What is chart rectification?

Dirius said:

This is all very beautiful and well written.

However, can you prove 24 hour rectification?

Click to expand...

Nobody can "prove" times in astrology, Dirius. Including in horary. We've been around and around this problem multiple times.

However I'am skeptical of the word:"take my word for it, it exists".

Click to expand...

Who has argued this? I'd be skeptical of it, as well.

Dirius, I've linked you to multiple concrete examples and cited books for you to read. I am at a loss to fathom your "logic" that you don't/won't read the very evidence you require, yet you still argue the evidence doesn't exist!

Rather than that it would be nicer if the actual method could be produced.

Click to expand...

Dirius, I've linked you to multiple methods. Multiple times over. Please read at least some of them. Then let's talk.

Dirius, re: your post 102, I'm relieved that you are now catching up on these references.

I think you're missing the point about the astrologers you cite.

Rectification is time-consuming. Typically very time-consuming. Understandably, someone of Steven Forrest's stature (busy with workshops, seminars, publishing, consulting, and I don't know what else) decided that he no longer has the time for rectification. Chris Brennan doesn't want to take the time for 24-hour rectification. But nothing in either of their methods requires a birth time estimate. Nowhere did they state that it cannot be done.

I don't know anything about Efrein other than that she also published on event timing. The book cover lists her as an astrologer practising in New York. (1987) Her book on rectification runs to 300 pages so I can't abstract it for you, but I've got a copy and suffice it to say that in her first worked out example beginning on page 24 there is no known birth time. She starts out with 3 hypothetical charts. On pp. 113-4 she recommends that beginners start with their chart or, ideally, that of a close friend or relative with at least an approximate birth time, as a training exercise. She further mentions that someone recording an unofficial birth time may not think to record a.m. or p.m. (The 24-hour clock is still not widely used in the US and Canada. A notation like "8:00" requires a 12-hour rectification process.) She notes that you have to start somewhere in a chart, and so guessing the native's rising sign may be about as good a place to start as any; but her methods quickly take on a lot of sophistication.

This was actually how I tried to rectify my birth chart prior to finding my official birth certificate in some of my (deceased) mother's old papers. I hadn't a clue about my birth time, other than a dim memory that my mother had said something about how either the obstetrician's or my father's dinner hour was disrupted by my birth, apparently. But "dinner" could mean anything from 5:00 to 8:00 pm where I grew up in the US. ("Dinner" on a farm would be more likely to be the mid-day meal.) Both my parents and all grandparents had died prior to my taking up astrology, and since my parents had moved to our community as a new couple, I had no way of asking relatives about my birth time.

In the early 1990s I had my chart read without a birth time by a professional astrologer who told me I "looked like a Leo." (Possibly due to round eyes and blonde hair.)

This sort-of worked horoscopically, but after I got Efrein's book (in the days prior to Internet astrology,) I began working with dates. I moved up my ascendant to early Libra, which sort of worked, as well; but after I got the birth certificate, late Virgo it was. And it just made a whole lot more sense to me. So I wasn't far off, even as a novice, but of course the rising sign difference was there. Interestingly, and depending upon which house system I used, a lot of the planets stayed in the same house with the same house cusps, either way.

This is why Efrein and just about everybody else recommends working with a lot of specific dates, and not how the native feels about herself. To say I "looked like a Leo" might have reflected only my family genetics and Leo moon. I sure didn't look or act the part of "neat freak" Virgo, but once I got the degree down, I realized that with Uranus square ascendant and Neptune in the first house, there was no way I was going to appear like the stereotypical tidy Virgo. I do have a lot of Virgo personality traits, however.

When I found another document recently in a different batch of old papers that bumped my rising sign back into early Libra, I intended to get around to chart rectification eventually; but my and Bob's rectification efforts on this thread were a good validation for late Virgo rising.

None of the timed differences were more than 11 degrees apart; but again, I was only a newbie at this, had no rectification software or knowledge of tropical primary directions or anything more sophisticated.

So while I take many of your points about rectification-- from personal experience-- I think the sophistication of rectification techniques has moved on considerably in the past 20 years.

One thing I pondered from my experience is the illusory quality of house cusps. Even with a solid birth time, house cusps and even signs vary with:

1. House system used. (In my case, the difference between Placidus and whole signs is huge.)
2. Tropical or sidereal zodiac. Depending upon whom you ask, our planets would all move backwards 24 or 27 degrees; yet Vedic astrologers somehow produce good results with planets in different signs. Heck, with sidereal astrology I lose a shabby out-of-sect, no-dignity Jupiter in Capricorn and gain a Jupiter in happy Sagittarius! I lose a ho-hum moon in Leo and gain a domiciled moon in Cancer.

I've concluded that aspects are really the most important things to look at, because they won't change significantly between house or zodiac system. The tighter the orb, the more instructive, naturally.

This is why I think we also have to learn to read nativities with no birth times. Probably much more difficult in traditional astrology; although it's surprising how much we can do without times.

Yet none of this means that I dispute the principles behind rectification, or would essentially charge the fine astrologers who develop the software as being frauds or deluded, as you do indirectly.

Nobody disputes that it's best to start with at least a decent recollection of a birth time if not a record, but we start with what we've got. Which may be nothing at all.

(continued from my previous posts)

Dirius said:

-----


So far all the sources that were implied to indicate the possibility of 24-hour chart rectification services, do not do it themselves. The only option which is uncertain would be Ben Dykes, given that his rectification form is automatic, but does not provide information on what to do in case the client doesn't know the time of birth.

Many of them don't provide rectification at all.

So out of 5, only 1 "maybe". Not very good statics.

So all these authors, which are what you are using as proof, don't seem to practice it themselves (there is no evidence they practice, or provide a method for rectification on a chart without a time of birth).

I mean come on, if an author could do 24-hour rectification wouldn't he advertise it on his website with giant words??? Thousands of astrology enthusiasts would pay hundreds of dollars for their correct chart.

So far none of the sources explain "how", or show they can do it.

Click to expand...

Dirius, I think you have an "argument from false premises."

You've taken a sample of 5 websites that I offered (which you initially refused to read or view,) inferred things from them, and then based your conclusions on your misinterpretations. I just googled "horoscope rectification" and found pages of sites. Obviously it helps to have a birth time guesstimate, but maybe you can find someone who thought it was essential-- vs. simply out of keeping with his time and effort investment to do a "cold" chart rectification, but in keeping with the method itself. This huge energy investment (or possibly their limited skills) are a primary reason for requesting the client's birth estimate as a prerequisite for rectifying a chart. Interestingly, a lot of rectification services are by Indian astrologers. Maybe someone here knows what methods they use.

Furthermore, where did I cite these astrologers as "proof" of anything other than that the definition of rectification includes 24-rectification?? Look, Dirius. You don't have to like it. You don't have to think it can be done accurately. That's all cool.

But you cannot imagine that rectification applies only and narrowly to fixing up a nearly-known birth time. That you have never stated the source of your belief for this, despite repeated requests, leaves me to conclude that you have no basis other than your personal opinion. And that just doesn't outweigh the bulk of overwhelming evidence. And I could supply more of this evidence if you indicated that you would actually read it.

The simple definition of rectification, again, from James R. Lewis, The Astrology Book (an encyclopedia/dictionary): the process of adjusting the birth chart to the precise birth time in cases where the birthday is known but the birth time is inexact or completely unknown.

From Fred Gettings, The Arkana Dictionary of Astrology: "a specialist term used to denote the process of adjusting a birth chart (itself believed to be inaccurate) by reference to known events which are dated independently of the horoscope, and hence permit correction of a progressed chart."

"The process of verification or correction of the birth moment or ascendant degree of the map, by reference to known events or characteristics pertaining to the native. This may be necessitated by the inaccuracy of time-pieces; the carelessness of those whose business it should be to make a careful record of the correct moment of birth; or it may consist of a hypothetical determination of a birth-hour wholly unknown to the native." http://www.astrologyweekly.com/dictionary/rectification.php

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/rectification "Astrology. the method by which the known times of major events in one's life are used to determine an unknown time of birth."

"In astrology rectification is the process of using astrological techniques and considerations in order to retrospectively determine when an event occurred, usually when that information is otherwise unknown or unavailable." http://en.mimi.hu/astrology/rectification.html

If you need more definitions of this nature, just ask.

I merely presented the point that, while most of those authors were quoted as examples of astrologers that can rectify a chart without a time of birth, none of them actually offer the possibility of doing it.

From those quoted, Dykes was given as an example, without any source or statement that he actually practiced that method (unlike Forrest and Brennan who do talk about the posibility). In fact a quick look to Dykes methods would indicate he does not practice rectification without a time frame.

I'm not saying any of these authors are "deluded or frauds" (much less Dykes who is a very good and respectable astrologer in my opinion). I'm merely questioning what whas implied about them, to make your points.

If none of them actually perform the method, its kind of hard to believe the method is actually possible.

So far its mostly:"The method exists; it is possible; some astrologers do it!; a lot of astrooger agree it can be done; etc."

But no actual example.

To me thats just like saying: I'll offer no proof, just take my word for it.

So it is to be expected some people like me would remain skeptical. And by the way, this was never about a traditional against a modern thing. If the same thing would be professed by a traditional, I would have questioned it the same way

waybread said:

Dirius, I think you have an "argument from false premises."

You've taken a sample of 5 websites that I offered (which you initially refused to read or view,) inferred things from them, and then based your conclusions on your misinterpretations.

Click to expand...

Hey they were your examples, not mine. If they were bad examples to begin with do not blame me please.

waybread said:

Furthermore, where did I cite these astrologers as "proof" of anything other than that the definition of rectification includes 24-rectification?? Look, Dirius. You don't have to like it. You don't have to think it can be done accurately. That's all cool.

Click to expand...

You said>

It is by no means correct "that it can't be done." It is being done, and by respected traditional astrologers like Benjamin Dykes and Chris Brennan .


-----

Hey waybread, its very simple. You think it is possible?

Then go ahead and show an example.

Dirius said:

I merely presented the point that, while most of those authors were quoted as examples of astrologers that can rectify a chart without a time of birth, none of them actually offer the possibility of doing it.

From those quoted, Dykes was given as an example, without any source or statement that he actually practiced that method (unlike Forrest and Brennan who do talk about the posibility). In fact a quick look to Dykes methods would indicate he does not practice rectification without a time frame.

I'm not saying any of these authors are "deluded or frauds" (much less Dykes who is a very good and respectable astrologer in my opinion). I'm merely questioning what whas implied about them, to make your points.

If none of them actually perform the method, its kind of hard to believe the method is actually possible.

So far its mostly:"The method exists; it is possible; some astrologers do it!; a lot of astrooger agree it can be done; etc."

But no actual example.

To me thats just like saying: I'll offer no proof, just take my word for it.

So it is to be expected some people like me would remain skeptical. And by the way, this was never about a traditional against a modern thing. If the same thing would be professed by a traditional, I would have questioned it the same way

Click to expand...

Dirius, I'm curious what you would accept as 'proof'?

Again, I'm not claiming accuracy or inaccuracy for 24-hour rectification, merely that it shouldn't scare away anybody with the appetite for a lot of detective work.

Let's take the proposition that the astrologer should know the birth time within the hour before agreeing to rectify the chart.

You get a scenario like:

1:00 am (within 12:00 midnight and 2:00 am.

2:00 am (within 1:00 am and 3:00 am)

3:00 am (within 2:00 and 4:00 am)

4:00 am (within 3:00 and 5:00 am)

and so on throughout the day.

We notice that there is a lot of overlap here, so you wouldn't actually have to look at 24 first-cut hypothetical charts. You might start with charts for 2:00 (1:00 to 3:00) and 4:00 (3:00-5:00) as covering your bases, with any "leftover" times (like 12:00-1:00) hypothetically being easy enough to adjust for if the two chosen hypothetical charts didn't seem to fit.

In terms of rectification as "reverse engineering," let's start with first principles. If two of the timed events in the native's life refer to the birth of her children, is there anything normally that we would look at other than: (1) the hypothetical 5th house, (2) ruler of the 5th, (3) any planets in the 5th, or (4) the moon? Modern astrologers might add (5) Ceres, which seems to time well with child birth.

This might seem like a lot of data bytes, but right away we turf out most of the data-bytes in the horoscope.

It has been something like 20 years since I tried to rectify my chart without a birth time, but I just looked at my two children's birth dates again, using the above criteria. I thought my son's birth coincided with a basic transit, but actually not-- his birth coincided with tertiary progression in which the moon (#4) had just entered my 5th house (#1), Venus had just completed a return in my natal 5th house (#3), and Jupiter was spot-on my natal 5th house sun's degree. His NN conjuncts my natal ascendant within the degree, as does the midpoint of his sun-Saturn conjunction for my relocated ascendant.

Efrien says that for an event chart used in rectification to be promising, you should see the angles involved. My son was born some distance from my birth place, and transiting Saturn, traditional ruler of my 5th house (Aquarius cusp, #1) hit my relocated ascendant on his birth date.

When my daughter was born, solar arc Jupiter conjuncted my 5th house (#1) sun within 1 degree 30'. The solar arc moon (#4) had just crossed my relocated ascendant. Her sun (birthday) conjuncts my ascendant within a degree. Several different return/progressed charts put the moon at the midpoint between my natal 5th house moon-Venus.

So a few points about all of this.

1. The results are suggestive but hardly conclusive. We'd need more than 2 data points.

2. It would be a phenomenal amount of work to do this sort of thing for an unknown birth time with no computer program, but it can be done, over weeks if not longer. I have no rectification programs and simply use the prognostication methods available at Astrodienst. I can see why busy professional astrologers prefer not to soak up their time in this fashion.

3. Efrein repeatedly makes the point that if you believe natal chart interpretation works, then it is hard to argue that the same interpretative frameworks go out the window if you don't have a birth time. If the second house rules money, for example, we don't go looking for money in a hypothetical 4th house, unless the ruler of the 2nd is in the 4th, in mutual reception with its ruler, or just a narrow suite of other options.

If you don't think natal chart interpretation works very well, then of course, rectification would be impossible-- but then what exactly about natal astrology are we left with?

Dirius said:

....
From those quoted, Dykes was given as an example, without any source or statement that he actually practiced that method (unlike Forrest and Brennan who do talk about the posibility). In fact a quick look to Dykes methods would indicate he does not practice rectification without a time frame.

Click to expand...

We'd have to ask. He did request it, but was it essential, or no rectification?

....

If none of them actually perform the method, its kind of hard to believe the method is actually possible.

So far its mostly:"The method exists; it is possible; some astrologers do it!; a lot of astrooger agree it can be done; etc."

But no actual example.

Click to expand...

This conclusion is quite simply incorrect. I read a lot of charts for people here and at Astrodienst, and compared with the time needed to respond to the usual nativity/horary requests, rectification would soak up just massive amounts of time. Dirius, have you ever tried to rectify a chart? How long did it take you? Did you read the Astrodienst thread I linked? There were clear examples of individuals with absolutely no birth time. Or try these:

https://tonylouis.wordpress.com/2013/05/13/rectifying-the-chart-of-alexander-the-great/

http://alabe.com/GraphicRectification.pdf (a mundane astrology example)

If you peruse the Astro-DataBank files, you will find a number of horoscopes rectified by Isaac Starkman, cited above, the creator of Polaris software. I found that he had done Abraham Lincoln (Rodden B, 1.5 hours difference from the best-guess time; ) and Charles Darwin, (Rodden DD, 15 hours difference.) Their case is interesting, because they were born on the same date, so their chart differences would be subtle. American presidents John Adams (Rodden C, 9 hours difference; )and Thomas Jefferson (Rodden X, based on a 24-hour rectification) illustrate taking a fresh look at a recollected time, and working with no time.

There are many other examples of worked out rectifications in the Astro-DataBank. I've linked Starkman, above, and he also appears on the linked Astrodienst thread.

muchacho said:

Dirius, I'm curious what you would accept as 'proof'?

Click to expand...

The answer, I have at last concluded, is that Dirius will accept nothing as evidence (never mind "proof") that contradicts his preconceived beliefs

Dirius, I gave you good examples. I didn't anticipate that you would misinterpret them, however.

Dirius, I put it to you in all seriousness that trying to convince you of the facts of the matter are a waste of time.

[deleted personal comment by request - Moderator]

Not at all, I'm more than willing to accept evidence. But so far, while you have posted hypothesis, and the opinions of other authors, none of them could be considered as a reliable way to approach a chart rectification without a birth time.

I agree that the methods are good, for normal rectification. But applied to a chart without a birth time will only render unreliable results.

So far what you've given is:

a) Links to authors that supposedly do it.
b) Posted normal rectification methods.
c) Talked about some ancient traditional methods for Ascendant finding.

A--> None of those authors seem to practice rectification without a time of birth, some don't practice rectification at all, so it would be imposible to assume that they can actually do it.

B--> The examples given are about your own chart, which was rectified using an assumed time of birth. The example you just posted above starts with a time frame. No method that has been proven to work has been shown.

C--> We talked about this most methods don't have a high accuracy percentage.None of the arguments are valid to be realistic. I understand that in "concept" it would be possible to find the ascendant. After all is 1 out of 12 possibilities, so at some point you might get it right. But how can we be sure we are right? we can't be.

Notice how CapRising on his thread posted that he can come up with 3 or 4 charts that explain the same thing, and because of that you can never be sure, and thus his method is for fun rather than for accuracy.

Its just that, no one can never be sure, and thus not a viable option to do.

You say I don't accept proof. Its ok if you want to see it that way. I just don't accept hypothetical methods than are never seen to be put in action. Its about getting a reliable chart.

I have always agreed on the fact that if could be possible, but as long as a method that can give you a certain security is shown, I must remain skeptical.

Like I said, its 1 sign out of 12. You could do a rectification and somehow find the answer. But we can never be sure of it.

Arena said:

Well, only Bob/ua can answer that...

but maybe he just chooses to post the tropical charts corrected to not confuse people with another zodiac.

He might use the sidereal zodiac for himself though.

But only he can answer that.

Click to expand...

Arena, the answer to your enquiry is that he is well documented as being a sidereal astrologer http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=8216

Yes I have seen some of his writings elsewhere, and I just wondered why he is using precession instead of just plain sidereal charts. But I suspect it might be because of him trying not to confuse those who use tropical. But also to point out to the tropicalists, that there is a way to produce more accurate charts without becoming "a siderealist"

But that is just me guessing.

I hope the debate can continue just about astrology, there is no need to become personal or start a discussion about nationalities, it has nothing to do with this debate.

Arena said:

Just to make things 100% clear, I am not trying to turn this into a sidereal vs tropical debate, I am just asking Bob/ua to clearify if I have the correct understanding of his techniques.

Click to expand...

The birth chart need not be Sidereal nor planetary positions precessed for use in later in life events as most of the planets will not precess much in an entire lifetime.

Accept my 4 decades of experience or follow the instructions and test the technique for 40 years yourself. I have found precession corrected solar and lunar returns produce the most appropriate combination of progressed lunar return angles and planetary and/or midpoint positions to them to describe an event. Work is presented in the Tropical zodiac as most who read charts use it. Signs are of no importance to me as I am seeking aspects to angles which are measured in DMS by planets measured in the same manner. To get them signs need not be used. Further, longitudinal positions are not the true positions of bodies in space.

I only use what exists in nature in the construction of charts - the positions of points in space for chart angles, planetary and midpoint positions and major astrological aspects between them, all measured in right ascension. Signs and houses are constructs by man, not nature. Measuring in right ascension avoids using them. As stated above work is presented in the Tropical zodiac for the convenience of most who look at the charts. Personally, I do not care which zodiac signs are represented. I do not use signs nor houses in my work but on rare occasions note a congruence I have noted in a progressed lunar chart for an event.

Event June 12, 1950, 7:27 AM, Fullerton, CA.

Locate the chart for which the progressed lunar is sought to the site of the event.

Eden was born in Long Beach, CA. The event was in Fullerton, CA. Relocate the natal.

Margaret Eden - Natal Relocated; Apr 17 1926, 10:20 AM, PST; Fullerton CA 33°N52'13'' 117°W55'28''

Do the nearest preceding PRECESSED solar return or demi-solar return for the location of the event.

Birth date - April 17th, event date - June 12th. Do a regular precession corrected solar return.

Margaret Eden - Solar Return; precession corrected; Apr 17 1950, 2:04:33 PM, PST; Fullerton CA 33°N52'13'' 117°W55'28''

Using the solar return Moon do the nearest PRECESSED lunar or demi-lunar before the date and time of the event for the location of the event.

Margaret Eden - Lunar Return; precession corrected; Jun 11 1950, 3:18:34 AM, PDT; Fullerton CA 33°N52'13'' 117°W55'28''

Get the transit Moon's position in right ascension from the event chart and subtract the lunar return's Moon position in right ascension from it.

Transits Jun 12 1950, 7:27 AM, PDT, Fullerton, CA 33°N52'13'' 117°W55'28''; Moon 043°50'

Margaret Eden Lunar Return precession corrected; Jun 11 1950, 3:18:34 AM, PDT; Fullerton CA; Moon 030°24'

043°50' - 030°24' = 13°26'.

Add the difference to the right ascension of the lunar return MC.

13°26' + 295°55' = 309°21'. Lunar return MC at the time of the accident.

Find the lunar return planet with a position given that is nearest to this new MC's right ascension. it was Mercury rising.




Using the lunar return chart do a chart for Mercury rising. This gave a chart with 313°55' for the MC on my computer running Solar Fire.

Wanted is 309°21'. The Mercury rising charts MC must decrease by 4°34'.

Interpolation of sorts. The MC moves 1° for approximately every 4 minutes of time. This further reduces to 1' of arc for every 4 seconds of time.

To reduce the MC by 4 degrees subtract 16 minutes from the charts time (4 degrees at 4 minutes each) . To reduce by another 34 minutes of arc subtract 136 seconds (which is 2 minutes, 16 seconds of time - [136 seconds of arc at 4 seconds of time for each]) yielding a total of 18 minutes, 16 seconds of time to be subtracted from the Mercury rising chart time of 4:30:23 AM, PDT, leaving a time of 4:12:07 for the progressed lunar return.

Rename the Mercury rising chart to what it represents. I used Edens F 50 PLR (The F telling me the chart is in Fullerton the 50 telling me it is for 1950.

Put in 4:12:07 for the time of the chart and run it.

This yields the MC at the 309°20' needed with secondary progressed Moon on the Asc and secondary progressed Saturn on the Desc with return Pluto at 141°18' on the Nadir (142°43'). Nadir is 90 degrees in right ascension from the Asc (52°43' + 90° = 142°43').

An example showing the accuracy of a progressed lunar return in producing an appropriate chart for an event. Just one of thousands alluding to my reason for using them to obtain a speculative birth time. This one uses a mundane starting point over which there is no argument as to where it was and over which I have no control.

A lunar or demi-lunar return lasts for about 14 days until the next lunar or demi-lunar return comes in. In that time the MC will progress 180° To see this in your mind, imagine you hold the MC and drag it counter clockwise until you get to the IC. In its movement you will see that it conjuncts, squares, or opposes every planet in the return. It will also aspect every natal, progressed natal, or transiting planet placed around the lunar as it moves (progresses). The question is when will it make these aspects.

If you were a political junky you would be aware that the Saturn-Pluto opposition in the Caplunar (Moon's entry into Sidereal Capricorn [Fagan-Bradley, expressed here in the Tropical zodiac for the convenience of most readers] is sitting on the Sibly Chart for the U.S. Asc-Desc axis, and would be interested in when that opposition would be swept by the progressed angles of the return if it was located to Washington, D.C.. Reading the rising and setting angles for Saturn and Pluto it can be seen that the strongest time will be when Saturn is on the MC and Pluto is on the IC - a Paran. Its opposite, Pluto on the MC and Saturn on the IC will never happen as the MC progresses, as that degree is never swept by the progressed MC. Saturn on the Asc and Pluto on the Desc is not a Paran, nor is Pluto on the Asc and Saturn on the Desc as the progressed angles reach them 7 or 8 degrees apart, more than 1/2 a day difference. But when does the progressed MC sweep across return Saturn?

The MC of the lunar is progressed the same distance as the return Moon has moved, about 13 degrees a day. We have to find the difference between the Caplunar's MC (279°38') and when it will sweep across Saturn's position (73°09' or in opposition to Pluto at 72°26'. That means subtracting the MC from either Saturn or Pluto. I will use Saturn. To make that possible 360° has to be added to Saturn's position making it 433°09'. 433°09' minus 279°38' leaves 153°31' as the distance to move. (a trick - the subtraction can be done without adding 360° by making the subtraction using Saturn and Pluto's positions in the last column on the right, which gives the same answer, the same is true when subtracting the Moon's difference to progress the lunar) Dividing this by 13° (the Moon's approximate movement each day) gives an answer of almost 12 (in your head, 11.8 by calculator). This is the number of days until the progressed MC of the lunar return will sweep across Saturn's position.

The return began on August 29 at about 9:13 pm, EDT. Going forward 12 days would indicate a chart done for sometime on September 10 should find Saturn on or near the progressed MC. Using 5 pm on September 10 as a time to progress the return to yields a progressed MC at 61°01'. This is short of the desired 73°09' by 12°08' or about the same distance the Moon would move in another day, meaning the progressed MC is going to sweep Saturn's position on September 11, 2001. This could be potent as the combination is on the Sibly Asc-Desc axis. I would do a chart for noon on September 11 and use that to progress the lunar return, then go forward or backward from noon to get my final answer.

Doing this produces a position of 72°31' for the lunar return MC at noon on September 11, almost exactly opposite return Pluto. I allow an orb of 2° before or after exactness as a window of most likely experience. That would be as early as 8 am or as late as 4 pm, EDT, for a 2° orb, or 10 am to 2 pm for a 1° allowance on September 11 in Washington. The Pentagon attack occurred at 9:38 am. The progressed Caplunar MC was 71°04. Return Pluto was on the IC at 72°26'.

In New York (perhaps used if one was into the markets) using noon gives a progressed MC of 75°02' indicating an earlier time to get Saturn or Pluto on an angle. Reducing it by 2° would take a move back in time of about 4 hours or about 8 o'clock. The time of the attack on the WTC was 8:46 am, EDT and produced a progressed MC of 73°32', having the Saturn-Pluto opposition closer to the progressed angles than the attack on the Pentagon and because of live television coverage of the second tower being hit and the greater loss of life involved received greater attention world wide.

Attack on the World Trade Center: Sep 11, 2001, 8:46 am, EDT, New York, NY.

Progressed Caplunar MC was 73°33'. Return Saturn was on the MC at 73°09', transit Saturn at 73°40', return Pluto was on the IC at 72°26', transit at 72°31'.

WTC Pluto was on the MC at 73°07', secondary progressed at 72°58'. Nadir was 77°59'. WTC natal Mars/Saturn was 77°37', return Mars/Pluto was 78°37'.



[url]http://home.nyc.gov/html/nyc100/html/classroom/hist_info/nycfacts.html[/URL]

When the present day five boroughs were consolidated on January 1, 1898 to form Greater New York, ...

http://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Cities:_New_York_NY_%28consol%29

Name
Cities: New York NY (consol) Gender: N/A
Birthname New York County
born on 1 January 1898 at 00:00 (= 12:00 midnight )
Place New York NY, USA, 40n43, 74w00
Timezone EST h5w (is standard time)
Data source
Timed official source; 00:00:01 legal
Rodden Rating AA

Dirius, my post #110 must have overlapped with your post #112. Here the gist of it is, again:

This conclusion is quite simply incorrect. I read a lot of charts for people here and at Astrodienst, and compared with the time needed to respond to the usual nativity/horary requests, rectification would soak up just massive amounts of time. Dirius, have you ever tried to rectify a chart? How long did it take you? Did you read the Astrodienst thread I linked? There were clear examples of individuals with absolutely no birth time. Or try these:

https://tonylouis.wordpress.com/2013...der-the-great/

http://alabe.com/GraphicRectification.pdf (a mundane astrology example)

If you peruse the Astro-DataBank files, you will find a number of horoscopes rectified by Isaac Starkman, cited above, the creator of Polaris software. I found that Starkman had done Abraham Lincoln (Rodden B, 1.5 hours difference from the best-guess time; ) and Charles Darwin, (Rodden DD, 15 hours difference.) Their case is interesting, because they were born on the same date, so their chart differences would be subtle. American presidents John Adams (Rodden C, 9 hours difference; )and Thomas Jefferson (Rodden X, based on a 24-hour rectification) illustrate taking a fresh look at a recollected time, and working with no time.

There are many other examples of worked out rectifications in the Astro-DataBank. I've linked Starkman, above, and he also appears on the linked Astrodienst thread.

Click to expand...

Starkman also posted occasionally at Skyscript, using his Polaris software.

What I found interesting about Starkman's rectifications on the Astro-DataBank, is that some of them were significantly different from the given birth time guesstimate. Jefferson had no guesstimate. We could debate how likely his rectifications are to be correct (given that we'll never know, obviously),but you cannot argue that astrologers simply don't rectify charts without nearly-correct birth times.

Of course, unique_astrology is our resident expert on this thread. Kannon was another one: his signature advertises his chart rectification services. Unfortunately he got annoyed with being attacked and left.

Dirius, you misinterpreted my examples from my chart. This is the kind of exercise I undertook when I had no birth time to go by. I am merely showing you how you might go about such an exercise, as you don't seem to rectify charts yourself.

I don't mind you not accepting "proof," because actual proof is mighty hard to come by with rectification. But I don't think you even accept evidence that rectification can and does apply to natives with no birth time estimate. At some level, I can't do your homework for you.

Dirius, you don't have to like the thought of 24-hour rectification. You don't need to see how it can be accurate. These are all digressions from my simple point, that you cannot deny: recitification can be done without a near-estimate birth time.

It entails a lot of work, although it is facilitated with rectification software.

unique_astrology said:

.....I have found precession corrected solar and lunar returns
produce the most appropriate combination of progressed lunar return angles
and planetary and/or midpoint positions to them to describe an event.

Work is presented in the Tropical zodiac as most who read charts use it.

Click to expand...

for those to whom these ideas are unfamiliar, keep in mind that
when a Tropical solar return is calculated
and then contrasted with a precessed Tropical solar return chart
the effects of precession are noticeable

and
although the actual amount of precession is about 4 seconds of arc per year
the older we get, the greater the difference in the houses and angles of the Precession Corrected chart
and so

by the time of our 18th birthday
the difference between a solar return calculated with and without precession = six hours:

and then

the difference on our thirty-sixth birthday = twelve hours

and

by our seventy second birthday the difference = an entire day.


A geocentric view of a Solar Return
depends upon the Earth, Sun and star background all re-establishing the relationship that existed at birth.
This is not the same as the position in space
(relative to our orbit about the Sun)
where the Tropical Zodiac says our Solar Return occurred.


The added distance and time
required for the Earth to move past the Tropical Zodiac “return” point

and then

to reach the “Sidereal” or “Precession-corrected” position

is what makes a Tropical Solar Return chart different from a Sidereal Solar Return chart.

For Kannon's take on rectification, start with his post #14, and follow until his last one. He wrote in #14:

It is best to have some notion of the general time of day to work with. But that does not mean a skilled, observant, patient rectifier cannot arrive at a correct chart with no time-related anchors at all. The best chances of success with this come when the rectifier knows the person and is well familiar with them. It is far less likely when dealing with public figures -- but it can be done IF all relevant information is taken into account, such as the person's physical features, demeanor/manner on record in film, etc.

Click to expand...

Kannon has made a serious study of features associated with rising signs, incidentally. I don't think that most of the rectification experts go by them, but clearly some astrologers do, like the one who told me, "You look like a Leo."

(I know, I know: glamourous, magnanimous, natural leadership qualities, looks good in diamonds..... Too bad I wound up with Virgo.)

Arena said:

Yes I have seen some of his writings elsewhere,
and I just wondered why he is using precession instead of just plain sidereal charts.

But I suspect it might be because of him trying not to confuse those who use tropical.
But also to point out to the tropicalists,
that there is a way to produce more accurate charts without becoming "a siderealist"

But that is just me guessing.

I hope the debate can continue just about astrology,
there is no need to become personal or start a discussion about nationalities, it has nothing to do with this debate.

Click to expand...

Certainly the astrology is interesting in that there is as you say, 'no need to become "a siderealist"
in order to simply produce more accurate charts'

You mention that:"rectification without a time frame can be done"

As I mentioned earlier in answer to this: anything can be theoriticaly acomplished, but the succesful rate will be low, and the factor of the chart being unreliable being very high. As I said its 1 out of 12 possibilities. By definition, you can guess and you will be right some times. But can you ever be sure? not at all.

CapRising showed on his post (using a similar method to yours), he might come up with 3 or 4 similar charts that could explain the individual, thus knowing which one is the correct one is imposible.

Its not that I do not accept evidence, but I have to remain skeptical to the information that was presented so far, because:

- One is the theoretical discussion on a practical approach, that includes a high possibility of not getting to the correct chart (because you can get mutiple charts). So I do not consider this evidence to be much reliable.

- The second was the advise and quotes from other authors, which as I mentioned earlier, do not practice this type of rectification themselves, and sometimes they don't practice rectification at all. So it becomes hard to believe on someone's word on rectification, when they don't practice it themselves.

I have not tested polaris software, however by your description of it giving different ascendants that the guessed time, it doesn't seem much reliable to start. But from what I read on skyscript most of his "experiments" were done by himself, not by other people. Is there a trial version to his software that can be tested?

Dirius said:

You mention that:CapRising showed on his post (using a similar method to yours), he might come up with 3 or 4 similar charts that could explain the individual, thus knowing which one is the correct one is imposible.

Its not that I do not accept evidence, but I have to remain skeptical to the information that was presented so far, because:

- One is the theoretical discussion on a practical approach, that includes a high possibility of not getting to the correct chart (because you can get mutiple charts). So I do not consider this evidence to be much reliable.

Click to expand...

To whom is this addressed?