Originally Posted by Seadog '66

Eric:

Would you care to comment on the content of this article?

http://www.surfingtheapocalypse.net/....cgi?read=2192

The fact that you have said nothing about this suggests to me that it is all BS. But it is damn entertaining BS! :lol:

Here is a page of links to three related articles:

http://www.surfingtheapocalypse.net/....cgi?read=2190

I read the article. It seems the work of some crackpot. Not entirely BS though.

I don't remember what the "transit of Venus" refers to, although I remember that the transit of the 1760s was important and was observed by Captain Cook I believe. I think it has something to do with Venus passing over the Moon, but I forget. It comes into some position in which it is observable. I don't have any basis for assuming it is significant as an omen of events. I don't put too much stock in the Mayan Calendar either.

It is good to advise people to forgive themselves, be ethical, pay attention to your growing abilities, and be open to telepathy, but I don't have a lot of sympathy for the rants along the lines of "you'd better do it, or you'll be eliminated soon by world changes, indicated by such and such. Your choice!" No, the world isn't coming to an end. There is a 4T coming, I'll grant that. And he seems to be on to what it will involve, to an extent.

Ah, my urge to theorize cyclically has been stirred by the debate with HC over Reagan and nationalism. As you know, I have made some good predictions in recent years, so another one I have made might bear some attention, perhaps. :wink:

2012 is the "great year" from the Mayan Calendar which new agers look to for some great change. It so happens that this is the year Neptune, the great "ocean liner" of humanity as it takes us through the zodiac over 164-165 years (two saecula?), enters Pisces, the sign most like itself archetypally. Pisces and Neptune represent the dissolving of boundaries and expansion of consciousness.

The last time Neptune entered into Pisces thus bears some mind. It was 1848. That year, precisely as Neptune entered its own sign, Europe broke out in revolution. More to the point, it was the "awakening of the masses" to nationalist and socialist ideas. Several national wars resulted, which set the stage for more, waged by "realist" leaders. This process was played out in America as well as Europe; even arguably in China.

But as I mentioned to HC, the origin of nationalism as we know it lies in the French Revolution, when in 1792 the French people rose up to defend their revolution and their "nation" against invading foreign despots (while singing their great national anthem "La Marseillaise"). Eventually the French nation itself and its citizen armies under Napoleon invaded Europe to topple the despots and install reform, which was resented by the conquered peoples who developed a sense of nationalism of their own and threw off French domination by 1815.

But the restored despots crushed nationalist sentiment and held the lid on until 1848.

1792 was the exact year Neptune entered Scorpio. It returned there for the first time since then, in the year 1957. That was the year the environmental crisis was first noticed. As the 1960s proceeded, this crisis became a great cause. In 1970, Earth Day was the greatest worldwide demonstration ever seen (until Feb.15, 2003). By the 1970s Margaret Mead said that the environmental crisis would dissolve national boundaries.

But Reagan took over in 1980 and delayed the movement. He was the Metternich of his time, crushing college youth movements and keeping a lid on the most important social movements of his time.

But 2012 looms. I suggest that just as in 1848, when the masses of people gained a wider identification with their national group, which from then on dominated politics, I suggest that in 2012, which will come not long after the start of the next 4T crisis era, the environmental crisis will force our dawning global consciousness to become dominant. Globalization will fully trump nationalism for the first time.

Just as nationalism (and socialism) had their flaws, which eventually (especially when combined) became much greater than whatever benefits they conferred, globalism has its dangers too (which Tim Walker points out, for example). Globalization is a double-edged sword too. But it may be inevitable, and the question will be how to shape and manage it so that it benefits us rather than crushes us in a uniformity that distorts our traditions and lifestyles.

The Green values may hold the key here, since they recognize both our identity with the Earth, and the need to respect diversity, and local identity and economics.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

I don't remember what the "transit of Venus" refers to, although I remember that the transit of the 1760s was important and was observed by Captain Cook I believe. I think it has something to do with Venus passing over the Moon, but I forget. It comes into some position in which it is observable. I don't have any basis for assuming it is significant as an omen of events. I don't put too much stock in the Mayan Calendar either.

Actually, the transit of Venus involves that planet passing between Earth and the Sun. Its disk will be visible as a dark spot during the 8th over Eurasia, Africa, and eastern North America. Unfortunately for you and others in California, by the time the Sun rises over the western US, the transit will be over. I know it would be counted as a conjunction between the Sun and Venus. However, I don't know if it would have as much significance as, say, an eclipse, which it resembles. I don't even know if an eclipse has even more significance than a simple conjunction, in the case of a solar eclipse, or opposition, in the case of a lunar eclipse.

BTW, Eric, your statement could be used as evidence that you really need to observe the heavenly bodies for yourself once in a while! :lol:

Originally Posted by Vince Lamb '59

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

I don't remember what the "transit of Venus" refers to, although I remember that the transit of the 1760s was important and was observed by Captain Cook I believe. I think it has something to do with Venus passing over the Moon, but I forget. It comes into some position in which it is observable. I don't have any basis for assuming it is significant as an omen of events. I don't put too much stock in the Mayan Calendar either.

Actually, the transit of Venus involves that planet passing between Earth and the Sun. Its disk will be visible as a dark spot during the 8th over Eurasia, Africa, and eastern North America. Unfortunately for you and others in California, by the time the Sun rises over the western US, the transit will be over. I know it would be counted as a conjunction between the Sun and Venus. However, I don't know if it would have as much significance as, say, an eclipse, which it resembles. I don't even know if an eclipse has even more significance than a simple conjunction, in the case of a solar eclipse, or opposition, in the case of a lunar eclipse.

BTW, Eric, your statement could be used as evidence that you really need to observe the heavenly bodies for yourself once in a while! :lol:

I think I must have meant the Sun. Sometimes my words don't resemble what I'm thinking.

I admit I have been puzzled by talk of observing this "transit." You can't look at it, obviously; and even in a telescope it doesn't look like much. I never understood what the ruckus was about.

I doubt this transit has much significance, astrologically, but some people do. A solar or lunar eclipse does have more significance than just a Sun-Moon conjunction (new moon). So conceivably, "the transit of Venus" has more significance than a regular conjunction. But, as indicators of world events, or trends in peoples' lives, I have never encountered or found any evidence that these conjunctions are very important. They do mean something in a personal horoscope, like any other conjunction does.

Obviously I think it would be nice if people were more interested in the astrological events which I think are significant. As for example, the post above.

Gosh, having re-read those posts about 1892 and Forrest Gump again, I am impressed. :lol: I am proud of my work making all these fine connections and prophecies. I wish some people paid some attention.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

Ah, my urge to theorize cyclically has been stirred by the debate with HC over Reagan and nationalism. As you know, I have made some good predictions in recent years, so another one I have made might bear some attention, perhaps. :wink:

2012 is the "great year" from the Mayan Calendar which new agers look to for some great change. It so happens that this is the year Neptune, the great "ocean liner" of humanity as it takes us through the zodiac over 164-165 years (two saecula?), enters Pisces, the sign most like itself archetypally. Pisces and Neptune represent the dissolving of boundaries and expansion of consciousness.

The last time Neptune entered into Pisces thus bears some mind. It was 1848. That year, precisely as Neptune entered its own sign, Europe broke out in revolution. More to the point, it was the "awakening of the masses" to nationalist and socialist ideas. Several national wars resulted, which set the stage for more, waged by "realist" leaders. This process was played out in America as well as Europe; even arguably in China.

But as I mentioned to HC, the origin of nationalism as we know it lies in the French Revolution, when in 1792 the French people rose up to defend their revolution and their "nation" against invading foreign despots (while singing their great national anthem "La Marseillaise"). Eventually the French nation itself and its citizen armies under Napoleon invaded Europe to topple the despots and install reform, which was resented by the conquered peoples who developed a sense of nationalism of their own and threw off French domination by 1815.

But the restored despots crushed nationalist sentiment and held the lid on until 1848.

1792 was the exact year Neptune entered Scorpio. It returned there for the first time since then, in the year 1957. That was the year the environmental crisis was first noticed. As the 1960s proceeded, this crisis became a great cause. In 1970, Earth Day was the greatest worldwide demonstration ever seen (until Feb.15, 2003). By the 1970s Margaret Mead said that the environmental crisis would dissolve national boundaries.

But Reagan took over in 1980 and delayed the movement. He was the Metternich of his time, crushing college youth movements and keeping a lid on the most important social movements of his time.

But 2012 looms. I suggest that just as in 1848, when the masses of people gained a wider identification with their national group, which from then on dominated politics, I suggest that in 2012, which will come not long after the start of the next 4T crisis era, the environmental crisis will force our dawning global consciousness to become dominant. Globalization will fully trump nationalism for the first time.

Just as nationalism (and socialism) had their flaws, which eventually (especially when combined) became much greater than whatever benefits they conferred, globalism has its dangers too (which Tim Walker points out, for example). Globalization is a double-edged sword too. But it may be inevitable, and the question will be how to shape and manage it so that it benefits us rather than crushes us in a uniformity that distorts our traditions and lifestyles.

The Green values may hold the key here, since they recognize both our identity with the Earth, and the need to respect diversity, and local identity and economics.

What's in the stars for the rest of 2004?

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

Ah, my urge to theorize cyclically has been stirred by the debate with HC over Reagan and nationalism. As you know, I have made some good predictions in recent years, so another one I have made might bear some attention, perhaps. :wink:

2012 is the "great year" from the Mayan Calendar which new agers look to for some great change. It so happens that this is the year Neptune, the great "ocean liner" of humanity as it takes us through the zodiac over 164-165 years (two saecula?), enters Pisces, the sign most like itself archetypally. Pisces and Neptune represent the dissolving of boundaries and expansion of consciousness.

Gentlemen, start your bongs!

The last time Neptune entered into Pisces thus bears some mind. It was 1848. That year, precisely as Neptune entered its own sign, Europe broke out in revolution. More to the point, it was the "awakening of the masses" to nationalist and socialist ideas. Several national wars resulted, which set the stage for more, waged by "realist" leaders. This process was played out in America as well as Europe; even arguably in China.

Ready.

But as I mentioned to HC, the origin of nationalism as we know it lies in the French Revolution, when in 1792 the French people rose up to defend their revolution and their "nation" against invading foreign despots (while singing their great national anthem "La Marseillaise"). Eventually the French nation itself and its citizen armies under Napoleon invaded Europe to topple the despots and install reform, which was resented by the conquered peoples who developed a sense of nationalism of their own and threw off French domination by 1815.

But the restored despots crushed nationalist sentiment and held the lid on until 1848.

Set.

1792 was the exact year Neptune entered Scorpio. It returned there for the first time since then, in the year 1957. That was the year the environmental crisis was first noticed. As the 1960s proceeded, this crisis became a great cause. In 1970, Earth Day was the greatest worldwide demonstration ever seen (until Feb.15, 2003). By the 1970s Margaret Mead said that the environmental crisis would dissolve national boundaries.

INHALE!!!!

WJB, the only thing that matters in 2004 is whether Bush is defeated for "re-election." I have written on the subject and my article should be at my website:
http://www.california.com/~eameece/book.htm

Dane Rudhyar, our cyclic astrological philosopher, wrote about the seasonal significance of the zodiac in The Pulse of Life. He said that in Capricorn (Winter Solstice, akin to the 4T), the Ceasar state is all-powerful, but the birth of Christ occurs (Christmas). Rudhyar didn't say this, but I'm saying it: In Cancer (Summer Solstice, 2T), the individual is powerful, but the birth of Caesar occurs. On the 4th of July, we celebrate the birth of Caesar, just as on Dec.25 we celebrate the birth of Christ. USA, the new empire of Caesar!

Rudhyar writes in The Pulse of Life (1943):

A philosophical approach to the problem of experience gives to astrology a meaning and a value which few contemporary thinkers suspect it to contain. Astrology can be seen... as a remarkable tool for the understanding of human experience considered as the field for a cyclic interplay of polar energies or attitudes.... The cycles of the planets and their relationships represent to man reality in an ordered state and in reference to the "greater whole" which we know as the solar system. Men are "lesser wholes" within this "greater whole."... There is no organic entity which is not contained within a "greater whole" and which does not contain "lesser wholes."

http://www.cfos100.com/research/excitability.php
I haven't read many of the posts in this exact forum, so forgive me if the above link has already been posted.

The link above is a good study on sun spot cycles. I've been doing a lot of work around Turnings, sun spots, and astronomical data. I just thought I'd drop this file off for everyone. I really enjoy the study. It's not perfect but it has lots of interesting data.

If you want more links to astronomical, astrological, and sun spot cycles, I have about 60 of them under "astronomical, astrological, and sun spot links", on my web site at this page: http://www.jamesgoulding.com/Links_ALL.htm

The links are more about sun spots than anything else.

Hope this helps.
Take care,
jim g

I don't know if anyone has mentioned this yet, but if you happen to believe in classical astrology, you should be aware that America's progressed sun enters the sign of Pisces literally on the day of the election. A person (or country's) progressed sun will remain in a particular sign for about thirty years, and America's progressed sun has been in the secular, uber rational and scientific sign of Aquarius sign the mid 1970s (some put the particular moment as the day Nixon left office, others say it was in early 1975). Pisces is associated with the arts, but also with religious fanatacism, martyrdom, substance abuse, and dictatorial paternalism. To give you a sense of what might be in store (if this stuff is to believed) the world generally has been slowly entering the "age of aquarius" since the beginning of the enlightenment, and it will be about 2000 years long. The last 2000 years (beginning with the birth of Christ) - the Christian epoch - has been the age of Pisces. So it is not inconceivable (again, if this is to be believed) that the next 30 years will bring a temporary but ultimately unsustainable reversion to Christian mores in America and anti-democratic, even theocratic, tendencies in American politics and culture.

Well so far your use of the progressed US horoscope seems to have paid off. You said this before Nov.2nd, and indeed the religious right prevailed in the election and are demanding their payback.

Pisces can be an idealistic and compassionate sign too, devoted to helping the suffering, but obviously America tends to fulfill the worst of whatever is possible.

The coincidence with Neptune's passage through Pisces from 2012 to 2026 is also noteable. Also last year, Uranus entered Pisces too. Pisces indicates many muddled affairs, delusions and quagmires. Saturn was there when we invaded Vietnam in 1965. Neptune there in the 1850s coincided with the Crimean War, which was Neptunian in every respect.

On the other hand, Aquarius has not seemed very noticeable in American society since 1974, other than the computer tech advances, which have really been a century-long thing. Aquarius is supposed to be a sign of humanitarian consciousness and dedication to causes. Neptune's last transit brought on many utopian movements and some reforms (the 1830s/40s). Uranus' last transit in Aquarius in 1912-1919 brought many important revolutions, catastrophe, and a reform US administration that added to federal power.

Only the worst of these trends were seen this time, from 1996-2003. Federal power has increased again, much as it did under Wilson; but this time it benefits only the greedy. War abroad for "democracy" resulted in repression at home and suppression of dissidents, then as now. We had a catastrophe, 9-11, which started a "global war on terror." It seems to be going badly, like World War One did. But at least there was a clear victory (though not a complete one), and it ended before Uranus went into Pisces. The Iraq War began when Uranus entered Pisces. This is a muddled quagmire that will achieve nothing, like Vietnam and Crimea. I predicted as much.

Uranus is the astrological indicator of the seaculum, at least in modern times. It's revolution around the Sun and through all the signs takes 84 years.

Another important indicator is Saturn. It marks off 30-year cycles in politics which corresponds to a cycle that Schlesinger wrote a book about. The 1990s were a chance for a progressive reform era. Clinton pretty much blew his chance. At least he tried. Saturn was in Aquarius in 1993 when he tried. It brought back the progressive era of Saturn in Aquarius in 1963, 1933 and 1903 and years surrounding these. The 1870s, 1840s, 1810s and 1780s were also somewhat progressive or revolutionary.

The following decades have represented conservative reaction, war, and consolidation of central authority. In more progressive times, this may consolidate the federal power of progressive policies, as in the 1910s, 1940s and 1970s. But we are evidently not in a progressive era, despite the planets in Aquarius. My prediction was wrong on this point. The 2000s have brought strong consolidation of federal power, and for the purpose of war; but for the benefit of entrenched corporate interests and religious wackos. Too bad. Pluto in religious sign Sagittarius has some bearing here; some astrologers predicted this would bring religious-based fanaticism and terrorism. The dates are 1995 to 2008.

In the 1880s, 1850s, 1820s and 1790s, reaction prevailed, especially in Europe, and government power consolidated. Reigns of terror and dictatorial kings and tsars were notable. The 1790s were the decade of Federalist rule in the USA. In the 1820s the Marshall court consolidated federal power in America, and the 1880s saw the birth of the civil service.

The other Saturn decades have represented dispersal of power. In the 19th century this was classical liberalism and advance of democracy; today it is libertarian, reactionary, ideology #1 as I call it. Trickle-down economics and laissez faire. The decades are: 1800s, 1830s, 1860s, 1890s, 1920s, 1950s, 1980s. The 1892 conjunction of Neptune-Pluto, which changes everything, turned the old liberals into conservatives, and the populists took over the Democratic Party and redefined what was "liberal." Bryan vs. McKinley in 1896 defined all subsequent elections.

This pattern would indicate that the 2010s would see a dispersal of power. That does not look good for a time of crisis, when drastic and focused government action will be needed. Events may surge out of control. Neptune in Pisces and US progressed Sun in Pisces would seem to confirm this.

But it could change things too. Neptune in Pisces in the 1850s dissolved some of the consolidation of power, especially in America.

There is another thing to watch. Jupiter conjunct Saturn, every 20 years (actually slightly less than 20), now coincides with the start of decades. The last one was in 2000. Half way between is the opposition, coming in 2010. It will also be aligned with Uranus and Pluto. This should shake things up good.

Jupiter opposite Saturn is the climax of each 20-year era. Furthermore, it always represents a shift in the direction of events (the conjunction usually means this too, but a new beginning rather than a climax of trends). Often this shift is from liberal to conservative or vice versa (circa 1931, 1951, 1971, 1991). Sometimes it means a shift from peace to war, as during the 1910s. Sometimes it might mean a rise in unrest; as in 1891-92, or the 1850s in America. 1792 and 1812 were sure examples of these climaxes in world history.

Perhaps this means that the trends of the 2000s, toward consolidation of right-wing power and war, could shift in 2010, because of climactic events. Whether to something better, or worse, is yet to be determined.

When people ask me for predictions, this is the thing I'm best at; rather than answering "what's ahead for 2004" and such. Following the cycles; just like following the saeculum. The big trends are what's important. And they come sooner than we think.

Look for America to get "unstuck" in the 2020s, the next progressive era. Unstuck one way or another. When Uranus returns to 9 degrees Gemini, in 2027, it will bring back the key hinge of history; the climax of crisis and the key moment of decision. The Declaration of Independence, the attack on Fort Sumpter, and D-Day, are the precedents. Also the founding of Jamestown, and King William's War.

The 2020s will be here sooner than you think. After all, 1980 was just yesterday; especially when you consider how little has happened and how little has been accomplished since then, especially in America. We might as well be still in 1980. If anything, we have retrogressed since then. 9-11 accelerated the regression bigtime.

Uranus, Neptune and Pluto outline for us the long cycles of history. Their movements into new zodiac signs, and their mutual conjunctions and oppositions, have coincided with every turning shift except one (1946). Since these conjunctions and oppositions only occur rarely (one or another of them on average every 50 years or so), and sign shifts somewhat rarely (every 7, 14 or 21 years on average), this coincidence is significant. I detailed this in an archived post.

These 3 planets indicate by their position the "spirit of the times," the zeitgeist (the word for spirit of the times in German).

Here is more food for the thoughtful.

Between the time of Theodore Roosevelt and that of Ronald Reagan (one revolution of Uranus = one saeculum), every American president except one came into office while Uranus, Neptune and/or Pluto was aligned (conjunct) with that president's Sun, Moon and/or Ascendant.

TR was a Scorpio with Cancer Moon (Ascendant was either Sag. or Gemini). Neptune was conj. his Moon in Cancer; Uranus was in Sag. and Pluto was in Gemini during his term.

TR's annointed successor Taft was the only exception. He was Sun Leo, Moon Virgo, Scorpio rising. No conjunction with Uranus, Neptune or Pluto. It is noteable that he felt completely out of place in the big house and was booted out four years later, finishing third behind TR himself and Wilson.

Wilson was Sun Capricorn, Moon Aquarius. Uranus was in Aquarius, conj. his Moon exactly as he took office. In his last year, when he suffered a breakdown after failing to rally the nation behind the League, Uranus had moved on into Pisces. His connection to the times had been broken.

Harding was a Scorpio with Pisces rising. Uranus was in Pisces.

Coolidge was a Sun Cancer. Pluto was there conj. his Sun.

Hoover was a late Leo. Neptune was in Leo-- until it wasn't. When it entered Virgo in 1929 he lost touch with his times.

FDR picked up the mantle. He had Virgo rising, conj. Neptune's position there during his first three terms. He was an Aquarian with Cancer Moon.

Truman had Libra rising, conj. Neptune there during his term.

Ike had Sun and Moon in late Libra, conj. Neptune there. But Neptune left Libra in his last years, as the temper/tempo of the country moved faster.

JFK had the Moon in Virgo, where Pluto was, and Uranus joined it there late in his term. Uranus and Pluto (the revolutionary planets) joined in exact conjunction in 1965, making an exact posthumous conjunction to his lunar degree. In that year the acclaim for the martyred president helped LBJ pass the programs which JFK had proposed but failed to pass in life.

LBJ was a double Virgo, Sun and Moon there near the Ascendant. Uranus and Pluto were there, but Uranus moved on into Libra as he left office.

By the way, Robert Kennedy was virtually the only candidate not elected between 1901 and 1984 who had a connection to the times, with his Sun conj. Neptune's place in late Scorpio in 1968. He of course was not allowed to assume the helm, to our everlasting national detriment (on the other hand, Neptune left Scorpio soon after 1968, so who knows if he could have kept his connection to the times after 1970, which was so obvious while he lived).

Nixon had Virgo rising. Pluto was still there until Watergate.

Ford had Moon in Sagittarius, conj. Neptune during his presidency.

Carter was Sun Libra, Libra rising and Moon in Scorpio. During his term Pluto was in Libra and Uranus in Scorpio. He understood the "malaise" of his time perfectly.

Reagan had late Sagittarius rising, with Mars in Capricorn close by. Neptune was still in late Sag. conj. his Ascendant in 1980. In 1986 it conjoined his Mars when he bombed Libya, while Mars itself was also there in the sky. Uranus was also in Sagittarius from 1982 to 1989, returning to the sign it occupied from 1898 to 1905 when this trend began with TR, who made the USA the world's leader. Sagittarius is considered the rising sign of the USA by most astrologers.

But Reagan was the president who took his nation off track. Since then, no president has been in touch with the spirit of the times.

Bush Sr. is Sun Gemini, Virgo rising, Libra Moon. No conjunctions.
Clinton is Sun Leo, Taurus Moon, Libra rising. No conjunctions.

Bush Jr. is Sun Cancer, Leo rising, Moon Libra. No conjunctions. In fact, all three outer planets are opposing planets in his chart. Not only is Bush not aligned with the spirit of the times, he actively opposes it. Neptune now in Aquarius occupies his 7th house of war, opposing his Ascendant in kingly Leo.

To me this indicates how far America has gone off track, and is now no longer the center of the spirit of the times; no longer the world's leader. Today Europe has reclaimed that position, which it held before TR; along with the Far East now.

Back in the 19th century, I haven't yet found any presidents who had this connection. Most of them were indeed mediocrities who led nobody to do anything. Even Lincoln had no such connection. The man who had the great connection to the spirit of the times in the time of Lincoln was Otto von Bismarck. He was an Aries, with Neptune exactly conj. his solar degree as he declared that his nation would unite and conquer all Germany through blood and iron (the traits of Mars, god of war and ruler of Aries). He remained the world's leading figure until 1890; not long before TR.

If we wish to get back our connection to the spirit of the times, we will elect Hillary Clinton or Al Gore in 2008. I don't predict that we will. Kerry had a great connection to the times, with Sun and Ascendant in Sagittarius exactly conj. Pluto's position there. He lost anyway. America decided to stay off course and remain stuck in the 19th century, thanks to its red half.

Hillary or Gore could lead us back, if we choose to let them take the helm, and if they are allowed to. Hillary has the Moon (near the top of her chart) at the end of Pisces, just where Uranus will be in 2008-2010. Gore has Moon at the end of Sagittarius, just where Pluto will be then. Gore as Sun Aries will also be aligned with Uranus after 2010. We can look to them as potential gray champions during the early crisis. Their appeal will be their connection to the common people (the Moon). Other gray champions will be needed later; especially of course if the Bush Dynasty continues in 2009, which of course would continue to lead us astray.

That's a question: is America now a hereditary monarchy? Clinton may be succeeded (after an interregnum) by his wife. Bush the son, King George III, who was installed by the Supreme Court his father appointed, may be succeeded by his brother, who helped install him.

Eric,

If Pluto, now known to be a Kuiperoid, not a planet, can have such an effect, what of Sedna, and all the other yet undiscovered Kuiperoids floating around out there? With them not included in your calculations, wouldn't that be a major, major problem? I mean, maybe Sedna conjuncted with Uranus for Mr. Lincoln! Or the yet undiscovered Zooka!bakka'anna!soomasooma (Bushman scrubbrush deity) conjuncted with Neptune?

AND . . . what of Sol's black dwarf partner, Nemesis, with it's 26 million year hyperelliptic orbit? Surely it plays a role!

I have shown the correlations with Uranus, Neptune and Pluto; they are statistically significant. We have much evidence that they indicate the zeitgeist, and other planets don't. What's important is what this says about America and our presidents.

Pluto has been rehabilitated, last I heard. Astrologers have no problem interpreting other planets when they come along either. They did fine without the outer 3 for a long time. They have just added more grist to our interpretative mill. IIRC Sedna moves so slowly that it doesn't really conflict with the other cycles but reinforces them. But I'm not really well informed on Sedna. When I found out about its orbit I pretty much dismissed the idea that it would affect anything differently.

I guess you're saying that the Kuiperoids could indicate the zeitgeist too, and if I add them in then I could provide a planet to prove a connection to any president, anytime. Maybe, but so far I am stubbornly sticking with my story. I don't want to be out of character. Speaking of which, who the hell are you?

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

Pluto has been rehabilitated, last I heard.

Nope. Among astronomers there is agreement that if Pluto/Charon were discovered today it/they would not rate planet status. It would be labeled a wayward Kuiper Belt Object (KBO), exactly like Sedna, Quaoar, and Varuna.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

Astrologers have no problem interpreting other planets when they come along either. They did fine without the outer 3 for a long time. They have just added more grist to our interpretative mill. IIRC Sedna moves so slowly that it doesn't really conflict with the other cycles but reinforces them. But I'm not really well informed on Sedna. When I found out about its orbit I pretty much dismissed the idea that it would affect anything differently.

So size doesn't matter, just speed of motion?

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

I guess you're saying that the Kuiperoids could indicate the zeitgeist too, and if I add them in then I could provide a planet to prove a connection to any president, anytime. Maybe, but so far I am stubbornly sticking with my story. I don't want to be out of character. Speaking of which, who the hell are you?

I am a Masters in History who has spent too much time in a cubicle and morphed into a movie character.

Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

Pluto has been rehabilitated, last I heard.

Nope. Among astronomers there is agreement that if Pluto/Charon were discovered today it/they would not rate planet status. It would be labeled a wayward Kuiper Belt Object (KBO), exactly like Sedna, Quaoar, and Varuna.

We'll have to disagree on that. I'm sure I heard other opinion. It doesn't much matter what current opinion is then; knowledge about Pluto has not changed since the contrary opinion was heard by me. Clearly Pluto is much larger than those other objects, which also don't have Moons.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

Astrologers have no problem interpreting other planets when they come along either. They did fine without the outer 3 for a long time. They have just added more grist to our interpretative mill. IIRC Sedna moves so slowly that it doesn't really conflict with the other cycles but reinforces them. But I'm not really well informed on Sedna. When I found out about its orbit I pretty much dismissed the idea that it would affect anything differently.

So size doesn't matter, just speed of motion?

Now, let's keep this clean (although Pluto IS connected with sex)

Size matters, but so does length of the cycle, and other things.

I am a Masters in History who has spent too much time in a cubicle and morphed into a movie character.

A character few have heard of. So you should explain somewhere (not on this thread) why you chose it to represent yourself. At least I think that!
What is the connection between history and Mr. Gibbons? Does he look like you?

I miss ol William already. Bring him back!

You are a Masters in History? Did you tell me that before? Then you really SHOULD read my book. I don't know another book that shows how trends in different fields coincide and synthezies the meaning of a period in history, as well as mine. I used the astrological symbols as a way to organize the ideas. Of course, I know your opinion about astrology, so you have to read my book with your own special grain of salt. But don't read it while sitting in a cubicle. My book requires a wide perspective.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

Pluto has been rehabilitated, last I heard.

Nope. Among astronomers there is agreement that if Pluto/Charon were discovered today it/they would not rate planet status. It would be labeled a wayward Kuiper Belt Object (KBO), exactly like Sedna, Quaoar, and Varuna.

We'll have to disagree on that. I'm sure I heard other opinion. It doesn't much matter what current opinion is then; knowledge about Pluto has not changed since the contrary opinion was heard by me. Clearly Pluto is much larger than those other objects, which also don't have Moons.

I think the Wikipedia article on Pluto sums up the controversy well. It is absolutely clear that Pluto is a KBO, considering it's size, composition, and orbit. Now whether we continue to call it a "planet" due to it's special history in human terms is another story.

The relevant portion of the article:

The Pluto debate
Planet X?

The planet Pluto was originally discovered in 1930 in the course of a search for a body sufficiently massive to account for supposed anomalies in the orbits of Uranus and Neptune. Once it was found, its faintness and failure to show a visible disc cast doubt on the idea that it could be Lowell's Planet X.

In the following decades estimates of Pluto's mass and diameter were the subject of debate as telescopes and imaging systems improved. The consensus steadily favored smaller masses and diameters as time passed. Indeed, one observer waggishly pointed out that if the trend were extrapolated, the planet seemed to be in danger of vanishing altogether, a remark which proved possibly prophetic in light of later debates over Pluto's status as a "planet".

In an attempt to reconcile Pluto's small apparent size with its identification as Planet X, the theory of specular reflection was proposed. This held that observers were measuring only the diameter of a bright spot on the highly reflective surface of a much larger planet which could thereby be massive without having an exceptionally high density.

The uncertainty was conclusively resolved by the discovery of Pluto's satellite Charon in 1978. This made it possible to determine the combined mass of the Pluto-Charon system which turned out to be lower even than that anticipated by skeptics of the specular reflection theory, which was then rendered completely untenable. The accepted figure for Pluto's diameter today makes it considerably smaller than the Moon, with only a fraction of the Moon's mass on account of its being largely composed of ice. More recently, measurements of the path of Voyager have shown that Neptune has a lower mass than previously believed and that when this lower mass is taken into account there is no anomalous movement of Uranus or Neptune.

Thus Pluto's discovery was largely coincidental as it actually has no role in what were believed to be anomalies in Neptune and Uranus' motion. Pluto's discovery was mostly due to the thoroughness and diligence of Tombaugh's search, which he continued for some time after the discovery and left him satisfied that no other planet of a comparable magnitude existed.

While Pluto's identification as Planet X began to be doubted soon after its discovery, and for some decades afterwards some considered that a hypothetical tenth planet might be the true Planet X which supposedly caused anomalies in Uranus and Neptune's position, Pluto's identity as the solar system's ninth planet was unquestioned until the 1990s.

Minor planet?

In September of 1992 scientists began discovering hundreds of other, smaller, icy bodies in the area of the solar system beyond the orbit of Neptune. These objects are now deemed members of the Kuiper belt and are accordingly known as Kuiper Belt Objects (KBOs). The continued discovery of these objects began a debate that goes on to this day: is Pluto a planet or simply the largest (known) example of a Kuiper belt object?

Kuiper belt objects are minor planets, so the question arose as to whether to consider Pluto to be one too. This planetary sciences debate landed in newspaper headlines, editorials, and on the Internet in early 1999. Thoughts that Pluto might be "demoted" to non-planet status created an emotional response in certain sectors of the public. Such news outlets as the BBC News Online, the Boston Globe, and USA Today all printed stories noting that the International Astronomical Union was considering dropping Pluto's planetary status. "Save Pluto" websites sprang up, and school children sent letters to astronomers and the IAU.

On February 3, 1999, Brian Marsden of the Minor Planet Center inadvertently fueled the debate when he issued an editorial in the Minor Planet Electronic Circular 1999-C03 (http://cfa-www.harvard.edu/iau/mpec/J99/J99C03.html) noting that the 10,000th minor planet was about to be numbered and this called for a large celebration (the IAU celebrates every thousandth numbered minor planet in some way). He suggested that Pluto be honored with the number 10,000, giving it "dual citizenship" of sorts as both a major and a minor planet.

Between the media reports and the Minor Planets Electronic Circular, IAU General Secretary Joannes Anderson issued a press release that same day stating there were no plans to change Pluto's planetary status. Eventually, the number 10,000 was assigned to an ordinary asteroid.

New discoveries

Continuing discoveries in the Kuiper belt and beyond keep rekindling the debate. In 2002, 50000 Quaoar was discovered, with a 1280 km diameter, making it a bit more than half the size of Pluto. Another recent discovery, 90482 Orcus, is probably even larger. On March 15, 2004, Michael E. Brown, Chadwick A. Trujillo and David L. Rabinowitz announced their discovery of 90377 Sedna, much farther out than the Kuiper belt. An upper limit of 1800 km has been placed on Sedna's diameter, close to Pluto's 2320 km. Sedna could be the largest object yet discovered in the solar system since Pluto in 1930.

Some astronomers think it is only a matter of time before a Kuiper Belt object larger than Pluto is discovered. The last remaining distinguishing feature of Pluto would likely then be its moon, Charon, and its atmosphere. However, these characteristics may not be unique to Pluto: several other Kuiper belt objects (not including Sedna) are known to have satellites.

It is interesting to note that, historically, the first four asteroids (1 Ceres, 2 Pallas, 3 Juno and 4 Vesta) were considered planets for several decades (their size was not accurately known at the time). Some astronomy texts in the early 19th century referred to the existence of eleven planets (including Uranus and the first four asteroids).[Emphasis Mine] In 1845, the first new asteroid in 38 years was discovered (5 Astraea), just one year before Neptune, and soon every year brought a few more asteroid discoveries. Although they are still called "minor planets", they are no longer considered "planets". Thus there is precedent for the sort of "demotion" that some propose for Pluto (although Pluto has more than twice the diameter of Ceres and more than 10 times its mass).

On the other hand, it may very well be that regardless of future astronomical discoveries, Pluto will remain grandfathered as a planet in much the same way that Europe is considered a separate continent for historical reasons although geographically it makes more sense, from first principles, to consider both Europe and Asia to comprise the single continent of Eurasia.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

I am a Masters in History who has spent too much time in a cubicle and morphed into a movie character.

A character few have heard of. So you should explain somewhere (not on this thread) why you chose it to represent yourself. At least I think that!
What is the connection between history and Mr. Gibbons? Does he look like you?

I'm told I look more like a cross of Robin Williams and Andrew McCarthy when I'm wearing contacts and not my glasses.



You can ask Brian Rush, Dan DBookWoym, Kevin the Roadbuilder, or Neisha S.. They've met me.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

I miss ol William already. Bring him back!

I may do that someday.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

You are a Masters in History? Did you tell me that before? Then you really SHOULD read my book. I don't know another book that shows how trends in different fields coincide and synthezies the meaning of a period in history, as well as mine. I used the astrological symbols as a way to organize the ideas. Of course, I know your opinion about astrology, so you have to read my book with your own special grain of salt. But don't read it while sitting in a cubicle. My book requires a wide perspective.

I have my BA in European history with a minor emphasis in Middle Eastern history, and my MA is in American history with a concentration on William Jennings Bryan and Darwinism (I also took a serious interest for a while in Jonathan Edwards and proto-Idealism as I discovered Edwards' ontology was very similar to Bishop George Berkeley, yet his conclusions were not).

I asked about your book at East-West Bookshop but they said it was out of print. No, wait, I just bought it on Amazon. I should have it next week.

Some astrologers use the asteroids and the Kuiper objects. Feminist astrologers refer to the asteroid goddesses. I consider Pluto to be a transitional figure, representing that netherworld between the living and the dead, which is it archetypal or mythical meaning. Sometimes its importance in personal charts and transits is less important, but the empirical evidence indicates that Pluto is profoundly meaningful in long range trends in civilization. I gather there aren't too many other such cycles out there looking for a correlation from a Kuiper iceball. Somebody might find such a cycle. But another minor planet that some astrologers swear by is Chiron.

You can say, well I could attribute anything to any Kuiper iceball I choose. But I didn't choose them, and couldn't have done so. My initial discovery that "something's happening here" in the mid-60s that must correlate with an outer planet conjunction, and then seeing that very thing in the very week I thought it most likely to have occured, still impresses me greatly. And of course, one of those two planets was Pluto. And then I found all those other correlations, and then also its significance for presidents which I mentioned above.

Interestingly, in the Crisis era, Neptune correlated with 4 presidents in a row (their current positions aligning with their Sun, Moon and/or Ascendant). That was when Neptune was in Virgo and Libra, which is considered the top or executive sector of the US horoscope. Then when Pluto and Uranus did the same thing during the Awakening era, 3 presidents in a row followed whose charts were correlated with THOSE planets.

And the whole trend started and ended with correlations to Uranus at the Ascendant point of the USA, Sagittarius, and the Ascending points in the charts of TR and RR. The Ascendant point or rising sign represents startings and endings, astrologically.

I'm not an enigma, but you could say that astrology is.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

. . . But another minor planet that some astrologers swear by is Chiron . . .

As long as don't swear by the ring around Uranus.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

Some astrologers use the asteroids and the Kuiper objects. Feminist astrologers refer to the asteroid goddesses. I consider Pluto to be a transitional figure, representing that netherworld between the living and the dead, which is it archetypal or mythical meaning. Sometimes its importance in personal charts and transits is less important, but the empirical evidence indicates that Pluto is profoundly meaningful in long range trends in civilization. I gather there aren't too many other such cycles out there looking for a correlation from a Kuiper iceball. Somebody might find such a cycle. But another minor planet that some astrologers swear by is Chiron.

You can say, well I could attribute anything to any Kuiper iceball I choose. But I didn't choose them, and couldn't have done so. My initial discovery that "something's happening here" in the mid-60s that must correlate with an outer planet conjunction, and then seeing that very thing in the very week I thought it most likely to have occured, still impresses me greatly. And of course, one of those two planets was Pluto. And then I found all those other correlations, and then also its significance for presidents which I mentioned above.

Interestingly, in the Crisis era, Neptune correlated with 4 presidents in a row (their current positions aligning with their Sun, Moon and/or Ascendant). That was when Neptune was in Virgo and Libra, which is considered the top or executive sector of the US horoscope. Then when Pluto and Uranus did the same thing during the Awakening era, 3 presidents in a row followed whose charts were correlated with THOSE planets.

And the whole trend started and ended with correlations to Uranus at the Ascendant point of the USA, Sagittarius, and the Ascending points in the charts of TR and RR. The Ascendant point or rising sign represents startings and endings, astrologically.

I'm not an enigma, but you could say that astrology is.

Hey Eric Meece,

Did you know that the Iraq elections will take place on the 37th anniversary (to the day) of the beginning of the Tet offensive? Put that one in your astrological pipe and smoke it.

Originally Posted by kenof98112

Hey Eric Meece,

Did you know that the Iraq elections will take place on the 37th anniversary (to the day) of the beginning of the Tet offensive? Put that one in your astrological pipe and smoke it.

Go Eric, Go Eric, Go Eric . . .

Wish I could join ya, man. But I gave up the herb back in the 80's.

It does appear that Iraq is another Vietnam, and January 2005 is about two years into the conflict (or three if you connect it to 9-11; the "big lie" used to justify the war). What seems clear (back to Pluto again), is that Pluto opposed Saturn in 1965-1966 as the US-Vietnam War began, and that two or three years later the Tet Offensive happened, which revealed that the Vietnam War was a quagmire to those who didn't realize it before. Perhaps now, two or three years after the most recent time (and the first time since 1966) that Pluto opposed Saturn, which occured in late-Summer 2001, and reformed in early 2003, it will dawn on more people that Iraq IS the quagmire that we anti-war folks said it would be. So maybe the anniversary is no coincidence.

Those who refuse to learn from history, are doomed to repeat it. That is what is happening to America. And these lessons can be relied upon to follow the planetary cycles.

Unfortunately, in early 1968 the American people still had the chance in the coming months to vote against their stupid leaders, and the Democrats chased LBJ from office. In January 2005 we don't have that choice; we are stuck with the poor choice we have already made.

This is likely a recipe for even greater divisions than in the late 1960s; or worse, with a growing fascism that can't be dislodged until the nation collapses.

From what I can make of it, the Oort Cloud, working in conjunction with the sun's companion star Nemesis, would blemish most of astrology's fair complexion; but they might help to erase that ugly ring around Uranus.

Unlike alot of Christians, I do think that Astrology has some validity. This mainly stems from the fact that I beleive in Absolute Destiny, Fate, Predestination, etc. An all knowing, seeing, present, and powerful God is not compatible with the quaint idea of free-will. However, rather than the celestial bodies dictating life and events I believe they describe life and events as symbols or archtypes representing intangible foreces/energies similar to Plato's theory of forms. I also have a theory that the prohibitions in the Bible against "religious observance" of such signs is due to mans propensity for spiritual adultery (following after "other gods"). Lesser informed men would have, and did, look at the celestial bodies as "gods" rather than recognizing them as God's handiwork. Rather than following God and trusting in Him, they would, and did, follow his creation instead, oblivious to the fact that there was a greater source behind them...