Five years ago, Patrice Guinard of C.U.R.A. (The International Astrology Research Center), made a "true and wonderful" prediction for the twenty years 2010-2030 . It's brief, read it HERE. (I'm not able to access the noted "provisos" though.)
The prediction doesn't fill me with eager anticipation! It is based on Pluto - say no more!
SNIP
What's this about latitude? I did once get into the declination thing in astrology, but discarded it as being either not useful or "a bridge too far" when combined with the many other variables available. Latitude is another way of describing declination in astrology (I think).
From astrologer Paul Newman's piece Declination for Beginners
Here's what librarising.com has to say on astrological latitude
So then, taking Patrice Guinard's prediction into account, here's yet another potential cyclical pattern in astrology. Is it likely to be as significant as some other, better known cycles though? At least, it needs to be taken into account when considering them. When Pluto is involved in other cyclical patterns - aspect cycles such as the Uranus/Pluto squares we've experienced in the past few years, if any points in that Uranus/Pluto cycle coincided with Pluto's low latitude cycle (they all did), results could prove to be more intense, more clearly defined. What we need to be doing is looking for any other cyclical patterns involving Pluto, from now until around 2030, and marking 'em with an asterisk!
Staying on CURA's website, a piece titled Astrological Cycles in History by Palden Jenkins is well worth a good long read. There's a lot to digest there, but as a taster, maybe try starting part-way through the piece at the section headed Uranus-Pluto cycles and the storms of history.
Penultimate paragraphs of the piece (it was written in 2002 by the way):
The prediction doesn't fill me with eager anticipation! It is based on Pluto - say no more!
SNIP
With its high latitude, Pluto cannot easily form aspects, especially the conjunction or opposition, with any planet. But when its latitude is lower, these aspects are possible.
What's this about latitude? I did once get into the declination thing in astrology, but discarded it as being either not useful or "a bridge too far" when combined with the many other variables available. Latitude is another way of describing declination in astrology (I think).
From astrologer Paul Newman's piece Declination for Beginners
In a nutshell, declination is a form of latitude rather than longitude. It is the measurement of planets north or south of the celestial equator, which is the Earth"s equator extended into space. It is worth remembering that when we talk of an exact conjunction of planets in a zodiac sign—for example the Moon and Saturn in Leo—these would not necessarily be conjunct in the sky. They would be conjunct by longitude (maybe appearing one above the other) but not necessarily conjunct by latitude or declination.* Similarly, the Moon and Saturn may be conjunct by declination (parallel to each other) but from different zodiac signs and therefore not conjunct by longitude. Separately either of these types of "conjunction" (longitude conjunction, declination parallel) has an equal force, but the strongest possible conjunction in astrology is when two planets are conjunct by longitude and parallel by declination at the same time. They would then appear to be conjunct in the sky. This may also help to explain why some transits seem stronger than others.
Here's what librarising.com has to say on astrological latitude
The ecliptic or Sun's apparent path is a belt of some 16 degrees thick(8° north and 8° south) where all the planets including our Earth orbit. Only Pluto and the dwarfs(as well as most stars) deviate from this belt. Wheareas east-west on the ecliptic is measured as LONGITUDE(in degrees), north-south of the ecliptic is measured as LATITUDE(in degrees). So planets in longitude and latitude in astrology refer to their position with respect to the sun's plane or ecliptic as seen from Earth. How this all translates to terrestial co-ordinates is another matter.
So then, taking Patrice Guinard's prediction into account, here's yet another potential cyclical pattern in astrology. Is it likely to be as significant as some other, better known cycles though? At least, it needs to be taken into account when considering them. When Pluto is involved in other cyclical patterns - aspect cycles such as the Uranus/Pluto squares we've experienced in the past few years, if any points in that Uranus/Pluto cycle coincided with Pluto's low latitude cycle (they all did), results could prove to be more intense, more clearly defined. What we need to be doing is looking for any other cyclical patterns involving Pluto, from now until around 2030, and marking 'em with an asterisk!
Staying on CURA's website, a piece titled Astrological Cycles in History by Palden Jenkins is well worth a good long read. There's a lot to digest there, but as a taster, maybe try starting part-way through the piece at the section headed Uranus-Pluto cycles and the storms of history.
Penultimate paragraphs of the piece (it was written in 2002 by the way):
At present, many prophecy buffs look toward the year 2012 as a time of drastic change. Though end-of-the-world type anticipations might turn out to be exaggerated, there nevertheless is a Uranus-Pluto square from 2012-15. At a square, new impulses arising from a conjunction are put to the test - there is a manifestation crisis. The astrologically-logical likelihood for 2012 is that the paradigm-shift issues of the 1960s will be forced by circumstance to deliver their goods: ecological ideas, women's power and techno-globalism, to name but three bundles of issues, will probably have to handle an emergency. War, institutions and boundaries (Aries-Capricorn) are predictable front-runners for likely trouble. Knowing how things are nowadays, this aspect is likely actually to bring a hailstorm of major issues.
But the choices now are fundamental. We need to realise, for example, that war no longer resolves conflicts as once it did. This is now a pragmatic issue, not solely a moral one or the domain of lettuce-eating pacifists. In the twelve years up to this aspect, we possess the choice to make major proactive forward-steps, or to continue delaying and avoiding such challenges as long as possible. As in 1930, on the previous square, when economic and social crisis demanded drastic action, so around 2012 we tread perilous paths along which the choices we make might have enormous and rapid outcomes. Ten years after 1930 the world was at war. What will the world be like in the decade following 2012?
4 comments:
Yes, another variable to consider in astrology! Parallel-conjunctions (latitude-longitude) are considered eclipses and are of significance. You may remember that Venus eclipsed the Sun back in 2012, in tropical Gemini. Venus' North Node is at approximately 16* tropical Gemini, which is why there was an eclipse:
"Venus, with an orbit inclined by 3.4° relative to the Earth's, usually appears to pass under (or over) the Sun at inferior conjunction. A transit occurs when Venus reaches conjunction with the Sun at or near one of its nodes—the longitude where Venus passes through the Earth's orbital plane (the ecliptic)—and appears to pass directly across the Sun. Although the inclination between these two orbital planes is only 3.4°, Venus can be as far as 9.6° from the Sun when viewed from the Earth at inferior conjunction. Since the angular diameter of the Sun is about half a degree, Venus may appear to pass above or below the Sun by more than 18 solar diameters during an ordinary conjunction."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transit_of_Venus
This is very similar to the lunar Nodes...we have a total solar eclipse coming-up at 29* tropical Pisces on the 20th of March.
Planetary Nodes (sidereal heliocentric are first, but scroll down for tropical):
http://noeltyl.com/discussion/index.php?topic=3242.0;wap2
A decent explanation of declination (see note at very bottom):
http://www.astrologer.com/aanet/pub/journal/declination-for-beginners.htm
"Most of the bodies of the Solar System orbit the Sun in nearly the same plane. This is likely due to the way in which the Solar System formed from a protoplanetary disk. Probably the closest current representation of the disk is known as the invariable plane of the Solar System. The Earth's orbit, and hence, the ecliptic, is inclined a little more than 1° to the invariable plane, and the other major planets are also within about 6° of it. Because of this, most Solar System bodies appear very close to the ecliptic in the sky. The ecliptic is well defined by the motion of the Sun. The invariable plane is defined by the angular momentum of the entire Solar System, essentially the summation of all of the revolutions and rotations of all the bodies of the system, a somewhat uncertain value which requires precise knowledge of every object in the system. For these reasons, the ecliptic is used as the reference plane of the Solar System out of convenience."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecliptic
mike ~ Thanks for these additional pieces.
It's tricky stuff to evaluate since we have no idea what astrology really is and how or why it sometimes works (either in part or as a whole doctrine). If we did it's be easy to assess whether latitude would be of significance or not, astrologically.
I'm not convinced that the planets themselves are actually "doing" anything other than acting as markers or beacons in a band or wave of time/space. Whether their position north or south of the ecliptic would be of interest in that (possibly hare-brained) set-up I can't tell. ;-/
It's another interesting variable though, particularly in respect of Pluto's latitude currently.
"Beginning in April 2012, the Moon will pass directly in front of Pluto, blocking its energy for no less than 19 consecutive months! Given the fact that this occultation hasn’t happened since 1935, it would appear to be a major event, with some cosmic intent or purpose for the world at large."
http://mountainastrologer.com/tma/the-moonpluto-occultations
We appear to be having a number of Moon occultations of Uranus in 2015:
http://lunar-occultations.com/iota/planets/planets.htm
mike (again) ~ Hmmm - and Pluto was in low latitude and potentially more "effective", but Moon was standing in front of Pluto, hands up saying "Oh nooooo you don't" ? You know, mike, I think (like Danny Glover in (whatever the movie was) "I'm getting too old for this shit!" ;-)
Thanks for the links. Still more variables eh!
Post a Comment