Atlantean wrote:

Re: Eshelman's methods

Yes, there are some eclectic things thrown in there and I'm a little skeptical (still) on his idea of dormancy of ingress charts. On the other hand, one would be hard-pressed to find as many (good) resources on their site (as Solunars has) and no one could say that Eshelman doesn't appear tireless in his pursuit.

Agreed. Jim Eshleman is a true missionary for the ayanamsa and methods he believes to be correct, and he offers these free to anyone interested. Some of these techniques he has devised himself, and others are traditional from the time of the early siderealists.

Re: Krishnamurti vs FB

I worked up dozens and dozens of events using Jim's methods (and the FB ayanamsa) and way beyond chance, the charts were readable and underscored exactly what happened, relative to the event.

These methods might very well work as well or better with the Krishnamurti ayanamsa. (I don’t know which methods you are referring to.) Any cyclic chart related to the year is going to be very close since the difference between Fagan-Bradley and Krishnamurti is almost exactly a degree, 59 minutes. So with solar returns or monthly ingress charts, for example, the two ascendants are often quite close by degree. Only the Moon will have moved significantly between the charts. Nevertheless you are showing that even a minor difference in ascendant degree moves angular planets enough to show the superiority of the KM ayanamsa.

The scientific side of me (and I do have a 1st place State math award - Illinois), is telling me it's EITHER Krishnamurti OR FB, it can't be that both are correct...

I agree which makes the data and charts you are sharing here on Skyscript very valuable. So we have to continue with any additional ways we can find to test the ayanamsa.