False Prophets, misleaders, hopesalesmen

[Guest guest]

> Hello Therese

>

> Thanks very much for your comments, but in my experience, it's almost

> impossible to convince Tropical zodiac people that there's a better or

more

> accurate zodiac out there.

 

I think this is basically due to the fact that when you have been preaching

something as the gospel truth or correct system for so long, it is very hard

to then say you were mistaken and there is actually a more correct system.

People like Liz Greene and Robert Hand's whole life is tied to their belief

the tropical zodiac is valid and if not, they have been misleading not only

themselves, but the paying customer for over 20 years!! As a Vedic

astrologer I myself am only interested in what works and what works very

clearly. Intellectual abstractions are fine for learning but in practice I

want clear and precise results and not the psuedo psycho criptic crap I see

in my daily newspaper from Jonathan Canier. Is it wonder astrology is a joke

to most people.

 

 

All the arguments come down to nothing. I've

> decided that the best way is to first define what makes each sign THAT

> sign, and then demonstrate using actual horoscopes that a particular sign

> is indeed THAT sign we're talking about. Tropical astrologers probably

> still won't pay attention, but at least our cards will be on the table.

I'm

> working on a web site to deal with some of these questions. I'll post the

> URL here when the site is up and running.

 

You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make him drink it. The lords of

Tropical zodiac have too much to lose in admitting they are wrong or the

sidereal zodiac is the correct one. To me the proof is totally in the

results. I use the Krishnamurti system which gives stunning results when

used with a correct birthtime. My proof is when I meet a person I have never

known previously and within a few hours of looking at their chart I can

define their life very accurately. What is written in old books has little

meaning to me unless I can see the principals working very clearly

consistently.

 

 

 

> The latest writings on ancient astrology (like Robert Hand's booklets) do

a

> very good job of explaining the history of the zodiac.

 

 

I see alot of this as Tropical Astrology propaganda with Hand trying to

hijack parts of traditional Vedic astrology and give their origins to either

the Greeks or others who used the Tropical zodiac. Most of it as best is

speculation. He would be better off spending his time on researching

horoscopes with both Tropical and sidereal calculations and then he would

clearly see which one works well. People like Richard Houck were honest

enough to admit their research led them to dismiss the tropical zodiac

calculations. Its a pity the others get so much credibility without

producing the results in practical application.

 

If you have any articles on this I can post them on my website at

www.members.optusnet.com.au/skinbags as many people are interested in the

problem of the " two " zodiacs. If you have anything of interest you can share

or anyone else has, please forward your articles to me at

skinbags I often feel like launching a full scale war on

people like Jonathan Canier and his cronies who fill the daily papers with

their Sun sign bullshit. All serious minded astrologers should be concerned

at the damage these hopesalesmen do to our art. I have at many times fought

a lone battle against these people by sending emails asking them for a

reading on my chart to see if they have any real skill. Never ever have got

a reply of course.

 

Andrew