Double Checking A Polaris Rectification

[Halina]

     After doing a rectification for my mother and father using Starkman's Polaris, I would always worry if the rectification was correct as their marriage event would never check out with methods like Primary Directions, Secondary Directions, Solar Arc, Transits, Lunar Returns, Solar Returns, both Direct and Converse.
However, while reading the book "Working With Astrology" I finally came upon a method that works better than all these checking methods combined.
I have never seen Isaac, OD on Life or Juan Estadella, in his book "Predictive Astrology" use this double check method.
     This method employs using the rectified chart and checking the marriage event with TRANSITS TO THE MIDPOINT, then using COSI for interpretation.  Here are the results:
     1. Mother's  Marriage:Tr Asc=Mars/Node Union based on physical attraction alone.  Tr Neptune= Venus/Node The hopefulness of a relationship.
       Tr  Asc=Jupiter/Neptune Sharing great hopes with others.  Tr Venus= Merc/Asc The demonstration of love & affection.  Tr Jupiter= Uranus/Asc Successful cooperation
       or teamwork.  Tr Pluto= Venus/Jupiter A state of great happiness.  Tr Moon=Sun/Mars The desire for marriage---the HUSBAND.   Tr Uranus=Sun/Mars Sudden events,
       Marriage.  Tr MC= Mars/Asc A comrade in arms.  Tr MC=Mars/Uranus Get suddenly  into intimate relationship  Tr Merc=Jupiter/Asc A love of social contact.
       Tr Merc=Moon/Venus The longing for love, erotic thoughts.  ORBS were all tight, many exact!!!   The next post will show my father's marriage using this method.
This method can be used with any rectification you've done, even if it isn't with POLARIS.  Print out a Midpoint Modal sort of your natal midpoints, then check event transits to these midpoints that are close.   Use book "Combination of Stellar Influences" for interpretations.

[Halina]

     Here are the transits to natal midpoints for his marriage event:
Tr Asc= Sun/Moon Desire to make new contacts. 90'  Tr Mars=Sun/Moon The urge to marry. 14'  Tr Mars=Moon/MC 34' Longing of the soul for union with partner.
Tr Jupiter=Mars/Uranus Good luck.  Tr Sun=Moon/Venus 15' Marital love.  Tr Asc=Venus/Neptune 6' Longing for love.  Tr Venus=Sun/Merc Thoughts on sex, love union. 11'
Tr Venus=tr Sun The stage of falling in love, love union. 4'  Tr Uranus= Moon/Pluto An extremely emotional life.  Tr MH=Moon/Jupiter.  The BRIDE, HAPPY WIFE. 59'.
     After using this DOUBLE CHECK METHOD FOR MY POLARIS RECTIFICATION, I no longer had any doubt about the accuracy of the rectification.
This method gives more checks, a ratio of 15 to 1 compared to the combined methods of Transit, Sec Prog, Primary, Solar/Lunar Return, PSSR, Age Harmonics, etc, etc.
     You could also extend this method by using 1. Solar Arcs to natal midpoints for the marriage event.
                                                                2. Secondary Progression to the natal midpoints for the marriage event.
                                                                3. Primary Direction to the natal midpoints for the marriage event.
    Wow!!! as OD would say, a ratio of 45:1 for this method of checking as compared to the other sometimes fruitless methods.

[ODdOnLifeItself]

Hello Halina,

Do you have Prediction - Using Common and Prenatal Cycles by Alexander Marr?

Please read the section "Evaluation of Transits and Prenatal Transits in the Half-sum System of Reinhold Ebertin."

We'll meet back here.   

Peace

James

[Halina]

     Further reading will not be necessary.  I did not mention any Marr techniques.  I'm satisfied with the method I have mentioned.  Perhaps you should reread Marrs section  since you do not employ these techniques.  If you want to defend any of the master's (Marr's techniques) please use them in your post examples.  For example in discussing your relatives rectifications, not once did you employ half sums(Midpoints and transits to them) for events.  Isaac also does not use transits to natal midpoints.
Often you back up an event as relevant even if there is only one technique backing it up.  In discussing bladder cancer, no where do you employ half sums, midpoints.
     You & Isaac preach verifying a rectification via Primaries, Secondaries, Trans, Solar Arc, Returns etc, etc.  Unfortunately these involve hits to only 4 angle points.
A circle has 360 degrees so what about hits to the other 360-4= 356 degree points???  Lots of luck.  The only way to get hits to some of these other 356 points is to EMPLOY TRANSITS TO NATAL MIDPOINTS!!!

[ODdOnLifeItself]

Hello Halina,

Please don't misunderstand what I mean.  There is nothing wrong with using midpoints, HOWEVER, please realize that if you use large orbs, you'll be able to prove virtually anything.  If orbs up to 90' of arc allowed, anything can be justified.  This has been discussed before.

With 78 midpoints, if you allow a 90' orb, that works out to 234° of the zodiac that can be used up...and this is just the conjunctions.  If we're also allowing oppositions, double that.  There's an opening square and a closing square, if we're allowing that, then quadruple that.  Many factors will be in aspect by chance.

What starts to happen is, the zodiac is so full of factors (78 midpoints PLUS the 13 or 14 or more points that we're also considering multiplied by the number of aspects we are considering) and you can (hopefully) see that there will be sufficient factors to find corroborating midpoints for ANY event, based on ANY chart.

So that you'll hopefully see what I am getting at, I went and took the transits for a random event from my life.  If I allow 90' of arc and I consider ONLY the hard aspects, conjunction, square, opposition, semisquare, and sesquisquare we have:

Saturn: 10 midpoint pictures
Uranus: 6 midpoint pictures
Neptune: 9 midpoint pictures
Pluto: 11 midpoint pictures

That gives us 36 midpoint pictures.  I tried another random date and also came up with 36 midpoint pictures, strangely enough.

With that many midpoint pictures, you can "justify" most any event.  On the date that my Father died, we can look at the midpoints and use Uranus=Jupiter/Ascendant to justify a rectification that says that time was "Optimistic attitude toward others, a lucky hand in the guidance of other people as well as new ventures.  A fortunate rearrangement of conditions and circumstances."  Yet, that's NOT what happened, but we just justified it as if it had.  

The reason that I referenced the Marr chapter is that he mentions the use of midpoints and explains some of the poignant points, the necessity of very tight orbs, likely being the main one.  My implication is that Alexander Marr, through print, demonstrates that he is well-aware of midpoints (and the mathematical ramifications of their use).  I am not aware of any instances of his using midpoints to check rectifications and it's not because it wasn't considered.

Think just for one minute what you are trying to do.  You are taking one system (the transiting midpoints) with tons of aspects saying various things symbolically and using that as a justification, a measuring stick, to try and check the accuracy of another system that, itself, gives often thematic congregations of aspects which mature in just minutes of arc.  It's like trying to precisely measure the water in a cup, using an unmarked bathtub as the measuring stick.  "That half cup of water looks like it fills up about 1/6000th of the tub to me."

In order for a measuring stick to be appropriate, it needs to be at least as precise, ie. on the same order of, the system that it is measuring.  This is why PSSR aspects are so handy.  They mature in a relatively similar orb as the tested system's aspects do.  Secondary Progressions also fit into this category.

In summary, Transits generally can act to more than 1° 20' of arc.  Connecting them with the multitudinous midpoint pictures doesn't define a correct rectification.  I will wager with you that we can take totally wrong rectifications and use midpoints to prove they were right.

Re: "...not once did you employ half sums (Midpoints and transits to them) for events.  Isaac also does not use transits to natal midpoints."

Because of the above, I don't think you'd ever see us use midpoints to check if a rectification is correct.  Pardon my candor, but it's just not logical.  

Of course, we could do a little experiment.  I could take the transiting midpoints that are active at a particular time and use them to show that some particular event was corroborated through them.  Once it looked like they were justifying the rectification, I could EITHER a) reveal that that time period relates to a completely different event and/or b) reveal that the rectification is, in fact, wrong.

I'm all for using new techniques, but the way that you have described it, to my ears/eyes, it has false positive written all over it.

Peace

James

[Halina]

     Hi OD, thanx for the in depth look at this situation.  Let me first of all correct what you think I am doing.  I am NOT using transiting midpoints as Marr suggests, I am finding out all the natal midpoints, via a modal sort, cardinal, fixed,. mutable, listed 1degree through 30 degrees, then printing that on a sheet.  Next I print out the wedding event transits.  Next, I match, any single transitting planet to a natal midpoint.  The orbs I got for the various matches were 4', 6', 11', 14', 15', 34', 59', 90'.  I  think it was unfair of you to say that these were all HUGE ORBS, they weren't they were very close.
     Now the reason I use this method, is that suppose we use 22 events via Polaris but only 10 of them check out using Primaries, Secondaries, Solar Arcs, Lunars, Solars etc.
We cannot assume that all 22 events will hit one of the 4 angles, NOR should we assume that all of the events will aspect one of the 12 cusps.   So we are left with NO METHOD to check if the Polaris rectification is correct.  So in other words Polaris can only check 4 + 12 (angles plus cusps) = 16 points out of a possible 360 degrees of the natal chart.  However using my method, transit of event to natal midpoints, I have been able to verify the marriage event with close orbs and applicable interps.
    Please don;t use that stupid argument about HUGE ORBS again.
I am now going to use your other method, TRANSITING MIDPOINTS TO NATAL PLANETS, for a siblings wedding.  To see if your other argument bears fruit.
Here I find only 6 appropriate hits for wedding type aspects.  This kills your idea that we get 100 possible hits.  My orbs were extremely close, 1', 11', 13', 15', 19'.  This kills your argument about HUGE ORBS.  THe interpretations from COSI were very appropriate for a wedding event: "Harmonious love union, desire for motherhood, intense love expression, happy love union, romantic love inclinations, spiritual union with others, love union, the girl engaged to be married...the bride, union based on physical attraction."
Tr Moon/Venus=natal Asc; tr  Sun/Mars= n.Venus; tr Venus/Node= n. Jupiter' tr Venus/Uranus= Jupiter' tr Sun/Venus=Neptune etc etc.
    

[ODdOnLifeItself]

Hello Halina,

I must be the reigning King of the misquoted...

Re: "The orbs I got for the various matches were...  I think it is unfair of you to say that these were all HUGE ORBS..."

I didn't in any place say that they were "all" huge orbs.  What is true though, is that if you allow orbs out to 1° 30' of arc, you are (obviously) potentially considering midpoints with huge orbs.  If every point is "allowed" a 1° 30' orb, then it should be obvious that each midpoint is carving out 3° (1.5 applying, 1.5 separating).  Multiply that 3° by the number of points and midpoints (and then by the number of aspects being considered) and the zodiac is mostly full...just by chance.

Re: Orbs

You don't have to agree with me just because I look at it statistically, but it would be somehow wrong of me to not comment on what to me is an obvious mathematical error.  If you've read the Marr book, then you'd know that, in natal astrology (which normally uses LARGER orbs than are considered in transits--- ie. two planets 6° apart are considered conjunct in a natal chart, but you'd never (I hope) consider a transiting factor with an orb of 6° as relevant) he is suggesting for aspects other than the conjunction and opposition, an orb considerably smaller than you would imagine (single digits even).  In Transits, to have a reliable relevancy, it would be less.

Re: "Now the reason I use this method, is that suppose we use 22 events via Polaris but only 10 of them check out using Primaries, Secondaries, Solar Arcs, Solars etc...."

Before we go further unnecessarily, let's stop right there.  If you only have 10 events checking out, out of 22, then the rectification can already be seen to be wrong.  Midpoints won't be necessary for that, unless you're wanting to get a false sense of security.  The Primary Directions, themselves, should have an 80% hit rate OR MORE and with very, very tight orbs.  In your example, it's less than half.... ie. wrong birthtime.

I won't mention any names or dates as the person is entitled to their anonymity, if they choose, but I just did a (free) rectification for someone on this forum.  With the 11 events that I have used, they ALL have relevant factors in ALL the systems (Primary Directions, Secondary Progressions, PSSR, and Age Harmonics).  Some are more clearly stated than others, but all of them symbolically fit the events.  

Re: "So we are left with NO METHOD to check if the Polaris rectification is correct."

Before I would ever use midpoints to try and justify the rectification, I would have left two events out of the rectification, performed it, and THEN checked those two missing events across these systems to make sure it was right.

For the rectification listed above, the person was a bit skeptical (a good thing) and wanted me to do the rectification and THEN give me a very major event in order to test the rectification and to see if (as I had said many times) the Topocentric Primary Directions are reliable in symbolism for future events and out-of-sample tests.

I completed the rectification and sent the results.  I was given the major event, which was "meeting a love interest" (to them a soulmate, so not just a love interest, but a very special one!)

What Topocentric Primary Directions match the date given?

Jupiter conjunct the 5th (0° 9')... ie. the planet of social expansion and good tidings exactly conjoining the cusp that says romantic interest!
Node conjunct MC (0° 8')... ie. individual relationships and the establishment of unions based on shared inner understanding!

The ONE TIME when this occurred astrologically is the ONE TIME when it occurred in the life.

This is corroboration, short and to the point, beyond what a page of X = Y/Z could provide.

From reading your comments, I can only deduce that there are elements of this process that you aren't understanding completely and that it is working to your detriment in doing rectifications with Polaris.  As Polaris isn't cheap, I suggest (to get your full money's worth) that you perhaps contact Isaac and perhaps he can increase your efficiency with his program and these methods.

Re: "Please don't use that stupid argument about HUGE ORBS again."

The argument only appears stupid.  If you use transiting midpoint pictures out to 90' of arc, we can "prove" that on the day of one's Mother's death, they instead had a child.... we can "prove" that on the day one's Brother was born, they instead were in a terrible accident, etc.

The Point:  If we can show so many events that didn't happen, based on the multitude of midpoint pictures, it should be obvious that the midpoint pictures will be lacking when trying to prove CONCLUSIVELY that any particular event did, in fact, happen.

One last attempt to push through on this...  Let's say that we have a terrible event that happened in someone's life...  perhaps, they were in a car accident that left them widowed.  We look and find (among 35 other midpoint pictures) that Pluto = Saturn/Uranus.  Now, if the event happened on May 15th of 2009, and we allow up to 90' of arc, then that midpoint picture is active Feb, Mar, Apr, May, Jun, Jul, Dec of 2009 and Jan, Feb, Jul, Aug, Sep, Oct, Nov, and Dec of 2010!  Get it?  You can pretty much use that midpoint picture to explain some terrible thing happening virtually WHENEVER over a two year period.  And what do we make of the (normally very positive) Uranus = Sun/Jupiter (orb 0° 2') that happened in the middle of May?  What do we make of the 20 positive midpoint pictures that are COINCIDENT with this calamity?  In the middle of a girl's dream wedding, the crown of her LIFE, what do you make of the 20 negative midpoint pictures at the same time?

What you really need is something mathematically conclusive.  If you are finding the correct aspects (for the event) relatively clearly stated across all of these systems, the mathematical odds are very small that they would all line up for the wrong birthtime.

As a (real world) example for Birth of one's Brother...

The Topocentric Primary Directions show Jupiter conjunct the IC (0° 2')...check.

The Progressed Sidereal Solar Return shows Node conjunct Mercury (0° 5')...check.

The Secondary Progressions show Jupiter sesquisquare Node (0° 5') and IC conjunct Sun (0° 7')...check.

The Age Harmonics show AH Mercury conjunct AH Vertex and AH Sun trine Node...check.

The Transits show Jupiter (r. 3rd) square Moon...check.

Another (real world) example for meeting one's future wife...(from same rectification)

The Topocentric Primary Directions show Venus semisquare 5th (0° 2')...check.

The Progressed Sidereal Solar Return shows Venus inconjunct Asc (0° 1')...check.

The Secondary Progressions show Jupiter sextile Venus (0° 0') and Moon trine Sun (0° 3')...check!

The Age Harmonics show AH Sun trine AH Node and AH Venus conjunct the MC...check!

With all due respect, Halina, this is the way to check a rectification...the mathematical odds that all these systems would line up symbolically perfectly in all of these systems at the timing of the event for multiple events is quite small.  

The chances of finding thematically correct midpoint pictures within 90' out of 36 or more midpoint pictures using the wrong birthtime is quite HIGH.

I can't state it more plainly than the directly above two sentences...

Peace

James

[Halina]

      Thanks for the detail.  Unfortunately it strays away from midpoints and you don't even supply an event that you try with midpoint check.  I gave orbs like 1', 5', 9', 15', 15', 90', so right away you jump on the 90' orb and try to suggest I'm using huge orbs.  How unfair!
Why don't you dwell on the close orbs that these midpoints produced.  Oh, I see, it would invalidate your argument as to the usefulness of this midpoint check method.  Why not produce 20 lines of post as to the very close orbs that the marriage midpoint produced.  Obviously we would throw out large orbs and still have 5 hits under 15'.  Why don't you dwell on that for 20 lines of post.
     You have not even tried this method.  I don't follow any of your argument which drifts off to checking with other methods like Primary Directions, etc. Unfortunately for the marriage event of my parents none of these other methods showed any hits.
     Only 3 percent of the forum has Polaris, so they won't be checking any of their rectifications with Primary Directions.  They'll just be using Transits, Solar Arcs, Secondary Directions, Returns and the method I propose of Transits to natal MidPoints.
     Only reply to this post if you've tried examples with this method and dwell only on that instead of veering off course.
You might want to visit the site of Marjorie Orr, an astrologer of 30 years, who uses this method.  Or how about astrologers Michael Harding and Charles Harvey who have published books on this method.  Or David Cochrane who suggests this method as a rectification tool.  He is a famous astrologer, maker of the Sirius astrology computer program.

[ODdOnLifeItself]

Hello Halina,

I have written two rather lengthy posts about this particular topic.  I still feel that you do not understand what I am getting at, so let this brief commentary be my last opportunity to get my point across, as alas, I am tired.

Re: "...so right away you jump on the 90' orb..."

Yes, when you are using A huge orb, then it is okay to comment on the problems with it.

As someone that for the longest time was very much a midpoint oriented person (see my post about Saturn, reality, and the closest midpoints), this is not some idea that suddenly fell out of the sky (pun intended) one day.

My problem, and since it relates to the mathematics of what you are doing, it becomes THE problem; is that you are trying to check a FINE-ADJUSTMENT using a measurer that is surely set on COARSE-ADJUSTMENT setting.  As  English might not be your first language...let me ask if you understand what I mean by that sentence...

If I change the birthtime (since we're talking about rectifications) by just 60 seconds (ie. make it WRONG by 60 seconds), I do not significantly change the midpoint pictures available, but I have completely changed most, if not all, of the Primary Directions.  This is the main thrust of my point -->  finding "appropriate" midpoint pictures does NOT guarantee that the birthtime is right.  I wish, truly wish, that it did!!!  It would make my life a lot easier, as I do TONS of rectifications and I still have to do all the cross-checking and aspect listing for comparison.

I tell you what... you bought Polaris.  You must have some faith in that method, or you (hopefully) would not have spent the $350.  Isaac, I am sure, has done more precise rectifications than Marjorie Orr, David Cochrane, Michael Harding, and Charles Harvey combined.  Ask Isaac his honest opinion of using Transiting ANYTHING as a direct confirmation for which birthtime is correct... ie. Transits to confirm Primary Directions.  He's likely polite enough to not chuckle where you can hear it, but I am sure that he would say it is the wrong tool for the job.

You wanted me to take an example and look at it and since that seems only fair, I am happy to do so.  

Let's take the event "Death of Mother" from my chart.  For that event we get the aspect Saturn = Mercury/Uranus.  This describes correctly grasping a difficult situation or separating one's SELF FROM others.  If I fudge my birthtime, I get Saturn = Moon/Ascendant.  This describes the separation from relations, especially females.  Moon/Asc even MEANS females in your environment.  Mercury/Uranus speaks more of astuteness and intuition.  Did I suffer relating to my astuteness or my intuition or to the contrary, did I suffer relating to a female in my environment when my Mother died?

In short, I made my birthtime WRONG and got closer, more correct midpoints.  

But, let's not stop there... let's look at Uranus.

When my Mother died we get Uranus = Jupiter/Asc...generally, optimism, luck, and good fortune.  If I again FUDGE my birthtime, I can pick up Uranus = Venus/Saturn, which is much more expressive of a sudden separation from a female.  

Again, I made my birthtime WRONG and got closer, more correct midpoints.

Is it a fluke?  Let's try it again...

When I got married, we have Jupiter = Saturn/MC, which relates more to keeping a happy face through adversity or feeling content in limiting circumstances.  If I fudge my birthtime, I can have Jupiter = Node/MC, which is "jolly parties and a happy communion of souls" which sounds much more like a wedding.

Still again, I made my birthtime WRONG and got closer, more correct midpoints.

This is back to the fundamental problem I stated in my first reply.  Going to better midpoint pictures can "confirm" a less accurate birthtime.

In light of that, it is obvious and replicatable that it is not a reliable method of rectification and especially not a valid method for choosing particular Primary Directions-derived birthtimes, which are vastly different in aspects THEMSELVES with a slight change of birthtime, but can have virtually identical midpoint pictures.

I am very sorry Halina, but in spite of what ANYONE says, it is the wrong tool for the job.  A thousand examples are easy to find.

Re: "Only reply to this post if you've tried examples with this method and dwell only on that..."

Done.

James

P.S.  You still have not addressed the issue that in that number of midpoint pictures (36 in the two examples I checked before), we can have midpoints for life...AND DEATH.... for marriage...AND SEPARATION.... for tremendous success...AND DISMAL FAILURE all at the same time.  You want to check/measure the reliability of Primary Directions-derived birthtimes using a method that can obviously be misleading. (look at my examples)   Again, the ONLY definitive thing that I can see coming out of that technique is a false sense of security.  I wish it weren't so... it would make my work much easier!!!

[james m]

halina,

working with astrology is a really good book, and i am glad to see you have read it and gotten some good use out of it! i noticed noel tyl mentions it in his s+c in astrology book as well..

you may be aware of this, but if you have solarfire you can examine primary directions.. very recently i got some free software called morinus which is more traditional astrology type software and which clearly gives primary directions along with a number of other features that might interest you and others as well.

http://sites.google.com/site/pymorinus/#TOC-Programming

regarding the modal sort for midpoints - that is a handy tool to examine midpoints.. if you haven't done this already, you might want to try putting them in a 90 degree sort whereby all cardinal planets for example are given in 0 to 30 degree, fixed as 30 to 60 and mutable as 60 to 90.. this lets you see quickly any hard aspects including the 45/135 which involve midpoints and includes planet positions as well.

rectification has to be one of the most challenging areas to astrology. there are so many variables that reflect the countless different techniques one can see as a bystander or practitioner to these methods as well.. it reminds me of a story i'd like to share that i think has practical application with regard to using software for rectification.

there were a couple of guys that won the nobel prize for economics. they would be considered fairly bright.. they were hired and became partners of an investment firm when they won the nobel prize for economics.. the company was called long term capital management.. here's a wikipedia page on them and the story that unfolded..........hubris would be the most defining characteristic to take into consideration..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-Term_Capital_Management

[Halina]

james, thanx for the modal 90degree sort idea.  I have checked Solar Fire Primary Directions once and noticed that so many programs can't seem to agree or get the same Primary Direction, due to different methods used, so I relie on POLARIS.  Thanx, again.

OD, Finally, thank you for making your birthtime in error and showing that nevertheless the midpoints worked despite the error.
However, you did not say by how much in ERROR did you make your birthtime.  This would be very notable to know.  Thanks again for a detailed look at this.  I must say this was your best post on this topic.  You must be tired, yes, but if you don't mind telling me just your correct birthtime and the time you used to create an error.  It sounds like this error time is not too far off the real time if your getting hits to event midpoints.   Thanx a lot.

[Steve]

Hi Halina & Od,

There is an important election for President Nov. 6th 2012 for the United States. We have a timed birth chart for Obama, Aug. 4th 1961, 7:24 PM, Honolulu, Hi. Although we don’t have timed births for the candidates who may be running against Obama, I thought it may be interesting to see what each of your systems foretells with Obama (does he win or lose) with this upcoming election. As of now, but subject to change at any time, Obama has a slight lead in public polls over both candidates who will may be running against Obama.

Regards

[ODdOnLifeItself]

Hello Halina,

As you were so (let's say) energetically promoting this method, I wanted to take another chart that I was SURE of the time and do a test.  The idea was... I'll take the chart and create a copy 10 mins earlier and then compare some midpoints.  If there are significant midpoints that seem to be better using the surely wrong time, then the potential for "abuse" using this technique is quite high.

The chart I chose to use is for my biological Mother.  Hers is a strong one since a) she has 13 whole Brothers and Sisters and I have MANY other dates for her and b) the derived rectification time is very, very close to the Birth Certificate time.

Her data is:

Apr 3, 1944
11:36:54 PM
Mount Vernon, IL
Asc: 6 Sag 31

The "fudged" chart is 10 mins earlier.

When my Mother's ex-Husband suddenly and unexpectedly passed away (2/4/2010), we might be inclined to look at Uranus, since it relates to sudden, unexpected things as well as often relating in "separations" of various sorts.

With the correct time, the closest midpoint that we have is Uranus = Mercury/Jupiter (0° 24'). 

This is the only midpoint picture within 45' of arc.  (half of the "huge orb" 90' that we previously discussed)

Now, if we fudge Mom's chart 10 mins earlier and look at Uranus, we have Uranus = Sun/Asc (0° 0').

Here, we have perfect symbolism... NO ORB...  WRONG BIRTHTIME.

ie. BIG PROBLEM

Let's try again with a more exaggerated example.

Using Mom's data again...

If we look at the time she was giving birth to me (something often symbolized through Jupiter), we have (with the correct birthtime):

Jupiter = Mercury/Neptune (huge 0° 51')  and Jupiter = Saturn/Uranus (huge 0° 59')

[Neither one strongly suggests childbirth...]

Now, if we move Mom's birthtime 24 hours earlier (ie. BIG BIRTHTIME ERROR), we now have:

Jupiter = Sun/Moon (0° 19') and Jupiter = Asc/MC (0° 39')

[Both MUCH more strongly readable as a childbirth... and most astrologers seeing Sun/Moon in one and Asc/MC in the other would be moved to think that they are seeing something "special"... ie. this birthtime produces rare results.]

The problem is, the impressive midpoints are for a drastically incorrect birthtime.

As my last comment in this thread... I stand 100% behind my statement that this technique has a higher likelihood of misleading one away from the correct time than leading one TO the correct birthtime.

This can be easily statistically proven as there are 1439 WRONG birth minutes in the day and only 1 RIGHT one.

The crux of the biscuit here is that the WRONG time can be demonstrated to produce better midpoint pictures.  This "breaks" the fundamental premise of your hypothesis that the correct time will have the better midpoints, which can be demonstrated to be false.

Sorry, Halina...as I said...I sure wish this method did work!

Peace

James

[Halina]

Hi OD, Before you dismiss this method, YOU FORGOT SOMETHING.  You only tested TRANSITS TO NATAL MIDPOINTS for the event.  You did not test the following:
SOLAR ARCS TO NATAL MIDPOINTS for the event,
SECONDARY PROGRESSIONS TO NATAL MIDPOINTS for the event.
PRIMARY DIRECTIONS TO NATAL MIDPOINTS for the event.
    So you'd better check these before jumping to conclusions.  In the meantime, I will give further examples of the validation of my method.
A family member had a heart attack requiring surgery to put in a stent.  Normal methods, such as ones you use indicate neither heart attack or surgery.
But using my method, I got: Trans Mars= Venus/Uranus which COSI describes as "An operation".  Also I got trans Uranus = Mars/Saturn..."A sudden illness".
I haven't even checked this event with Solar Arcs to natal midpoint nor Sec Prog to natal midpoint, not Primaries to natal midpoint, which no doubt would have yielded further significant hits to natal midpoints.
     Here's another example:  A family members wedding. Trans Sun=Venus/MC (7' orb). The bliss of being loved by another person.
Trans Venus= Moon/Jupiter (10' orb) The girl engaged to be married, the bride.  And here's Marr's method of transitting midpoint to natal for this event: Trans Venus/Node= Jupiter (l' orb)  Happy love union.  WOW!!! Really CLOSE ORBS!!!.
     You have not tested your family events with the various methods I mention.  And as my results of different events show,  I don't believe your results.
THIS METHOD IS EXCELLENT FOR VERIFYING A RECTIFIED BIRTHTIME!!!
    WOW!  SEE Isaac post today on Syria. where he confesses to an incorrect rectification..."My rectification that is Posted in April is INCORRECT...".  So ODEE, if Isaac is human, I'm quite sure your results are not to be trusted. You should double check those rectifications of your family members as Polaris is not that reliable.  Isaac made an error of 6hours 13min 4sec.  He sure didn't test his rectification with reliable methods like transits to midpoints.  Not Polaris fault, it's the person who doesnt double check his rectification.

[james m]

transiting midpoints are an area of astrology that is generally overlooked when considering data connecting with events.. i will see if i can provide a clear example on another thread i plan on posting on in the medical astrology section in the next day or two...