Hello Nixx

Re: "In the 'real world' if an Astrologer wanted to prove, or know, their Horoscopic notions had a relationship to life on it they would need to show this world that they can find the right data, tob/dob/pob, from a randomly generated sample."

Not quite sure exactly what you're saying here.

"Normally", we have a birth date, time, and place and then, using the events of their life, we painstakenly make that time more precise. Primary Directions are perfect for this purpose. Interestingly, the Secondary Progressions (and other reliable techniques) confirm whether this time is correct.

In my case, my birth was listed as 6:18 am... using Primary Directions, it is quite easy to see that my actual birthtime is 6:16:44 am or 1 minute and 16 seconds earlier than the time written down by the nurse. Using this birthtime (arrived at SOLELY through Primary Directions), it is seen that these exact angles/cusps are confirmed using Secondary Progressions, Progressed Sidereal Solar Returns, and Age Harmonics. [The Transits also confirm, but since Transits normally can mature as wide as 1? 20', this confirmation is not so precise. It's the same reason why Transits are a poor tool for rectification...]

When we have a very tight birthtime documented, what exactly is the purpose that is accomplished by selecting that time out of a random list of birthdata? Finding which time is correct (during a day) is not so difficult if there are plenty of dated events.

When rectifying Ken Haining's chart, just three events leads us unequivocally to the right birthtime. Dropping those three and using another dozen events doesn't change that time by even one second.

Take care

James

Good afternoon,

Perhaps Atlantean's conclusions are correct, perhaps not. Based on the evidence given until now, we simply do not yet know. To me it is encouraging that at least some contributors to this thread consider statistical evidence and a scientific approach as relevant to astrology. Others tend to ignore that great astrologers of a not so distant past were also amongst their era's greatest mathematicians and scientists, ex. gr. Herr Johannes Kepler.

Has anyone else been able to independently confirm Atlantean's findings? One of their underlying assumptions apparently is the relevance of the beginnings of the houses ('cusps'). As they play a role in the calculations of some of the Hellenistic lots, Dr H of Regulus Astrology used these for tests of Whole Sign and Alcabitius systems in his 800-page Rectification Manual without obtaining unambiguous results.

Best regards,

lihin

Atlantean wrote:
Not quite sure exactly what you're saying here.

Just standard experimental design. You could set the parameters as long as no data was revealed. Within reason, needing to sleep with the person or know what they were up to on the 2nd Sunday in March 48 years ago might be unrealistic.

Your primary direction notions would, or might, interest ?reality? if you could demonstrate they had any attached to them after a few sets of 1 from 10 challenges.

How many people have responded to the poll at this point? Whole sign houses is currently at 57%, which seems remarkably high. I know that usage of whole sign houses has really taken off over the past few years, but I'm still a bit surprised to see the figure be that high.

Chris Brennan wrote:How many people have responded to the poll at this point? Whole sign houses is currently at 57%, which seems remarkably high. I know that usage of whole sign houses has really taken off over the past few years, but I'm still a bit surprised to see the figure be that high.

http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=7145

but look at Iles example Chris.
how do you explain the differences in those two charts with wsh?

damon wrote: http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=7145

but look at Iles example Chris.
how do you explain the differences in those two charts with wsh?

I don't feel like I know enough about Ile's two friends in order to really make an assessment, but it seems like there are a lot of other differences between those two charts besides just the house placements.

Good evening,

A majority of the responses for Whole Sign Houses has surprised me as well.

Statistical testing of astrological assumptions is indeed difficult as it requires isolation of effects of individual variables.

Let us take primary directions as an example. Even assuming that everyone agrees on calculation methods, keys, aspects, etc., and obtains the same data (vast assumptions indeed, as we have seen in other threads), they seem further from 'objectivity' than many appear to think. Reference is made again to Dr H's A Rectification Manual. With many well documented examples he illustrated the importance of house, sign and confines! placements of the planets and points involved in the primary directions, also in the underlying event chart. Dr H has apparently not yet tested Chaldaean confines.

Best regards,

lihin

Where have all these astonishing votes or results of voting gone?

edit

as someone who voted and am a part of the 3% group, i am very happy about that too, lol.. i never thought there was ever any strength in numbers, lol..