Okay, lets call this Devils Advocate here now, if you will. I am *not* trying to upset anyone, and I definitely do *not* want people getting angry and/or deciding they need to flame or allow their language to deteriorate amidst the challenge Im putting out here. Its a potentially good although controversial topic for discussion if people can stay passionate about the subject and offer pithy and logical rationale for their thinking in support of this idea. . Many here are gung ho on asteroids and the like. Others are not. A few minutes ago, I read a post by Margarita Abadie that gave me a clear second nudge to pose this question. Kevin Johnson was the first catalyst toward my doing so. Id have done this sooner, but I suppose I needed a full belly before trying this and have been missing for some hours while I spent the afternoon into the evening with my family at an early American Thanksgiving dinner since at least 3 members of my family will be working on Thanksgiving Day. Yes, we have a large--no, more like huge--family, but the three who would have been missing are major players in the family. Soooo dinner first. Now that Im back, Im sharing this thought with all of you. (And yes, dinner was marvelous, and I managed to get away without so much as a sliver of pie on top of the many calories I could have eaten and managed not to.) . Margarita, just a little food for thought since I know some of your comments might be directed at a post Kevin made in re to asteroids, etc: There are over 17000 now-identified asteroids, and NASA has stated somewhere on their site--I dont remember where now, I confess--that they identify some 85 asteroids on the average night, every night. That said, it seems to me--and this is why I err perhaps on the side of caution--that one can be treading the path down that golden road to OCDism at the very least. . I also admit Ive been impressed along the way with analysis via some asteroids, especially the Centaurs (Chiron, Ceres, Juno, Vesta, and Pallas Athene), but 17000 does seem just a *tad* over the top in a 360° wheel. After all, how many can we comfortably fit into the chart? . Astrology began as a field of study based on planets and luminaries, not 17000 asteroids, fixed stars, transNeptunian, transPlutonian, and Uranian bodies on top of those planets and luminaries. While I respect those who use asteroids and do *not* mean to imply otherwise, I cant help but wonder where the planets and luminaries have gone when I see 99% asteroidal analysis and 1%--if that--in terms of planetary and luminary analysis in the chart. . Soooo, lets defend here. Why do you use asteroids? Why wouldnt you use asteroids? If you use asteroids, Id like to know whether you can analyze a chart completely without using the asteroids? If you do not use asteroids, would you consider using them, and why or why not? Lets have a worthy discussion that we can use as an ongoing conversation. Again, please *please* dont allow language to deteriorate and do *not* stoop to flaming others. No sarcasm needed, no hostility. Just quality conversation without a judgment even if you find another persons intelligence presumably beneath your intellect. Professional, quality conversation, please. Insults will be removed. I believe this is a conversation thats long overdue.
Posted on: Sun, 23 Nov 2014 01:40:01 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015