form of astrology based on the nakshatras to create what they have today.
• They have had a more stable transmission that we have had in the west in the past 2000 years.
• As a result of this the Sidereal Zodiac is still the primary form of sign division used amongst Indian astrologers to this day.

Argument 7: It Was Used in the Earliest Texts on Initiations like Questions
• Dorotheus of Sidon wrote the most influential text on initiations by travelling and compiling Egyptian and Babylonian ideas.
• One of the earliest complete text on questions that has survived was written by Masha’allah.

Inspired by
http://theastrologypodcast.com/wp-co...ign-houses.pdf
__________________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82p-D...eature=related Hippocrates Let food be your medicine: let medicine be your food. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvz9uSK3zXo Rosencrantz & Guildenstern are Dead Tom Stoppard http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KchhSIVwMdY Every exit is an entrance to somewhere else. VETTIUS VALENS FREE http://www.csus.edu/indiv/r/rileymt/...s%20entire.pdf
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
accurate, astrology, sidereal

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Is Sidereal Astrology more accurate than Tropical? outerhaven.6 Houses & cusps 108 01-10-2019 08:12 AM
Natal rulers vs. Natural Rulers serena Houses & cusps 77 01-14-2013 01:31 AM
Sidereal vs tropical Yoi Natal Astrology 178 02-07-2012 03:52 AM
Sidereal Time Of Birth or Civil Time Of Birth? Capricornius_Aquarius Read My Chart 9 01-24-2012 01:54 AM



All times are GMT. The time now is 10:16 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2005-2018, AstrologyWeekly.com. Boards' structure and all posts are property of AstrologyWeekly.com and their respective creators. No part of the messages sent on these boards may be copied without their owners' explicit consent.