Guest guest Posted February 23, 2004 Report Share Posted February 23, 2004 Message: 1 Sun, 22 Feb 2004 10:30:25 -0800 (PST) Juan Oliver <jivio Re: RE: Digest Number 716 >The scientist's mode of research does not prove much...So do not waste your time in research, for scientists. Hi Juan. Sofar I remember I did not write this sentence above. I agree, I put it in the wrong way in my email. Now I realize, that Therese has taken up research mainly to sort out the best ayamsa for mundane questions on sun/moon ingresses,eventually for us. It is free to do that. And I might help her with it. What I stated only was, after her remark that her sensitivity could be better for research than in counselor work. It was not an attack at research. The difference is the sort scientists,I mentioned in my last email, who start research to value astrology. without sufficient knowledge of the whole scale of astrology systems. Michael Gauquelin only started his research to prove astrology was fake to offend his father, being an astrologer. I am not sure, if his wife studied astrology already before or after the discovery of the Mars - effect,but at a congres with astronomers and astrologers, Gauquelin remarked quite friendly to me, after my explanation (done privately during the pause) Mars is active in the XII zone,because one progressive in I it is activated. Seems to me research by astrologers for astrologers is more fun. Regards, Anny Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 24, 2004 Report Share Posted February 24, 2004 Anny... Thanks for your response... It makes a big difference to me knowing how you think and feel instead of presuming that I know what you are saying when I read e-mails. When I read that you wrote the following...>>The scientist's mode of research does not prove much...So do not waste>>your time in research, for scientists. and read what Therese wrote... >>I agree that in general statistics as used in science have proved of >>little use in astrology. I thought you both were in agreement that science has little in the way of valuable information for astrologers. That science such as astrophysics or astronomy or history etc. has little to offer astrology. Again... thanks... Enjoy this link which I received recently from " The Lunar Planner " ... http://www.gps.caltech.edu/%7Echad/2004dw/ If you don't to the Lunar Planner... check it out, I think you would enjoy it... http://www.lunarplanner.com/ Regards, Juan Anny van Berckel <avbdk wrote: Message: 1 Sun, 22 Feb 2004 10:30:25 -0800 (PST) Juan Oliver Re: RE: Digest Number 716 >The scientist's mode of research does not prove much...So do not waste your time in research, for scientists. Hi Juan. Sofar I remember I did not write this sentence above. I agree, I put it in the wrong way in my email. Now I realize, that Therese has taken up research mainly to sort out the best ayamsa for mundane questions on sun/moon ingresses,eventually for us. It is free to do that. And I might help her with it. What I stated only was, after her remark that her sensitivity could be better for research than in counselor work. It was not an attack at research. The difference is the sort scientists,I mentioned in my last email, who start research to value astrology. without sufficient knowledge of the whole scale of astrology systems. Michael Gauquelin only started his research to prove astrology was fake to offend his father, being an astrologer. I am not sure, if his wife studied astrology already before or after the discovery of the Mars - effect,but at a congres with astronomers and astrologers, Gauquelin remarked quite friendly to me, after my explanation (done privately during the pause) Mars is active in the XII zone,because one progressive in I it is activated. Seems to me research by astrologers for astrologers is more fun. Regards, Anny " How can Pluto be in Sagittarius when it's so close to Antares? " ----- Post message: Subscribe: - Un: - List owner: -owner Shortcut URL to this page: / Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 24, 2004 Report Share Posted February 24, 2004 Dear All, There is written: Out of all the people who have Mars traits, for example, only a small number will actually have Mars in a key sector, and some people who have Mars in a key sector won't be Martian at all, Indeed, it is also dependable which sign Mars occupies, and the house. For a scientist, without knowledge of astrology, is his research admirable. He had a very hard life then, in extreme poverty, because he lost his function at the University of Paris,as a scientist. I wonder, Mars in the Vth house is considered to raise his /her kids in the Martian way,I read in my Uranian Astrology book. George Foreman's Mars for instance -I notice now- occupies the Vth house. He might be raised that way too. The sign Leo is prominent in birthfigures too, which I have collected up till now. My grandson's Mars is in Leo in IX. With Ascendant in Scorpio, he chose for the judosport. Sun in Gemini. http://www.astrodatabank.com/AS/JoseBecerra.htm ---------------------------- Interesting is, that my program Janus gave 8 o'çlok 09' as time for the sunrise, after I casted a chart for John Kerry's own given time. After reading a closeup of the Ascendant/MC - degrees for both charts, I have chosen for real sunrise 8.09' his mother's time. His East Point, my first house (Meridian) is in Sagitarius. Two own sons of mine have the same countenance: a lean body and the face. ------------- In the close mutual aspects....................... In the Meridean houses, which I practice are Sun and Moon in opposition from the XII-VI house. It might be the reason of no obvious taking the leader's role in the Senate, or not getting it. Regards, Anny Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.