Astrologers' Community  

Go Back   Astrologers' Community > General Astrology > Other Astrology > Research and Development

Research and Development This is a forum designed for applying scientific methods and understanding to all approaches of astrology, cooperative formulation and testing of new ideas, re-examination of known methods of delineation and interpretation, and the exploration of new astrological methods of all kinds (e.g. heliocentric models, planetary nodes and apogees, etc.).


Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Unread 01-24-2015, 10:55 AM
MissScorpio MissScorpio is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 697
Confused about Pluto

Hi everyone,

I am very confused about Pluto after reading the following... and what I can't understand or grasp is why Pluto was assigned as ruler of Scorpio?


Last edited by MissScorpio; 09-10-2017 at 10:35 AM. Reason: Changed view
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Unread 01-24-2015, 11:16 AM
Oddity's Avatar
Oddity Oddity is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 2,982
Re: Confused about Pluto

I don't find Pluto useful, but a lot of people do, and include it in their astrology. That it's no longer a planet by astronomy's current standard really doesn't matter, it's a different field of endeavour to astrology in the modern world.

Where you may want to consider compromising is using Pluto as a planet, but retaining traditional rulerships: Mars rules Scorpio.

Or not - it's up to you. At the end of the day, the astrology police aren't going to bust your door down because 'you're doing it wrong' whichever way you go.
Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Oddity For This Useful Post:
Dirius (01-25-2015), JUPITERASC (01-24-2015), MissScorpio (01-24-2015), R4VEN (01-25-2015)
  #3  
Unread 01-24-2015, 12:01 PM
JUPITERASC's Avatar
JUPITERASC JUPITERASC is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 62,778
Re: Confused about Pluto

Quote:
Originally Posted by MissScorpio View Post

Hi everyone,

I am very confused about Pluto after reading the following... and what I can't understand or grasp is why Pluto was assigned as ruler of Scorpio? Obviously in Greek myth he is known as God of the Underworld and is dark and destructive in nature like Scorpio, but what appears to be misleading for me is that many scientists have debated over whether or not Pluto is even a planet, and from my understanding, a decision was actually cast that Pluto is not in fact a planet as there are other objects that are known to be bigger that have also been discovered.

I also read the following:

Due to the extremely slow and eccentric orbit of Pluto, its effect on the individual personality has yet to be fully determined by astrologers. It takes approximately 248 years to make one complete round throughout the zodiac and can spend between 15 and 20 years in a sign. This is why those who argue against its use in delineating the personal horoscope, will say it is more generational than personal, as literally millions of people are born during its transit through one sign. We observe however, in practice, that Pluto does in fact have a tangible and long lasting impact on us.

So we know it has an impact on us, and I myself have experienced uncanny changes when Pluto conjunct my Venus, all typical , classical cases of transformation.. So I am bemused, as clearly Pluto's energy is integrating and formulating in some way , causing profound impacts on our life journeys..
But I also vastly aware that there must be unrecoginsed sources and bodies that we have not yet even discovered that are also unwittingly affecting our soul path.

So do we continue to believe in Pluto's force? Personally, everything I read about from an astrological point of view on Pluto I relate to, notoriously so.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaiousei no Senshi View Post

To explain further, there are a few philosophical issues that arise when using the outer planets. It's true that many more classically oriented astrologers use them, but they tend to regard them as fainter fixed stars, so their importance and abilities tend to be scaled back or ignored unless they are on an angle or conjunct some important planet.

Dirius is correct in noting that the fact the outers carry no visible light is a major detriment to their inclusion into the classical framework. Astrology evolved alongside ancient optical theories and these theories still permeate astrological discourse to this day. Planets in aspect are said to "see" or "regard" one another and their light is often considered a transmitter of their influence.

The word "planet" originally evolved from the Greek "planetes aster", or "wandering star" and referred to the Sun, Moon, Mercury, Venus, Jupiter, Mars, and Saturn whose motion could be detected against the backdrop of fixed stars that are stable in their relative distance from one another, but all move together as one large group. Today we have redefined what a planet is to serve our own categorical needs. There's nothing wrong with that, but it's important to remember that we, as astrologers, have organizational needs that are different from those of astronomy.

Another issue with the outer planets in general is that they lack much of the tools that the classical planets have. This isn't just referring to dignities (though that is a large part of it), but they also lack nature, sect, gender, years, winds, orbs, signatures, etc. This may all seem superfluous or unnecessary, but its significance really cannot be overstated. Without these associations, the outer planets are essentially blank orbs without instruction or meaning.

Finally, there is the issue with the meanings contemporary astrologers have given to them.
Mostly they either 1) don't make sense within their own context
or
2) are already taken by another planet.

About the first,
a lot of the meanings of the planets have been assigned to them based on mythological interpretations or perceived mundane events happening around the time of their discovery.
A lot of the mythological meanings are cherry picked and often nonsensical, like Uranus ruling rebellion,
but in the myth Ouranos is the tyrannical dictator, not the freedom fighter.
The mundane events are definitely cherry picked
as there are many important events happening around the world at any given time.
Pluto was discovered in 1930 and has taken on an association with nuclear force,
but when I hear 1930s I think Great Depression
and I've never heard anyone associate Pluto with financial ruination.

About the second, each of the outer planets have significations that are more or less plucked from the classical planets.
Uranus's reported instability and recklessness can be found in Mercury and Mars.
Neptune's illusions and mysticism can be found in the Moon.
Pluto's transformation and general heavy-handedness are the domains of Mercury and Saturn.
Not only does this create strange, cross-breed planets, but it makes the classical planets into flat characters when their meanings and significations are much more multifaceted in the tradition.
http://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum...ad.php?t=80531
__________________
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
  #4  
Unread 01-24-2015, 12:27 PM
Catia Catia is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 92
Re: Confused about Pluto

Pluto makes no major aspects in my natal chart.
However, I have experienced several Pluto transits to important planets. Pluto square Sun/ASC was one of the worst times of my life, but I have quite good experiences with tr Pluto trine Venus....
Both transits lasted for quite a long time (ap. 2 years) and these experiences COULDN'T be explained by any other transits. Mars transits take max. several weeks so couldn't account for what happened.
Because my experiences could be explained only by Pluto, I will continue taking Pluto into consideration when I look at transits.
Next year I will have tr Pluto trine natal Sun in the 1st house. I am very curious what will happen….
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Catia For This Useful Post:
MissScorpio (01-24-2015)
  #5  
Unread 01-24-2015, 12:44 PM
HYS HYS is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 45
Re: Confused about Pluto

Astronomers saying Pluto is no planet doesn't really bother astrologers. Astrology is not interested in studying gravity, dark matter or mineral strucutres. Instead it's aim is humans. Astronomers don't care for our definitions, let's don't care too much for theirs.

I use Pluto and find it very usefull, it is also strong in my birth chart. In the recent years Pluto transited my Mars and in the same time my skill set undergone quite a transformation. There was no other major aspects, I have litlle doubt the indicator was Pluto.

However, there is definitely some open questions about Pluto. Domicile of Pluto is one of them. Usualy Pluto is set as ruler of Scorpio and this is the way I mostly use it. However, I am intrigued by the Austrian school, that gives Pluto rulership of Aries (one of the reasons is he remains there for 30 years, in Scorpio only 12).

I also like the idea of the "virtual XIII" sign for Pluto. In a nutshel it goes like this: Aries has two purposes. As first sign in the zodiac he is ruled by Mars and represents the initial spark of activity. This spark moves through all the signs and finishes the cycle in Pisces. Whatever has become from the spark in Pisces enters Aries and has to fight for survival in Aries with the new spark. And this elimination process is ruled by Pluto as the ruler of Aries, in this case the "virtual XIII sign".
It sounds interesting because it copies the process in the nature. In spring the nature is not empty or blanc. However, there is some room for elimination of the old in the last decan of Pisces, that is ruled by Pluto. In many cultures this week of the year has been about cleaning rituals, making the whole "virtual XIII sign" useless. Anyway it sounds interesting and worth considering.
Matters around Pluto need time, observation and experience. There is some open questions. For me he works fine and I use Pluto.
__________________
http://www.horoscopeyourself.com Free interpreted horoscopes, astrology charts and calculations
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Unread 01-24-2015, 10:45 PM
Bunraku's Avatar
Bunraku Bunraku is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Milky Way Galaxy
Posts: 5,647
Re: Confused about Pluto

Quote:
Originally Posted by MissScorpio View Post
but what appears to be misleading for me is that many scientists have debated over whether or not Pluto is even a planet, and from my understanding, a decision was actually cast that Pluto is not in fact a planet as there are other objects that are known to be bigger that have also been discovered.

Well theres your mistake. Listening to scientists about astrology
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Unread 01-24-2015, 11:42 PM
Bunraku's Avatar
Bunraku Bunraku is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Milky Way Galaxy
Posts: 5,647
Re: Confused about Pluto

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oddity View Post
Or not - it's up to you. At the end of the day, the astrology police aren't going to bust your door down because 'you're doing it wrong' whichever way you go.
Really? A lot of modern astrologers left this forum complaining that they were mercilessly attacked by traditionalists.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Bunraku For This Useful Post:
Abby83 (01-31-2015), ALRESCHA (04-10-2015)
  #8  
Unread 01-25-2015, 12:40 AM
Oddity's Avatar
Oddity Oddity is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 2,982
Re: Confused about Pluto

I haven't been here long, so I don't know. I've noticed that modern astrology seems to be the predominant form here, as it is most places, and a few modern astrologers have been quite quick to 'correct' some of my posts.

That's still a far cry from being arrested for not doing astrology right.

Though I guess if you're that concerned about what other people think, it might be best not to do astrology at all, or at least not admit to it. That would defeat the purpose of places like this, though.

At the end of the day, do you really care if someone else is using or not using Pluto in their astrology? How can that possibly affect you unless your thing is to try to control others or to make them feel bad? And if that is the reason you do astrology, you might want to rethink some things.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Oddity For This Useful Post:
JUPITERASC (01-25-2015)
  #9  
Unread 01-25-2015, 01:20 AM
waybread's Avatar
waybread waybread is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: A class M planet near you
Posts: 15,408
Re: Confused about Pluto

It is important to distinguish between astronomy and astrology. Pluto got "demoted" to dwarf planet status by an international congress of astronomers in 2006-- at the same time that the former asteroid Ceres got elevated to dwarf planet status. Astrologers play by somewhat different rules.

Re: Pluto's slow circuit around the sun.

1. Many things that effect our lives are generational.
2. Most people have Pluto in aspect to several personal planets or sensitive points in the chart. When this happens, the personal planet, angle, or what-have-you gets "Plutonized." Whether this goes easily or with difficulty for the person depends upon the type of aspect (square vs. trine, for example.)
3. Pluto was discovered in 1930. That's roughly 85 years to figure out how a planet operates astrologically.
4. We can look at historical events or people of past centuries to understand how Pluto operated in signs prior to living memory.

Pluto is classified astronomically as one of the "trans-Neptunians" that includes Eris, Sedna, Makemake, some objects yet to be named, and probably other bodies yet to be discovered.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Neptunian_object
__________________
My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we’ll change the world. Jack Layton, "Letter to Canadians"

I thought we went along paths--but it seems there are no paths. The going itself is the path.
C.S. Lewis, Perelandra.

Life is not about finding yourself. Life is about creating yourself. Message on a refrigerator magnet.

Last edited by waybread; 01-25-2015 at 01:24 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Unread 01-25-2015, 04:12 AM
Dirius's Avatar
Dirius Dirius is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 3,494
Re: Confused about Pluto

Follow JupAsc's link, we had this discussion recently.

From the traditional perspective: pluto has no astrological value.

Pluto, like the other outers, doesn't reflect the light of the Sun and is invisible to the naked eye. Since astrology was born by astronomical observation of the planets thousands of years ago, the whole astrological system was created for the 2 luminaries and 5 errant stars (Sun/Moon and Mercury/Venus/Mars/Jupiter/Saturn).

In classical astrology, there are MANY factos concerning a planet that play a role in the chart, most of them abandoned by modern astrology.

I think I can actually give you some proof of why pluto is irrelevant in traditional astrology.

Lets analyze....the concept of COMBUSTION:

So what is combustion? Its when a planet finds itself too close to the sun, under its rays. This is a negative position for the planet, because it is assumed that the sun "burns" the planet, thus, drains it from any positive influence they could have. Most traditionals and some modern astrologers employ the concept of a combusted planet.

But what is combustion exactly? In reality, the sun doesn't "burn" the planet. What happens is that, when a planet is too close to the sun, during its heliacal cycle of rising as either a morning or evening star, the planet is invisible to the naked eye, because of the exces of light produced by the Sun. Thus the planet is invisible to us, and can't reveal its astrological message properly.

Thus the planet is considered "burned" from any meaning it might have (in some cases, like in Horary, combustion signifies hidden things).

So, here is the problem:

If you are to consider COMBUSTION as an important factor in traditional astrology, then how can you consider Pluto, when he is invisible all the time, and pretty much under the same effect of combustion all the time, given that he is unable to reflect light?

The concept of pluto goes against the nature of traditional astrology, because it assumes that there is a planet that will always be unable to express its meaning or significance with ease, and will never be able to conduct the affairs of the house it supposedly rules in a proper way.

But again, this is just the traditional view regarding pluto. It is incompatible with classical teachings.
__________________
If you'd like a private Horary or Natal consultation, please visit me at:

https://antiqueastrology.wordpress.com/

You'll also find some tips for horary practice!

Last edited by Dirius; 01-25-2015 at 04:43 AM.
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Dirius For This Useful Post:
JUPITERASC (01-25-2015), Oddity (10-17-2015), opiumchild (03-06-2015)
  #11  
Unread 01-25-2015, 05:38 AM
waybread's Avatar
waybread waybread is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: A class M planet near you
Posts: 15,408
Re: Confused about Pluto

Actually, Dirius, Pluto does reflect the light of the sun, although faintly. This was how Clyde Tombaugh detected Pluto on photographic plates in 1930. (See attached photo, with arrows pointing to Pluto.)

Some mostly-traditional astrologers do use Pluto, but as supplementary data, as it doesn't fit into the traditional system of essential dignities beyond its domicile and perhaps detriment. The "naked eye" argument really doesn't hold up: the reason is mostly that there is no way to shoehorn Pluto into terms, faces, triplicities.

The combustion argument is an interesting one. I can only assume that centuries ago, an astronomer/astrologer actually figured out how far out the sun's rays extended, such that a planet's own light was either invisible or nearly so. This is tricky, however, as planets are still considered combust in a night chart, with neither the sun nor its near neighbours visible. Planets (besides the moon) are seldom visible in broad daylight, regardless of how close or removed they are from the sun. Also, as the morning or evening star, Venus is going to be considerably more visible in twilight than Saturn, simply because Venus appears to us from our Ptolemaic perspective as bigger and brighter.

There is no reason to privilege "naked eye" viewing as somehow better or purer than using a telescope. These have been around for centuries, including during traditional astrology's heyday. I can't see planets without my eyeglasses. I don't view them as qualitatively different than looking through a telescope. It is simply a quantitative measure of magnification.

Pluto has enormous interpretive power in natal charts using modern astrological methods.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Pluto_discovery_plates.jpg (70.4 KB, 5 views)
__________________
My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we’ll change the world. Jack Layton, "Letter to Canadians"

I thought we went along paths--but it seems there are no paths. The going itself is the path.
C.S. Lewis, Perelandra.

Life is not about finding yourself. Life is about creating yourself. Message on a refrigerator magnet.

Last edited by waybread; 01-25-2015 at 05:45 AM.
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to waybread For This Useful Post:
MissScorpio (01-25-2015), opiumchild (03-06-2015), StillOne (02-09-2015)
  #12  
Unread 01-25-2015, 10:54 AM
Konrad Konrad is offline
Account Closed
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 659
Re: Confused about Pluto

Waybread,

the "naked-eye" argument actually does hold up. Most of the significations of the planets come from their visible astronomical behaviours or mathematical conceptions of things like their visibility cycles and return periods. To suggest that the reason for not using Pluto is that it can't be "shoe-horned" into the essential dignity system is very misleading. It isn't used because it isn't part of the traditional system for the reason that it can't be seen in the night-sky.

As for your comments on combustion, they are quite frankly ridiculous, as you well know. I was debating whether or not to even respond to them, and I will for the simple reason that someone less knowledgeable than yourself may read them and believe them. Combustion is important, as you note, because a planet becomes invisible due to the power of the Sun's light. That the Sun is not visible at night is either here nor there, the point is that the planet is no longer visible either before the Sun rises or at night when it is below the earth. Similarly, that only the Moon is visible with the Sun during the day is meaningless (in this context anyway) as the others will be visible either in the morning before the Sun rises, or for some chunk of the night. As for Venus appearing brighter than Saturn, you actually prove the importance of naked-eye observation. This is one of the reasons Venus is associated with beneficial things, and Saturn is seen as a planet of maleficence at least in regard to sustaining life.

As for your comment on wearing eyeglasses, we tend not to find the norm or mean from those who are deficient somehow. I would not look to find a measure of health from one terminally ill. The fact that you need eyeglasses to see a planet does not negate the fact that they can be seen by those with healthy eyes and this vision of them appearing and disappearing is vital to the way they were interpreted even after people stopped watching the skies to interpret them. My point is that the observational astronomy of the Mesopotamians is fundamental to all astrology whether the practitioners know it or not. Telescopes have only been around since the 17th century, so no, they were not around in astrology's heyday.

Finally, in regard to your final comment about the efficacy of Pluto, I remember putting forth my chart as I have all three outers in either the 1st or 10th house, so my thinking was that I should exhibit their significations quite strongly. If you remember, it didn't go well. I was even told that I had the wrong birth-time! I would go as far to say that anything one attributes to the outer planets in a chart reading can be spoken for without them. My personal preferences aside, I will say it would be better for all astrologers to learn to work fully with the seven traditional planets before working with the invisible ones. As an example, it would be better to look for some Venus/Saturn affliction when speaking of substance abuse rather than jumping straight to Neptune.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Konrad For This Useful Post:
JUPITERASC (01-25-2015), Oddity (01-25-2015)
  #13  
Unread 01-25-2015, 11:07 AM
JUPITERASC's Avatar
JUPITERASC JUPITERASC is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 62,778
Re: Confused about Pluto

Quote:
Originally Posted by waybread View Post

Actually, Dirius, Pluto does reflect the light of the sun, although faintly.
Here's just how faintly that is

Not long after its discovery in 1781, Uranus was found to have strange movements
that could only be attributed to another body.
Neptune's discovery in 1846 somewhat accounted for the orbit,
but there were still discrepancies
that led scientists to conclude yet another planet existed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by waybread View Post

This was how Clyde Tombaugh detected Pluto on photographic plates in 1930.
(See attached photo, with arrows pointing to Pluto.)

In 1894, businessman Percival Lowell built Lowell Observatory to study Mars.
In 1905, he turned the telescope toward the search for the elusive Planet X,
though he died before the new planet could be found.
Clyde Tombaugh was hired in 1929 and joined the search for the missing planet.

The telescope at the observatory was equipped with a camera
that would take two photographs of the sky on different days.
A device known as a blink compactor rapidly flipped back and forth between the two photographs.
Stars and galaxies essentially remained unmoving in the images,
but anything closer could be visually identified by its motion across the sky.
Tombaugh spent approximately a week studying each pair of photographs,
which contained over 150,000 stars, and sometimes nearly a million.

18 February 1930, Clyde Tombaugh noticed movement across the field of a pair of images taken a month beforehand.

After studying the object to confirm it,
the staff of Lowell Observatory officially announced the discovery of a ninth planet on 13 March 1930


These are the TWO PHOTOGRAPHS taken by a purpose-built expensive POWERFUL TELESCOPE
that allowed Clyde Tombaugh to notice movement in the skies



Note the ARROW
on EACH of the two separate photographs
highlighting what Clyde Tombaugh noticed




Above image is of Original plates from Clyde Tombaugh's discovery of Pluto in Lowell Observatory Archive. Credit: Lowell Observatory



Clearly, the miniscule light reflected by dwarf planet pluto

allows observation SOLELY
when using expensive equipment housed in a purpose built observatory
consisting of a powerful telescope fitted with a camera



FURTHERMORE

without those two still photgraphs,
taken at the LOWELL OBSERVATORY, ARIZONA
neither Clyde Tombaugh nor anyone else
could possibly have noticed dwarf planet pluto




The orbit of dwarf planet pluto is unusual in several ways.
It is inclined more than 17° from the ecliptic
The ecliptic is the plane in which the orbits of the planets lie.
The orbit is also more eccentric (far from circular)
than any other planetary orbit.
At times, Pluto is closer to the Sun than the orbit of Neptune.

The fact is, the 'light' reflected by dwarf planet pluto is entirely dependent on distance from the sun
on an elliptical orbit that is far from sun for more than two hundred years
i.e.
Every 228 years, dwarf planet pluto's orbit brings it closer to the Sun than Neptune
but only for a period of 20 years


Quote:
Originally Posted by waybread View Post
Some mostly-traditional astrologers do use Pluto, but as supplementary data,
as it doesn't fit into the traditional system of essential dignities beyond its domicile and perhaps detriment.
The "naked eye" argument really doesn't hold up: the reason is mostly that there is no way to shoehorn Pluto into terms, faces, triplicities.

The combustion argument is an interesting one.
I can only assume that centuries ago, an astronomer/astrologer actually figured out how far out the sun's rays extended, such that a planet's own light was either invisible or nearly so.
This is tricky, however, as planets are still considered combust in a night chart, with neither the sun nor its near neighbours visible. Planets (besides the moon) are seldom visible in broad daylight, regardless of how close or removed they are from the sun.
Also, as the morning or evening star, Venus is going to be considerably more visible in twilight than Saturn, simply because Venus appears to us from our Ptolemaic perspective as bigger and brighter.

There is no reason to privilege "naked eye" viewing as somehow better or purer than using a telescope.
These have been around for centuries, including during traditional astrology's heyday.
I can't see planets without my eyeglasses. I don't view them as qualitatively different than looking through a telescope.
It is simply a quantitative measure of magnification.
No one is attempting to state that viewing the skies with unaided vision
without artificial aids of any kind 'is somehow more privileged or better'


INSTEAD

HIGHLIGHTED FACTS
ARE SIMPLY
that the LOWELL OBSERVATORY was not in use THOUSANDS of years ago
when astrology began


hence "naked eye" viewing was the sole viewing available when astrology began

AND

for thousands of years
astrologers used "naked eye" viewing


Hence it is misleading to imply that the LOWELL OBSERVATORY was in use 'during traditional astrology's heyday'
because
the LOWELL OBSERVATORY was established only in 1894 in Arizona
whereas 'Traditional Astrology' is typically defined as using techniques developed prior to 1700
__________________
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
  #14  
Unread 01-25-2015, 11:25 AM
JUPITERASC's Avatar
JUPITERASC JUPITERASC is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 62,778
Re: Confused about Pluto

details regarding dwarf planet pluto's unusual orbit http://airandspace.si.edu/exhibition...uto_orbit.html

__________________
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
  #15  
Unread 01-25-2015, 12:21 PM
Oddity's Avatar
Oddity Oddity is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 2,982
Re: Confused about Pluto

Quote:
Originally Posted by waybread View Post

Some mostly-traditional astrologers do use Pluto, but as supplementary data, as it doesn't fit into the traditional system of essential dignities beyond its domicile and perhaps detriment.
I think you're mixing up traditional with modern. Pluto has no, and can have no domicile rulership, nor can it have detriment, in traditional astrology. It doesn't fit anywhere into the system of rulerships or dignities.

In modern astrology dignities aren't used, so Pluto can be put forth as a domicile ruler. But within traditional astrology, it can't be.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Oddity For This Useful Post:
JUPITERASC (01-25-2015)
  #16  
Unread 01-25-2015, 12:47 PM
HYS HYS is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 45
Re: Confused about Pluto

Quote:
Originally Posted by Konrad View Post
Waybread,

the "naked-eye" argument actually does hold up. Most of the significations of the planets come from their visible astronomical behaviours or mathematical conceptions of things like their visibility cycles and return periods. To suggest that the reason for not using Pluto is that it can't be "shoe-horned" into the essential dignity system is very misleading. It isn't used because it isn't part of the traditional system for the reason that it can't be seen in the night-sky.
The perception of things around us changed strongly in the modern area. Telescopes and microscopes transformed the way we percieve the world and that should count also for astrology. You can't see microbes with your naked eye, does it mean they can not influence you? They do, they exist and you can feel them working on your body. Why couldn't you percieve and feel Neptune without seeing it with your naked eye? The same Pluto.

The naked eye rule is important and astronomical observations are important for astrology. But the way we percieve the world is no longer based only on what we can see. Ancient astrologers used only what they could see because they had no idea how much more there is hidden to the naked eye.

Naked eye vision is still important but everybody knows that there is important things we can not see with our naked eye and still they influence us. That is one of the important fundaments of modernity and also modern astrology.

However, I agree that every student of astrology should master the traditional planets and afterwards proceed to the modern.
__________________
http://www.horoscopeyourself.com Free interpreted horoscopes, astrology charts and calculations
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Unread 01-25-2015, 01:50 PM
JUPITERASC's Avatar
JUPITERASC JUPITERASC is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 62,778
Re: Confused about Pluto

Quote:
Originally Posted by HYS View Post

The perception of things around us changed strongly in the modern area.
Telescopes and microscopes transformed the way we percieve the world and that should count also for astrology.
You can't see microbes with your naked eye, does it mean they can not influence you?
They do, they exist and you can feel them working on your body.
Why couldn't you percieve and feel Neptune without seeing it with your naked eye?
The same Pluto.

The naked eye rule is important and astronomical observations are important for astrology. But the way we percieve the world is no longer based only on what we can see. Ancient astrologers used only what they could see because they had no idea how much more there is hidden to the naked eye.

Naked eye vision is still important but everybody knows that there is important things we can not see with our naked eye and still they influence us. That is one of the important fundaments of modernity and also modern astrology.

Telescopes and microscopes are neither owned nor used by the vast majority of the population
Their use is limited to those who can afford their purchase


FURTHERMORE

Only NASA can afford the millions and billions required
to fund the use of the most powerful modern equipment

HOWEVER

in contrast
most of the seven billion inhabitants of our planet
can go outdoors and simply look at the sky with unaided vision
and observe the movements of the stars/planets/stellar objects

Regarding microbes being invisible to unaided vision
there is no consensus exactly how humans are affected by them

i.e.

http://www.whale.to/v/germ.htm

Quote:
Originally Posted by HYS View Post

However,
I agree that every student of astrology
should master the traditional planets
and
afterwards proceed to the modern.

given that modern astrology is dependent on traditional astrology
on which it is obviously founded
that is the sensible approach
__________________
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
  #18  
Unread 01-25-2015, 01:53 PM
Konrad Konrad is offline
Account Closed
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 659
Re: Confused about Pluto

Quote:
Originally Posted by HYS View Post
The perception of things around us changed strongly in the modern area. Telescopes and microscopes transformed the way we percieve the world and that should count also for astrology. You can't see microbes with your naked eye, does it mean they can not influence you? They do, they exist and you can feel them working on your body. Why couldn't you percieve and feel Neptune without seeing it with your naked eye? The same Pluto.

The naked eye rule is important and astronomical observations are important for astrology. But the way we percieve the world is no longer based only on what we can see. Ancient astrologers used only what they could see because they had no idea how much more there is hidden to the naked eye.

Naked eye vision is still important but everybody knows that there is important things we can not see with our naked eye and still they influence us. That is one of the important fundaments of modernity and also modern astrology.

However, I agree that every student of astrology should master the traditional planets and afterwards proceed to the modern.
Well I would argue that the world is still based upon only what we see, but it just so happens that people can now see to differing levels with the aid of machines. That doesn't equate to a greater understanding of life though, or even any form of progress. Until modern thought can explain the mechanics of how planetary configurations signify (and I definitely don't mean cause) happenings on earth, we shouldn't be using mainstream modern scientific thought as a basis for anyone's astrology.

The point is though, ancient peoples were aware of things beyond human perception, there are whole philosophical and theological schools dedicated to that very idea. To think that astrologers of yesteryear only used what they saw because it is all they saw, and if they could have viewed Pluto thorugh a telescope then they would have considered it too, is failing to recognise the foundational principles of their practice. The appearance of light in the sky here on earth was linked to knowledge of divine will from astrology's earliest recorded times. This is why the Heliacal appearances and disappearances were so important, why eclipses are such powerful omens, why we pay more attention to Aldebaran than Al-Hecka and on and on. I know this is not how a modern mind would think, but ask yourself this: has the free-for-all of invisible bodies that surrounds the modern astrologies' practice now made it more or less able to foretell events on earth?
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Konrad For This Useful Post:
Oddity (01-25-2015)
  #19  
Unread 01-25-2015, 02:16 PM
Dirius's Avatar
Dirius Dirius is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 3,494
Re: Confused about Pluto

Quote:
Originally Posted by waybread View Post
Actually, Dirius, Pluto does reflect the light of the sun, although faintly. This was how Clyde Tombaugh detected Pluto on photographic plates in 1930. (See attached photo, with arrows pointing to Pluto.)

Some mostly-traditional astrologers do use Pluto, but as supplementary data, as it doesn't fit into the traditional system of essential dignities beyond its domicile and perhaps detriment. The "naked eye" argument really doesn't hold up: the reason is mostly that there is no way to shoehorn Pluto into terms, faces, triplicities.

The combustion argument is an interesting one. I can only assume that centuries ago, an astronomer/astrologer actually figured out how far out the sun's rays extended, such that a planet's own light was either invisible or nearly so. This is tricky, however, as planets are still considered combust in a night chart, with neither the sun nor its near neighbours visible. Planets (besides the moon) are seldom visible in broad daylight, regardless of how close or removed they are from the sun. Also, as the morning or evening star, Venus is going to be considerably more visible in twilight than Saturn, simply because Venus appears to us from our Ptolemaic perspective as bigger and brighter.

There is no reason to privilege "naked eye" viewing as somehow better or purer than using a telescope. These have been around for centuries, including during traditional astrology's heyday. I can't see planets without my eyeglasses. I don't view them as qualitatively different than looking through a telescope. It is simply a quantitative measure of magnification.

Pluto has enormous interpretive power in natal charts using modern astrological methods.
Light is the first method in which we are able to percieve the planets.

This is, for example, where the idea of the planets "orb" comes from (the disk of light around a planet), and their ability to cast rays (aspects such as trine, square, etc). Without that percievable orb of light, the concept of a planet doing aspects makes no sense. Given that pluto (and the other outers) have no visibile disk of light, they can't cast rays for instance.

Combustion in a night's chart still holds its meaning, because, from traditional perspective the position in which a planet would rise at dawn or set at dusk is still relevant, regardless of whether it was currently below or above the ground at the moment of birth. But this is in the traditional perspective, with most of the concepts regarding the heliacal cycle of the planets being abandoned by modernists. Furthermore, what I explained is the original concept of COMBUSTION and how it was used.

The fact that a planet at some stages shines with bright light, and sometimes it does not, has indeed its traditional interpretations. For example, slower planets like jupiter, when approaching opposition with the sun, won't be able to be seen at dawn or dusk, but will shine with bright light at night. The best example here is the moon...full moon has a different interpretation than new moon, in any chart, regardless if the moon is above or below the ground.

Pluto doesn't hold to almost any of the traditional interpretations to make sense in what it used to be called astrology back in the day.

Furthermore I'd like to contest the argument that pluto has "influence" in every natal chart. Most of the factors regarding a person's life can be explained through the 7 classical planets, without the need for pluto.

In the post linked by JUPASC, the issue was raised using the example of Bill Gate's chart, in which most modernist assigned his promise of wealth to a pluto placement, when from the traditional perspective, I was able to show that there are other explanations, ignoring pluto completly.

Traditional techniques can explain anything assigned to pluto by modern astrology.
__________________
If you'd like a private Horary or Natal consultation, please visit me at:

https://antiqueastrology.wordpress.com/

You'll also find some tips for horary practice!
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Dirius For This Useful Post:
JUPITERASC (01-25-2015)
  #20  
Unread 01-25-2015, 02:19 PM
HYS HYS is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 45
Re: Confused about Pluto

Quote:
Originally Posted by JUPITERASC View Post
Telescopes and microscopes are neither owned nor used by the vast majority of the population
Their use is limited to those who can afford their purchase

....
most of the seven billion inhabitants of our planet
can go outdoors and simply look at the sky with unaided vision
and observe the movements of the stars/planets/stellar objects

It hink this is irrelvant. How many people really observe the sky at night? Couple hundred thousand? This does not affect astrology at all. If astrology would be dependent on how people observe the sky it wouldn't work at all, becasue most people observe the TV at night. It is the common knowledge that forms believes about the world and that does affect astrology; what we know about the world and how where we can find a copy of it in astrological symbolism.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JUPITERASC View Post
Regarding microbes being invisible to unaided vision
there is no consensus exactly how humans are affected by them
Quote:
Originally Posted by JUPITERASC View Post
They can make you sick and kill you, that is proven. The complete role is not uncovered but there is known branches that kill people and there is no doubt about that. HIV a virus (in modern astrology viruses belong to Pluto) behind AIDS and is proven to kill people. No doubt that things we can't see exercise influence on us.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JUPITERASC View Post
given that modern astrology is dependent on traditional astrology
on which it is obviously founded
that is the sensible approach
Yes, traditonal astrology is an important source for modern astrology. But traditional astrologers didn't acquire their knowledge in 200 years, lets give modern astrologers some time to build the art :-)
__________________
http://www.horoscopeyourself.com Free interpreted horoscopes, astrology charts and calculations
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Unread 01-25-2015, 02:49 PM
JUPITERASC's Avatar
JUPITERASC JUPITERASC is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 62,778
Re: Confused about Pluto

Quote:
Originally Posted by HYS View Post

It hink this is irrelvant.
How many people really observe the sky at night? Couple hundred thousand?


Exactly ~ thousands of years ago astrology began when people began observing the sky at night

Today, the vast majority are so out of touch with visual sky observations
that many assume that a Tropical astrology chart shows the visible location of planets/stars
but Tropical astrology instead shows the location of planets/stars as they once were more than two thousand years ago


people are easily confused simply due to being unfamiliar with the sky at night


Quote:
Originally Posted by HYS View Post

This does not affect astrology at all.


On the contrary
an understanding of the night skies is a pre-requisite of an understanding of astrology


Quote:
Originally Posted by HYS View Post
If astrology would be dependent on how people observe the sky it wouldn't work at all,
becasue most people observe the TV at night.

It is the common knowledge that forms believes about the world and that does affect astrology;
what we know about the world and how where we can find a copy of it in astrological symbolism.

astrology is based on visible locations of visible planets in visible skies
Quote:
Originally Posted by HYS View Post
They can make you sick and kill you, that is proven. The complete role is not uncovered but there is known branches that kill people and there is no doubt about that. HIV a virus (in modern astrology viruses belong to Pluto
Quote:
Originally Posted by HYS View Post
behind AIDS and is proven to kill people. No doubt that things we can't see exercise influence on us.
There is no proof that anything 'belongs to dwarf planet pluto'
Obviously, the world of theoretical physics also tells us that everything is energy
nevertheless
our experience is of visible skies with visible planets/stars

Quote:
Originally Posted by HYS View Post
Yes, traditonal astrology is an important source for modern astrology.

But traditional astrologers didn't acquire their knowledge in 200 years, lets give modern astrologers some time to build the art :-)

Traditional astrology as well as ancient astrology are the sources for modern astrology
and ancient astrology is thousands of years in the making
so
from the comments you have posted
you accept that modern astrologers require another few thousand years 'to build the art from their perspective'
in the meantime let's make use of tried and tested methods
successful for thousands of years
__________________
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
The Following User Says Thank You to JUPITERASC For This Useful Post:
Dirius (01-25-2015)
  #22  
Unread 01-25-2015, 03:01 PM
HYS HYS is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 45
Re: Confused about Pluto

Quote:
Originally Posted by Konrad View Post
Well I would argue that the world is still based upon only what we see, but it just so happens that people can now see to differing levels with the aid of machines. That doesn't equate to a greater understanding of life though, or even any form of progress. Until modern thought can explain the mechanics of how planetary configurations signify (and I definitely don't mean cause) happenings on earth, we shouldn't be using mainstream modern scientific thought as a basis for anyone's astrology.
It is completly human to use concepts that we don't fully understand for our benefit. People use laptops without fully understanding how they work ... Uranium and Radium have been thougt harmless for some 50 years, it was used in food cans and sold to people, Marie Curie died experimenting with it using no shielding. Without that there would be no nuclear energy, no potential for a clean efficient fussion reactor currently build in France.

I use this example to say, that the use of concepts we are not fully capable of understanding can cause some harm but that this harm is part of the pioneering work neccessary to fully understand them. Just leaving them apart does not help uncover they meaning properly, Pluto will not come down to tells us how we have to understand him. We have to do it ourselves. I agree it should be done carefuly.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Konrad View Post
The point is though, ancient peoples were aware of things beyond human perception, there are whole philosophical and theological schools dedicated to that very idea. To think that astrologers of yesteryear only used what they saw because it is all they saw, and if they could have viewed Pluto thorugh a telescope then they would have considered it too, is failing to recognise the foundational principles of their practice. The appearance of light in the sky here on earth was linked to knowledge of divine will from astrology's earliest recorded times. This is why the Heliacal appearances and disappearances were so important, why eclipses are such powerful omens, why we pay more attention to Aldebaran than Al-Hecka and on and on. I know this is not how a modern mind would think,
Yes, the ancient greek philosopher had hypotesis about the Sun been a fire ball and that we all made of small invisible parts (atoms). Ancient people knew there is things beyond their perception, else they couldn't make up myths about Pluto and Persephone, that fits so good to the planet Pluto in astrology.
But I don't think the reason why they didn't involve this perception about hidden things in the astrological practice is that they wouldn't need them or find wiser to use only the visible planets. I think the reason is that they couldn't, because even they knew about Pluto from the myths, they didn't know his location in the sky. So, I don't think we really can state that ancient astrologers wouldn't use Uranus, Neptune and Pluto and rather choose to build a system only on planets visible with the naked eye. The issue is they couldn't build another system as the one they build. And I also think that it is a very good and logical system becasue it has been build for so long.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Konrad View Post
but ask yourself this: has the free-for-all of invisible bodies that surrounds the modern astrologies' practice now made it more or less able to foretell events on earth?
I think the new bodies are very usefull and enriching. What is not, is the approach how this is used in practice. Newbie's to astrology purchase as second book something titled Chiron ... I use Chiron and I think he is usefull but I don't see how a beginer in astrology could benefit from studying him. There is lack of organization among astrologers. The same goes for Pluto, as I stated in my first post here: I myself have some healthy doubts how to assign him properly, I have no doubts he works but there is open questions about his domicile, there is good arguments on more sides, and only somebody who studyies astrology very lightly can ignore that. But again that shouldn't be a reason to let him out.
Just my opinion ... not a rule, I am not an astrology cop :-)
__________________
http://www.horoscopeyourself.com Free interpreted horoscopes, astrology charts and calculations
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to HYS For This Useful Post:
waybread (01-26-2015)
  #23  
Unread 01-25-2015, 03:03 PM
JUPITERASC's Avatar
JUPITERASC JUPITERASC is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 62,778
Re: Confused about Pluto

Quote:
Originally Posted by HYS View Post

The perception of things around us changed strongly in the modern area. Telescopes and microscopes transformed the way we percieve the world and that should count also for astrology. You can't see microbes with your naked eye, does it mean they can not influence you? They do, they exist and you can feel them working on your body. Why couldn't you percieve and feel Neptune without seeing it with your naked eye? The same Pluto.

The naked eye rule is important and astronomical observations are important for astrology. But the way we percieve the world is no longer based only on what we can see. Ancient astrologers used only what they could see because they had no idea how much more there is hidden to the naked eye.

Naked eye vision is still important but everybody knows that there is important things we can not see with our naked eye and still they influence us. That is one of the important fundaments of modernity and also modern astrology.

However, I agree that every student of astrology should master the traditional planets and afterwards proceed to the modern.
keep in mind that as Konrad has already stated
that's not necessarily so

Quote:
Originally Posted by Konrad View Post

Well I would argue that the world is still based upon only what we see,
but it just so happens that people can now see to differing levels with the aid of machines.
That doesn't equate to a greater understanding of life though, or even any form of progress.
Until modern thought can explain the mechanics of how planetary configurations signify (and I definitely don't mean cause) happenings on earth,
we shouldn't be using mainstream modern scientific thought as a basis for anyone's astrology.

The point is though, ancient peoples were aware of things beyond human perception,
there are whole philosophical and theological schools dedicated to that very idea.


To think that astrologers of yesteryear only used what they saw because it is all they saw,
and if they could have viewed Pluto thorugh a telescope then they would have considered it too,
is failing to recognise the foundational principles of their practice.


The appearance of light in the sky here on earth was linked to knowledge of divine will from astrology's earliest recorded times. This is why the Heliacal appearances and disappearances were so important, why eclipses are such powerful omens, why we pay more attention to Aldebaran than Al-Hecka and on and on. I know this is not how a modern mind would think, but ask yourself this: has the free-for-all of invisible bodies that surrounds the modern astrologies' practice now made it more or less able to foretell events on earth?
__________________
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
  #24  
Unread 01-25-2015, 03:18 PM
HYS HYS is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 45
Re: Confused about Pluto

Quote:
Originally Posted by JUPITERASC View Post


On the contrary
an understanding of the night skies is a pre-requisite of an understanding of astrology



astrology is based on visible locations of visible planets in visible skies


Understanding of astrolgoy yes. But I am saying about influence of the stellar bodies. You don't need to know anything about astrology or the sky to be affected by it. And so it is. People watch the TV at night not the stars, but anyway are affected by them. So, it is irrelevant if a person can find Venus on the night sky, Venus is affecting him. Therefore it is irelevant if you can see Pluto on the night sky and how, it exercise influence anyway. People didn't start to be influenced by the sky as they started watching it. Observation of the sky is needed to understand astrology but is not a prerequisite to be affected by it.


Quote:
Originally Posted by JUPITERASC View Post

There is no proof that anything 'belongs to dwarf planet pluto'

Pluto as dwarf planet - that is a astronomical definition based on his size, mineral structure and other criteria that are irrelevant to astrology. That is why I don't care if astronomers change his status, they use different metrics. Astronomers measure Pluto and try to figure out how the univers works. Astrologers observer Pluto to understand humans. Let's don't mix it up. Astronomical observations are crucial to astrology, astronomical ends, definitions, generalizations not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JUPITERASC View Post
Traditional astrology as well as ancient astrology are the sources for modern astrology
and ancient astrology is thousands of years in the making
so
from the comments you have posted
you accept that modern astrologers require another few thousand years 'to build the art from their perspective'
in the meantime let's make use of tried and tested methods
successful for thousands of years


I didn't say few thousand. Modern pace of acquiring knowledge is multiple times faster then in ancient times .. I don't dismiss traditional astrology at all, but ignoring new inventions is not the way to go for my MC. Clearly there is more then the old system knew, why leaving it out?
__________________
http://www.horoscopeyourself.com Free interpreted horoscopes, astrology charts and calculations

Last edited by HYS; 01-25-2015 at 03:31 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Unread 01-25-2015, 03:21 PM
HYS HYS is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 45
Re: Confused about Pluto

Quote:
Originally Posted by JUPITERASC View Post
keep in mind that as Konrad has already stated
that's not necessarily so
And I replied to this part at the end of my post. I agree with Konrad on that.
__________________
http://www.horoscopeyourself.com Free interpreted horoscopes, astrology charts and calculations
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
confused, pluto

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



All times are GMT. The time now is 02:24 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, 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.