Skyscript Astrology Forum

Hello Tom,

Re: "To stick for Tyl a bit, he is trying to make a living from astrology and that includes selling books as well as consultations, and teaching."

Don't forget the DVD's, the T-shirts, and the keyring. (Okay, there's no T-shirts and keyring)

Re: "He wrote a book on rectification a while back, Astrology of the Famed 1996."

He also has a rectification section in his Synthesis and Counseling book. We stroll through Pat Nixon's rectification to arrive at a very obviously wrong conclusion.

Re: "By his own admission it didn't sell very well..."

See comment immediately above for potentially related reasons.

Re: "He is no fan of primary directions either..."

No, he latched onto Solar Arcs, which can be guesstimated in the head and with 1? of "play" in the system. This is obviously the opposite of Primary Directions (math intensive, requiring a precise birthtime), which exhibit only a few scant minutes of "play."

Re: "...but if we shy from rectification because there are so many ways of doing them..."

That's illogical. It's like saying no one should peel apples because there are many ways to do it. In life, there are often many ways of doing any particular thing, but usually one best way. We should be working hard to find the very best way. [We have very accurately timed births as examples... those would be the ideal fodder for applying various rectification methods and seeing how they actually hold up in practice. ----meaning this should be done publicly...it's already been done many times privately]

Re: "... in order to be consistent we need to shy away from primaries for the same reason."

There may very well be ONE correct method and various approximations that seem to be working. The real telling factor will be the orbs involved. (in terms of evaluating them side-by-side)

Re: "Tyl uses transits and solar arcs for rectification."

...which didn't help one whit with Pat Nixon.

Re: "The main problem with most rectification techniques is that they depend on exact dates and ideally times of major events, yet we would never predict (accurately anyway) to the precise date or even within a few days."

Still, the aspects (in reliable systems) should be "within normal orb" for all the events. Looking for the smallest cumulative error is the way to maximize the potential that it is correct.

Re: "So if someone used, among other things, the dates of births of children for rectification purposes, can we say that with an accurate birth time an astrologer could predict those births accurately years before they occurred? I kind of doubt it."

This sounds reminiscent of the "all Volkswagens are cars, but not all cars are Volkswagens" idea. For the birth of a child, there are several astrological alignments that we would expect. These same line-ups might occur and no child being born, yet, it can be that at an actual birth, these core types of line-ups DO occur. (ie. a person might buy a winning lottery ticket as Jupiter conjoins Venus, but that does not, in any way, mean that every time Jupiter comes to Venus the person wins the lottery. It's far too complex for pat, one-to-one correspondences.)

Still, with an accurate rectification, we should have (at the least) correctly "spelled" astrological aspects at events across the entire event list in reliable systems [ie. forced agreement across several systems, to dispel coincidence] within the normal orbs of maturity for each of those systems...

Look at my chart, below... (rectified 1 min 16 secs earlier than the birth certificate)
When my Ascendant moved (by Primary Direction) to conjoin the Node, I got married. ie. the point of the chart representing "me" came to the exact point of the chart that relates to "familial associations, especially feminine and/or nurturing ones" and I got married.

When my Ascendant moved (by PD) to next conjoin Venus, I got married. ie. the point of the chart representing "me" came to the exact point of the chart that relates to "my beloved" and "important females in the life" and again, I got married.

Would someone (having the exact birthtime) be able to faultlessly predict that I'd get married then? No. [I could have been asexual, uninterested, worse...uninteresting , working alone in an arctic weather station... etc.] Still, when I WOULD get married the symbolism should be correct. And in this case, the Topocentric Primary Directions are right on target...[as are the various other reliable systems, such as Secondaries, Progressed Sidereal Solar Return aspects, Age Harmonics, and Transits]

Peace

James

"To stick for Tyl a bit, he is trying to make a living from astrology and that includes selling books as well as consultations, and teaching."

Should have been to "stick up" for Tyl a bit. My bad.

As for his sales, rectification success or failure had little to do with that. It is text heavy not technique heavy. As I said, the people whose charts he rectified are, except for one, so old that even their birth dates cannot be verified. And that one, I was told worked out well as subsequent records show. But one is not persuasive evidence.

Re: "...but if we shy from rectification because there are so many ways of doing them..."

That's illogical. It's like saying no one should peel apples because there are many ways to do it.

No it isn't but your example is. We can peel apples many ways but we always get the same result: a peeled apple. The various ways of doing rectification DO NOT consistently produce the same result. The same is true for primary directions. If I use Placidus methods for one chart and Regiomontanus for another I get different hit dates - sometimes significantly different. That was the point

"within normal orb"

Orbs are like house systems, everyone has a different idea of what is right. But this begs the question. The rectifiers don't claim they are within a few hours of a correct birth time, they often say "This is it." If I use precise dates and times to work backwards to determine birth time, I should be able to predict precise events in the future with an accurate birth time. No one is so confident as to say, "You will be married on July 7 2022 at 4:00 PM. IF they get it within the year, they're happy.

This sounds reminiscent of the "all Volkswagens are cars, but not all cars are Volkswagens" idea.

That's not an "idea." It's the basis of the syllogism as taught by Aristotle.

Still, with an accurate rectification, we should have (at the least) correctly "spelled" astrological aspects

Not sure which aspects you're referring to. Transits? Directions? Natal? I'm a traditionalist. I don't see aspects as important as moderns do.

Would someone (having the exact birthtime) be able to faultlessly predict that I'd get married then? No. [I could have been asexual, uninterested, worse...uninteresting

I agree that directions etc can manifest more than one way, but if we can't predict a Venus ASC, then either primary directions don't work, or rectification doesn't.

Re: "No it isn't but your example is. We can peel apples many ways but we always get the same result: a peeled apple."

Try peeling it with a paring knife and then peel it with a meat tenderizer. If the result is "the same", it shouldn't matter which method is used.

Re: "The various ways of doing rectification DO NOT consistently produce the same result."

Yes, I totally agree on this point. However, methods that historically HAVE been able to go from event list to well-documented birthtime should be favored, since success in the specific case is a prerequisite to success in the general case.

Re: "The same is true for primary directions. If I use Placidus methods for one chart and Regiomontanus for another I get different hit dates - sometimes significantly different. That was the point"

Several methods giving different answers is not a condemnation of the technique. I think there is one, TRUE method that works and the rest are approximations of the correct method. [Remember that, until Einstein came along, Newtonian physics was considered the final answer on the topic.] Primary Directions do NOT control giant expanses of time. They are not arbiters for a year of time. They can be shown (with proper methodology) to mature in < 0? 6' for all aspects except Conj/Opp, which are < 0? 11'. As for timing, this makes all aspects (except Conj/Opp) to be +/- 1 month of time. For the Conj/Opp, it's basically +/- 2 months of time. [Keeping in mind that most events are shown by several aspects and the timing of the event normally falls within the overlapping period of the relevant aspects...]

Re: "If I use precise dates and times to work backwards to determine birth time, I should be able to predict precise events in the future with an accurate birth time. No one is so confident as to say, "You will be married on July 7 2022 at 4:00 PM. IF they get it within the year, they're happy."

Yes, but the exact dates make for a better fit when working backwards to find that exact birthtime. [Nothing is worse for a rectifier than to be sent a list of events that says "went back to school in '82... had a rough year when I was 38 with various medical problems... etc." For rectification, the exact dates are important, because the orbs ARE defined and only on those exact dates will it be sure that the aspects are within the prescribed orbs...]

Still, I have a problem with your phrase, "I should be able to predict precise events." Which is more important here, the precise event or the ramifications therefrom? To me, a "career change" is a specific event, even though we don't know if the client quits, gets caught stealing stationery, his company down-sizes, a relative offers him a more lucrative position, etc.

Since we have this overlap of meanings attributable to the symbols that we use in astrology, sometimes we can't know which particular "flavor" will be the correct one. Let's take a simple example, Saturn conjoining the Midheaven. This COULD be a time when the client takes on more personal responsibility relating to his work. This COULD be a time when signs in his life make it apparent that he has fallen off his path and needs a serious course-correction. This COULD be the time when his elderly Father becomes a major focus in his life as he decides whether to keep "Dad" at home or put him in an assisted-living facility. This COULD be a time when the client begins a major period of agoraphobia. All of these things "fit" with Saturn-MC. It would take other information to refine what is likely to take place.

Tom, if you go in to Baskin-Robbins, it might be amazingly easy to surmise as you exit, cone in hand, that you bought ice cream...it might be quite some feat to guess the flavor from 50 yards away. Astrologically, it's the same way. When I saw a Primary Direction of the Moon moving to conjoin Pluto (a once in a lifetime event, directions-wise) coming up in my Horoscope, I contemplated the base meaning of the symbols and surmised that I would have some emotionally shocking and transforming event that might well involve a death. I spoke at length about this to both my Wife and a friend of mine (also an astrologer). The event that transpired right at that time was the death of my step-Father. We weren't that close, but he came into my Mother's (and Brothers') life right at a time when they all really needed a stabilizing influence such as his. He was quite strict with my brother, David, but I came to realize that that was actually in David's best interests in the long run. In short, my step-Father's passing, which I would have thought (in contemplating the possibility) would be a relative non-event; was, on the contrary, a major event because it completely transformed my opinion of him and of his role in our lives. That there would be an emotional shock was an easy call, since it fits the symbols at their higher levels of meaning. However, not knowing that my step-Father was even ill and not having any life-circumstances drawing any attention to him made it very unlikely that anyone would have guessed the exact event.

Re: "That's not an "idea." It's the basis of the syllogism as taught by Aristotle."

Which Aristotle, of course, couldn't have taught unless it first was an idea in Aristotle's head.

Re: "Not sure which aspects you're referring to. Transits? Directions? Natal? I'm a traditionalist. I don't see aspects as important as moderns do."

I was referring to all "reliable" systems, with my definition of reliable including Topocentric Primary Directions, Secondary Progressions, Progressed Sidereal Solar Returns, Age Harmonics, Transits, and Solar-Lunar cycles... all direct and converse... In a correct rectification, there will be an agreement across the event list with appropriate astrological aspects in ALL of these systems with a very high reliability.

I have two dozen dated events in my event list. Feel free to pick a number and I'll show you, for that event, how it is expressed in all of these systems, since they all will agree with each other. (when it's the correct birth-time)

Re: "I agree that directions etc can manifest more than one way, but if we can't predict a Venus ASC..."

Can you elaborate on what you mean exactly when you say "but if we can't predict a Venus ASC..."? "Venus-Asc" as a theme can have several meanings...likewise, this aspect forming can have several outcomes...and still be 100% thematically correct...

Re: "...then either primary directions don't work, or rectification doesn't."

We have to take both of these "as they come", not how we might choose them to be. From having examined literally hundreds upon hundreds of events in these systems, I can state unequivocally, that Primary Directions (properly calculated) most definitely DO work. (and within just scant minutes of arc)

Peace

James

Several methods giving different answers is not a condemnation of the technique. I think there is one, TRUE method that works and the rest are approximations of the correct method.

I'm not sure if you are referring to the "technique" of primary directions or rectification. I'm not "condemning" either. I find primary directions fascinating, but also troubling because of the variety of results even tiny differences in birth time can make over the years. I'm suspicious of using them as a stand alone method of rectification. Birth time is critical with all kinds of primaries. I like to compare it to shooting a gun. If we perfectly level the gun and place the target on a perfectly level surface, we will hit the target in the same place (assuming perfectly straight trajectory of the bullet) no matter how far we place it from the gun. Now just tilt the gun upwards imperceptibly. As we move the target back farther and farther, the bullet strikes the target in different places until at some point the bullet sails over the target and misses completely. This is what primary directions can do over the lifetime even if the birth time is off by seconds.

JFK has a recorded birth time of 3:00 PM (May 29, 1917, Brookline MA USA). Despite it being on the hour it seems to be a very accurate time. Hell somebody has to be born on the hour. Rumen Kolev felt it necessary to rectify his chart to 2:59:31 or take off 29 seconds in order to get the directions to work best. Please don't misunderstand. I am not taking a shot at Kolev. I am seriously impressed with his mathematical ability and his knowledge of primary directions, not to mention his knowledge of Babylonian astrology. By rectifying the chart to this point, he managed to get a "hit" of a relevant direction (I forget which one) that occurred on Nov 22, 1963, the day of Kennedy's murder. A cynic might call that "forcing" the data to obtain the desired result.

Now with that in mind, how am I supposed to think primary directions can be used with no known birth time to rectify a chart accurately, when, after the rectification, usually to the second, the chart can only indicate an event within a year or six months either side of the hit? We might be able to use a birth time 10 or 15 minutes different than 3:00 PM and come up with a couple of hits within May 22 1963 and May 22 1964 that indicated death.

Let's say a man comes to me for a rectification; he knows his birth date and place of birth but no time - maybe he says he thinks its in the afternoon. Let's further say he was born in 1980 and was married on June 1, 2005. So I look for a primary direction, using that date and birth place that hits the 7th house on June 1 2005. So I place Venus on the 7th on that day and by that get my first test birth time. Now I use other timed events and come up with a birth time that places the hits so that the Venus direction works as well as the others. Fair enough. Now let's look at this a different way. The same man comes to me in 2002. He gives me as his birth time, the one we would have worked out in the previous example. Viola! I can now predict his marriage to take place on or about June 1, 2005. Right? Not really. And suppose his actual birth time is three minutes difference from the rectified time? The marriage prediction could be way off. My whole point is that if we can do it backwards with great accuracy we should be able to do it frontwards with great accuracy, but experience says otherwise.

Morin suggested using two (2) solar returns when a primary direction hit, just to get the year of the event predicted by the direction correct. He did argue that we could narrow it down to the month using lunar returns within that year, but due to the tables he used, he never accurately calculated a lunar return in his life. But I'm supposed to accept the idea that I can get an accurate birth time by using events that, according to the method I'm using, could have happened six months either way? And if I make the slightest mistake, those events might not occur for years after the prediction? Sorry.

This doesn't invalidate the technique. It simply places it in perspective.

Several methods giving different answers is not a condemnation of the technique. I think there is one, TRUE method that works and the rest are approximations of the correct method.

This "belief" comes up throughout astrology's history. Cardan and Guarico are probably the best example of two highly talented and knowledgeable astrologers taking different roads while condemning the other, each thoroughly convinced he was following the one true Ptolemy and each doing things differently. Just look at John Worsdale for the same thing, and Placidus. Modern astrologers are the same way. Stephen Arroyo once said he studied ALL (his word) methods of astrology and found none of them worked very well, so he reinvented it. I believe Dane Rudhyar was of the same school of thought despite his borrowing much of his astrology from Marc Edmond Jones, another re-writer of astrology. This is a problem, not a solution.

Still, I have a problem with your phrase, "I should be able to predict precise events." Which is more important here, the precise event or the ramifications therefrom?

Begging the question. If the method of determining the birth time from timed events doesn't produce an accurate time, by definition it isn't worth very much. The topic is whether or not an accurate birth time can be reliably determined over and over again using accurately timed life events working backwards. If we believe that, we should also believe that given an accurate birth time, we should be able to predict, i.e. working forward using the same technique, accurately timed events to the day, or very close to it. The precise nature of the event might not be predictable, but the manifestation should match what is in the nativity. In other words, a 7th house "hit" should manifest in a 7th house way to the day. It could be a divorce or a marriage, for example. We aren't that good. You say that isn't so, but once you accept the rectified time, if you work forward, you will find the hits coincide with events a lot closer than we would be willing to predict without a known outcome. So the rectification technique of using known events as though they were predictable to the day in an accurately time chart, is by itself, suspect.

That doesn't make it useless. We might get a serviceable chart, but as the native gets older, if we aren't spot on, the directions become less reliable.

Personal anecdotes may be interesting but they are not persuasive, which is why I rarely use them. But since they were used, here is one to contemplate. I have a birth certificate time for my birth. The teaching is that things happen when directed planets reach angles by primary direction. Not in my life. Directions to angles should be the most reliable since all astrologers agree on how to do it, even if they don't agree on what rate to use (i.e. the key). I can jiggle things a bit and get hits that coincide with events if I keep changing the key. But that's not all events. Using primary directions, my father and mother should still be alive.
/color]

Re: "That's not an "idea." It's the basis of the syllogism as taught by Aristotle."

Which Aristotle, of course, couldn't have taught unless it first was an idea in Aristotle's head. Wink

You don't get off that easy. You were dismissing my argument on the grounds that the syllogism you quoted was frivolous. Not on whether or not Aristotle thought of it before he wrote it. You called it "an idea" to be dismissive. You got caught

Re: "I'm not sure if you are referring to the "technique" of primary directions or rectification."

Sorry, at that point I was referring to Topocentric Primary Directions. (but could have just as easily been referring to rectification)

Re: "I find primary directions fascinating..."

Me too! With an accurate birthtime, they are unbelievably reliable. [With the qualification that I am speaking of Topocentric Primary Directions. I tried all the other methods that I could find and none of them connected up to the events of my life. The Topocentric Primary Directions, on the other hand, work flawlessly. Telling is that the correct house cusps are activated at major events. ie. 3rd House for births of siblings, 5th House for births of my children, 8th House over and over and over again for various deaths... thus, FIXING the exact time by the confirmation of exact Angles/Cusps.]

Re: "Birth time is critical with all kinds of primaries."

Yes. Changing the birthtime by 30 seconds can make the appropriate Primary Directions fall right off the list! This is both a joy and a curse... The curse is that a very tightly-defined birthtime is necessary to even USE Primary Directions. The joy is that the ratio from dynamic aspect maturity to birthtime is so high that finding the correct Primary Direction sequence fixes the birthtime very precisely.

Re: "This is what primary directions can do over the lifetime even if the birth time is off by seconds."

The more events that one has that didn't occur at a young age, the more likely that one will have a more refined birthtime. Still, the fact that (Topocentric) Primary Directions mature in just scant minutes of arc makes the fixing of the birthtime less problematic than the personal anecdote you referenced.

Re: "JFK has a recorded birth time of 3:00 PM (May 29, 1917, Brookline MA USA)."

Yeah, it's actually 2:59:44 PM.

Re: "Rumen Kolev felt it necessary to rectify his chart to 2:59:31 or take off 29 seconds in order to get the directions to work best."

He likely wasn't using Topocentric Primary Directions... He has moved the birthtime to (approx.) as far before the actual birth as the documented time was after it.

Re: "By rectifying the chart to this point, he managed to get a "hit" of a relevant direction (I forget which one) that occurred on Nov 22, 1963, the day of Kennedy's murder. A cynic might call that "forcing" the data to obtain the desired result."

In Topocentric Primary Directions (on the day of the assassination), we have (c) Sun square Saturn (Orb 0? 0' of arc).

In Secondary Progressions, we have Saturn conjunct Neptune (Orb 0? 6' of arc).

In Transits, we have Saturn square 8th (Orb 0? 1' of arc) and (c) Pluto conjunct 8th (Orb 0? 1' of arc).

In Progressed Sidereal Solar Return (done Tropically), we have Mars inconjunct Uranus (Orb 0? 3' of arc) and Moon sesquiquadrate 8th (Orb 0? 4' of arc).

In Age Harmonics, we have AH Mars (r. 4th) semisquare AH Saturn (chart ruler).

Re: "Now with that in mind, how am I supposed to think primary directions can be used with no known birth time to rectify a chart accurately, when, after the rectification, usually to the second, the chart can only indicate an event within a year or six months either side of the hit?"

That's the misconception. Primary Directions are NOT arbiters for expanses of time. With a maturity of < 0? 6' for all aspects except Conj/Opp and < 0? 11' for those, the aspects are NOT lining up to within +/- 6 months. In most cases, it's +/- 1 month! Additionally, since there are usually several aspects tied to any particular event, the Overlap Method (see Marr) can narrow that period down...

Re: "We might be able to use a birth time 10 or 15 minutes different than 3:00 PM and come up with a couple of hits within May 22 1963 and May 22 1964 that indicated death."

We only need to move the birthtime 16 seconds to get all systems to line up.

Re: "My whole point is that if we can do it backwards with great accuracy we should be able to do it frontwards with great accuracy, but experience says otherwise."

Partly, that depends on the level of precision you are talking about. If there is a Mars-Uranus direction, which hints at some type of accident/mishap; are we calling it a "hit" when there is an accident/mishap, or is it necessary to say that one will get run over by old lady McCreary at 3:12 pm in her cousin's Lexus at the corner of Hollywood and Vine? If we only require correctness to the root meanings of the symbols, then I think the ability to predict will be actually pretty reliable.

Re: "This doesn't invalidate the technique. It simply places it in perspective."

Yes, but realize it appears fixed that way due to your perspective/experience with the technique, not due to the technique's inherent qualities.

Re: "This "belief" comes up throughout astrology's history. Cardan and Guarico are probably the best example of two highly talented and knowledgeable astrologers taking different roads while condemning the other..."

Yes, but to me, since many are capable of being analyzed, we CAN come to definitive answers about many things in Astrology. [Secondary Progression angles/cusps working by True Solar motion in Right Ascension being a perfect example. This can be seen to be the correct method (it gives the smallest orbs consistently), but yet there is no definitive statement regarding its correctness and nearly all astrological software defaults to True Solar motion in Longitude.]

Re: "The topic is whether or not an accurate birth time can be reliably determined over and over again using accurately timed life events working backwards."

I agree, this is THE TOPIC. Luckily, it's not a question. When I enter life events for JFK into Polaris and Polaris indicates the birthtime as 2:59:44 pm, vs. the documented birthtime of 3:00 pm; I am calling that a hit. Show any other methods that can do this, let alone repeatedly....

Re: "Personal anecdotes may be interesting but they are not persuasive..."

More persuasive than were there no personal anecdotes.

Re: "I have a birth certificate time for my birth. The teaching is that things happen when directed planets reach angles by primary direction."

It's not just when they reach angles, it also includes aspects to angles as well as aspects to cusps and aspects to other planets.

Re: "Not in my life."

If you have an approximate birthtime and quite a few events, I would be happy to DEMONSTRATE appropriate Primary Directions at events.

Re: "Directions to angles should be the most reliable since all astrologers agree on how to do it, even if they don't agree on what rate to use (i.e. the key)."

Naibod time key with Carl K?hr's calculation refinements appears to be THE system, others approximating.

Re: "I can jiggle things a bit and get hits that coincide with events if I keep changing the key. But that's not all events. Using primary directions, my father and mother should still be alive."

Is your (perceived) birthdata publicly available? What are the dates that your Mother and Father died, if you don't mind my asking? I want to look in the vicinity of the birthdata that you are using and see if there are stand-out Primary Directions normally present at parental death and see if the birthtime can be refined a minute or two here or there...

Re: "You don't get off that easy. You were dismissing my argument on the grounds that the syllogism you quoted was frivolous."

No, the syllogism is (basically) correct. My point is that it's not equivocal in both directions. In other words, one might KNOW that the event is "a small blue Audi, ignoring the school crossing signs, drove at too high rate of speed and struck three children in the crosswalk. Two of the children are okay; however, one of the children suffered a broken leg. The driver has a history of moving violations of various types and was driving on a suspended license. He is being held in jail on a $5000 bond and has procured a lawyer." We CAN use this event and look backwards for appropriate astrological factors to explain the event and often also many of the surrounding circumstances.

Forget Primary Directions for a moment. There are no dynamic systems in astrology that I am aware of that will allow you to see the symbols and project forward to say, "in Pasadena, on July 17th, just before 3:30 pm, a small blue Audi WILL ignore the school crossing signs, WILL drive at too high rate of speed and WILL strike three children in a crosswalk. Two of the children WILL be okay; however, one of the children WILL suffer a broken leg. The driver WILL be found to have a history of moving violations of various types and WILL be driving on a suspended license. He WILL be held in jail on a $5000 bond and WILL procure a lawyer."

Looking forward will never be as detailed (potentially) as looking backwards, since in the rear-viewing stance, we already have the DETAILS and are looking for astrology that matches the BIG PICTURE. Looking forward, it will be impossible to use the astrology that shows us the BIG PICTURE and be able to deduce all the DETAILS. Open-ended prediction in astrology does not have a very good track record, regardless of methods used. Fixed-date events have a much higher success rate. ie. If I show you a chart and say, "here is someone's chart...what do you think happens to them in the next year?", it will be hard to give much detail as to actual events (regardless of method used), especially if you know virtually nothing about their actual life. If, instead, I say, "here is someone's chart who is running for local city counsel for an election in early November, will they be elected?", I am much more likely to arrive at a precisely correct answer.

"Hindsight is better than foresight" is not a cliche reserved for astrologers!

Peace

James

Re: "JFK has a recorded birth time of 3:00 PM (May 29, 1917, Brookline MA USA)."

Yeah, it's actually 2:59:44 PM.

Are you serious? Look, rather than jiggle a chart with past events to prove that other past events fall into line to get the results you want, why not make a prediction and see if it works with the precision you claim? There are enough famous people with sufficiently accurate birth data and known events in their lives for you to rectify (You did it with JFK) that you should be able to predict something within the time frame you claim is possible.

Taking my birth time using events like marriage and deaths of parents demonstrates nothing. You can just say my hospital birth time is off and you got it right. There is no way to demonstrate which one is correct.

My birth time might be around here somewhere, but I don't want it publicized because of the potential for identity theft. Yeah it's like getting hit by lightning, but why take the chance? Someone several years ago got a birth time for me pretty close to the birth certificate time using the Tritune of Hermes, a method that requires no events in the life.

By the way a "hit" means the perfection of an aspect or conjunction. It's the exact time of a transit, progression or direction. No orb.

And the syllogism is not "basically" correct. It is correct. End of story. A Volkswagen is a car and not all cars are Volkswagens. There is nothing there to fudge. You're being dismissive again, only less so, this time.

Excuse me for interrupting this fascinating dialogue....but Tom, wouldn't the problem with forecasting events be that a given astrological signature can have more than one outcome? For example, does a big whoop-de-do involving the 7th house indicate marriage, or perhaps two people deciding to live together? The 5th house rules all kinds of things besides children. Do you celebrate the birth of a child or winning the lottery?

Re: "Are you serious?"

Deathly so...and by the way, it's not my rectification. JFK was done by Isaac Starkman, I believe... I have merely reviewed this one extensively because I am a JFK fanatic.

Re: "Look, rather than jiggle a chart with past events..."

"Jiggling" a chart based on past events is exactly HOW TO rectify. Lining up major Primary Directions with events in the life is the best method. Lilly said as much and that was without the advantage (yes, advantage) of Carl K?hr's calculation refinements and the discovery (not invention!) of Topocentric Houses.

Re: "...to prove that other past events fall into line to get the results you want, why not make a prediction..."

Successful predictions (throughout history) have been shown to sometimes occur from using the wrong or imperfect data, so that literally proves NOTHING. A successful prediction can (and often has) issued from the wrong birth data. Wrong predictions have been made from the correct data. [Several astrologers have made correct U.S.A. predictions, with each using a different chart. From this alone, it can be seen that a correct prediction does not ensure correct data...]

Re: "Taking my birth time using events like marriage and deaths of parents demonstrates nothing."

Sunrise doesn't demonstrate anything to "flat-Earthers". Since you choose to withhold the data, it's an easy statement to make. If I take you to the shooting range and claim that you can't hit a two liter bottle with my .45 and then won't let you shoot my .45, you're going to have a hard time PROVING that you could do it. I've come here and offered to demonstrate something publicly and you have done the discussion-equivalent of pleading the Fifth Amendment...

Re: "You can just say my hospital birth time is off and you got it right. There is no way to demonstrate which one is correct."

Not without looking at it. You are correct. Very few planets have been discovered by completely avoiding the sky.

Re: "Yeah it's like getting hit by lightning, but why take the chance?"

Better safe than sorry. Tip: Avoid shadows, they breed danger.

Re: "...the Tritune of Hermes..."

In many well-timed births, the conditions of the Tritune of Hermes can be shown to not even be mathematically possible... ie. when it can be easily demonstrated that it can not work in specific cases, it can't be correct in the general case

Re: "By the way a "hit" means the perfection of an aspect or conjunction. It's the exact time of a transit, progression or direction. No orb."

Not in the way it was being used in the sentence. A hit is when an aspect that thematically fits an event is within orb, coincident with the event. As various systems have different angles of application, the amount of orb varies. In TPD's and Secondary Progressions (other than those involving the progressed Moon), normally 0? 11' is the maximum. For Transits, that orb is in the area of 1? 20'.

If we're analyzing in a directional system and I have a birthtime that I believe is correct and we look at a past event, say the birth of a Son; and we have the direction "Mars conjunct 5th", that is a hit... ie. the event suggested by the astrological symbolism matches the actual event and is within orb at the time of the event. If the prominent direction at the time of the event was Saturn conjunct 9th, then it would not be a hit, as Saturn at the 9th does not suggest "birth of Son." [Hopefully, you can see how/why Mars at the 5th "fits" (thematically) for birth of Son.]

Re: "And the syllogism is not "basically" correct. It is correct. End of story. A Volkswagen is a car and not all cars are Volkswagens. There is nothing there to fudge. You're being dismissive again, only less so, this time."

You still seem to be missing MY point. If we stand in front of my garage and I (truthfully) tell you that there is a Volkswagen inside, it is a GIVEN that there is a car in my garage. If I (truthfully) tell you that there is a car inside my garage, you will NOT know if it's a Volkswagen or some other make of car. That is the nature of my analogy. If we have an event, we already know empirically (by experience) what aspects are normal for the event as well as knowing thematically the ones that suggest the event (by definition). All accidents should exhibit astrology that suggests "accidents", HOWEVER, the astrology that suggests "accidents" can be the same exact astrological factors that fit other events! Uranus-Mars might be an accident, but it might be a major episode of losing your cool. It might be nothing more than cantankerous rebellion, loosely controlled. If Uranus-Mars conspicuously includes Jupiter, it might be a constructive, liberating event and no accident at all. Put Venus in place of Jupiter and it might be signifying nothing more than kinky sex!

So...what do we know?

1) An accurate prediction does not necessarily require an accurate birth time. [ie. accurate predictions have been made using the wrong data...and the right data has led to wrong predictions, so nothing can be considered proven about the birthtime based on any predictions, whether they are correct or not]

2) Astrology can not be proven to a skeptic, therefore it should come as no surprise when rectification isn't acknowledged by a skeptic astrologer.

3) The definition of "rectify" is "to set right, to make correct." To "not rectify" is to "not set right", "to not correct." ie. the data is imprecise/problematic and we'd rather work with the known faulty data than to take a chance that the corrected birthtime is not 100% correct. I put forth that this is an illogical stance. We can see by the increased frequency of x:00, x:15, x:30, and x:45 birthtimes in the AA-rated database that many birthtimes are in error on the order of 3.75 minutes of time. (assuming that births occur potentially at any given time of the day) Almost four minutes of time relates to almost a whole degree on the Midheaven. If one is using only Transits, one might not even notice the error so much! (ie. Transits, since they have up to 1? 20' of arc as normal orb, can be considered a system with a lot of "slop". For anyone using Topocentric Primary Directions, Secondary Progressions (with Angles/Cusps moved by true Solar Right Ascension), PSSR, and Age Harmonics; an error of almost a degree is completely unacceptable/unusable.) If I take my birthtime and fudge it to one minute later, the perfect line-up of aspects to events across my entire event list in all of these systems completely falls apart. If I fudge it to one minute earlier, the same thing...the main "telling" events fall off the list of aspects in orb! Yet, with this precise time (again, 1 min and 16 secs earlier than Birth Certificate), every one of my events exhibits correctly-themed astrology at events. This is true whether the events analyzed are those that went into the rectification or with the four major events that I have, which were not included in the rectification, as they hadn't transpired yet (3 of the 4 events) or were an event that I later researched to find the date of (1 of the 4 events). Three of these four events were deaths, so the astrology is relatively (and expectedly) dramatic, and involving multiple alignments to just minutes to the 8th House Cusp.

4) The proof of the astrological pudding is in the eating and we've established that Tom is only eating an ice cream of unknown flavor.

Peace

James

James I honestly believe you didn't understand a word I wrote.

Re: "You can just say my hospital birth time is off and you got it right. There is no way to demonstrate which one is correct."

Not without looking at it. You are correct. Very few planets have been discovered by completely avoiding the sky.

You're snarky response has nothing to do with what I wrote. I'll try it one more time. If you get different results than the birth certificate, you claim the BC is wrong. So who can tell which time, the BC or the rectified time, is correct, if no one was present at the birth to verify it? You'll say the rectified time because of the result. I say that's a priori reasoning unless you can predict future events with your new birth time.

To say you can't make a prediction, but you can figure out a birth time with known events, makes one wonder why we should bother at all. We already know what's happened. If all you want to do is solve puzzles fine.

As for jiggling, yes that's what you do. And by doing that you can perfectly line up a "hit" on the date a known event happened and then claim your method works, but if you can't do it for future events, you're not doing anything at all. I can find a birth time for me that will put Venus on the DSC the day I was married, but that proves nothing, if no other directions work in the future. The purpose of directions is prediction, not rectification. Martin Ganston noted in his book on primaries that they seemed to be used for predicting length of life initially. I don't see any other use for them other than prediction. What is the point in rectifying a chart if you aren't going to predict anything?

@Waybread. We discussed that earlier I noted that a direction to the 7th could manifest in marriage or divorce. It could also indicate death of a spouse a lawsuit, or difficulties with a rival. It is difficult to look at a chart with no other information, and say exactly how it will manifest. We don't go to a doctor and say, "Guess what's wrong with me."

We would probably have to know something about the native to get a handle on how a direction would manifest. If he was seeing a woman for a long time, then a marriage is indicated. If his marriage is in trouble a divorce is indicated etc. Without knowing something, it is difficult but we can predict a 7th house matter or involvement and infer the rest with the best knowledge.

John Worsdale used a technique that I think has real potential for predictive accuracy, if someone or a group had the time and energy to develop it. Worsdale listed a whole slew of primary directions in chronological order. He used direct, converse, mundane and zodiacal directions. He used minor aspects, too and he also checked his predictions using solar returns and secondary progressions (Or he said he did. We have no way of knowing or at least no one has tried to determine, if he actually predicted these events, i.e. deaths, or published them and claimed to have predicted them in advance, when he actually worked them out after the fact). His predictions in Celestial Philosophy almost all were of death of the native. His method for predicting death was to note a series of primary directions aimed at the hyleg and other planets and points that would indicate death, and then predict that death would occur within a reasonable period of time. In all of CP there is, I believe only one that was made prior to a known outcome, and since Worsdale himself died before the predicted event (the death of a client), we'll never know if he was right.

But the method is intriguing. He looked for a piling up of testimonies, not just a hit from the primaries or the progressions etc. Morin made a supportive remark for this on several occasions in Astrological Gallica when he noted that such and such " .. is not, by itself, enough to kill." See, in particular the discussion of the solar return of King Gustav Adolphus in Book 23. He is, deliberately or not, arguing for multiple testimonies.

Well if Worsdale is correct, then why not use the same method for other predictions? If we see a lot of directions etc to, say, the ruler of the 2nd might not that be an indication of a change in financial circumstances for better or for ill depending on which is doing what to whom? It's worth investigating.

Tom, it looks like we're in agreement, then, that rectification isn't about prediction, but about fixing a plausible birth time based upon past known events in the person's life. I thought you were suggesting that if a rectification method works, it should work in both situations.

You're snarky response has nothing to do with what I wrote. I'll try it one more time. If you get different results than the birth certificate, you claim the BC is wrong. So who can tell which time, the BC or the rectified time, is correct, if no one was present at the birth to verify it? You'll say the rectified time because of the result. I say that's a priori reasoning unless you can predict future events with your new birth time.

To say you can't make a prediction, but you can figure out a birth time with known events, makes one wonder why we should bother at all. We already know what's happened. If all you want to do is solve puzzles fine.

As for jiggling, yes that's what you do. And by doing that you can perfectly line up a "hit" on the date a known event happened and then claim your method works, but if you can't do it for future events, you're not doing anything at all. I can find a birth time for me that will put Venus on the DSC the day I was married, but that proves nothing, if no other directions work in the future.

Of course the rectified birthtime is also meant to be correct for future events. James gave examples for it for instance in one of his last posts. I am surprised that this needs to be discussed at all because I thought it to be an common agreement.

Yet, with this precise time (again, 1 min and 16 secs earlier than Birth Certificate), every one of my events exhibits correctly-themed astrology at events. This is true whether the events analyzed are those that went into the rectification or with the four major events that I have, which were not included in the rectification, as they hadn't transpired yet (3 of the 4 events) or were an event that I later researched to find the date of (1 of the 4 events).

Re: "You're snarky response has nothing to do with what I wrote."

That's why I quote you and comment point-by-point. It's my plan of "subterfuge by discussing everything clearly, out in the open." I think you're on to something...."snarky by nature."

Re: "I'll try it one more time."

With gusto!

Re: "If you get different results than the birth certificate, you claim the BC is wrong."

Stop the train. If the BC time isn't supported by strong astrology, it is wrong. Period.

* - Now, before we take off on a pointless tangent, let me explain what I mean by "strong astrology." At events, there will be relevant (astrology to event) aspects in Topocentric Primary Directions, Secondary Progressions, PSSR aspects, Age Harmonics, Solar/Lunar cycles, and Transits. If the performance in ANY of these various systems is weak, wrong birth time. It's bankable.

Re: "So who can tell which time, the BC or the rectified time, is correct,..."

The person who looks hardest, using the most precise methods.

Re: "...unless you can predict future events with your new birth time."

There are several major charts for the U.S.A. Various accurate predictions have been made with several of them. By your reasoning, the implication is that they are all right since accurate predictions were made from them.

Re: "If all you want to do is solve puzzles fine."

We're talking about rectification, which means finding the correct birth time. This is a puzzle. Since it's garbage in, garbage out; solving this particular puzzle is the all-important "first condition"...

Re: "...but if you can't do it for future events, you're not doing anything at all."

The integrity of the Angles/Cusps has held up for future events. There is no greater proof.

Re: "I can find a birth time for me that will put Venus on the DSC the day I was married, but that proves nothing..."

True, unless by finding that time that works with Venus-Dsc/marriage ALSO lines up the other significant events of your life with appropriate Primary Directions (etc.), as then you really ARE onto something (significant). [That is one of the (true) beauties of Polaris, that it searches based on ALL events/aspects....no cherry-picked favorites, preconceived notions.]

Re: "The purpose of directions is prediction, not rectification."

Assuming facts not in evidence.

Re: "Martin Ganston noted in his book on primaries that they seemed to be used for predicting length of life initially. I don't see any other use for them other than prediction. What is the point in rectifying a chart if you aren't going to predict anything?"

Not enough space here to elaborate on Martin's and my differing opinions on the (modern day) usage of Primary Directions. As far as prediction, no one said that no one is predicting things. My comment on prediction is that you are making it the crux of the biscuit (the most important element) when it is clearly not. Additionally, a valid prediction does not prove a valid chart. Someone can be alert to what is happening in the economy and make a prediction using VARIOUS U.S.A. charts to all arrive at the same conclusion!

Re: "We would probably have to know something about the native to get a handle on how a direction would manifest. If he was seeing a woman for a long time, then a marriage is indicated. If his marriage is in trouble a divorce is indicated etc. Without knowing something, it is difficult but we can predict a 7th house matter or involvement and infer the rest with the best knowledge."

You've just admitted that the real meat of the prediction isn't even possible to be known without SOME knowledge of the client's experiences and/or circumstances. This is correct, I believe. If I give you a chart and say, "what happens in the next year?", it might be good to know if you're looking at the chart of a homeless man, a female governor, or a publicly traded corporation.

Re: "He looked for a piling up of testimonies, not just a hit from the primaries or the progressions etc."

This sounds like a variant of what I said earlier. Major events will have a conspicuous line-up of telling aspects in several reliable systems. By forcing an agreement across these systems, we are limiting the chances of coincidence.

Re: "Morin made a supportive remark for this on several occasions in Astrological Gallica when he noted that such and such " .. is not, by itself, enough to kill." See, in particular the discussion of the solar return of King Gustav Adolphus in Book 23. He is, deliberately or not, arguing for multiple testimonies."

(Assuming) this is relatively well-known. The most ominous astrological configurations can turn out to be relative nothings with a little beneficial help from a well-placed Jupiter, etc. Alexander Marr's writings often show the relative synthesis and blending of ideas/circumstances relating to multiple aspects. [For instance, which of JFK's aspects relate to the death of his Son (Aug '63) and which related to his own death...]

Re: "Well if Worsdale is correct, then why not use the same method for other predictions? If we see a lot of directions etc to, say, the ruler of the 2nd might not that be an indication of a change in financial circumstances for better or for ill depending on which is doing what to whom? It's worth investigating."

Analyzing in several systems and looking for the individualized thrust behind the meaning of the aspects is already the proposed methodology. It's a dangerous game to "bet the bank" on the existence of one solitary aspect's statement.

Tom, can you humor me and pick a number from 1 to 24, for my next post?

Peace

James