Nick Clegg birth data

1
I was wondering if anyone out there has any ideas on a more timed chart for the British Liberal Democrat Party Leader Nick Clegg?

He looks like being the King maker following the upcoming UK general election on May 6th. A hung parliament is now looking quite likely. However, all we seem to have to work with is a noon chart.

I have heard from an unattributed source that Clegg was born at 8.00am but I dont know how reliable this is.

Anybody heard anything?

Mark
As thou conversest with the heavens, so instruct and inform thy minde according to the image of Divinity William Lilly

2
Looks like the quest for for Nick Clegg's data has taken a big step forward. This information is the latest update from the Astrological Association of the UK website:
...recent information from Nick Clegg?s campaign team gives his birth time as 5.30 am (not 8 am) - another private source has suggested 5 56 am. Both new times indicate a more dynamic and successful person.
Image
Image
As thou conversest with the heavens, so instruct and inform thy minde according to the image of Divinity William Lilly

3
He was born in a part of the UK that doesn't record times of birth though, so it has to be regarded as highly speculative.

The same goes for David Cameron's data.

Regards

H.

5
He was born in a part of the UK that doesn't record times of birth though,


There is only one part of the United Kingdom wise enough to do that. :wink:
it has to be regarded as highly speculative.


Not as highly speculative as doing a rectification chart with nothing to go on. :-?
The chart the AA have displayed for Nick Clegg is set for 00:56hrs not 5:56hrs
Correct. I noticed that too. I assumed they made a mistake with the chart. I have contacted the AA to clear up the confusion on whether the text or chart are wrong :???:
The same goes for David Cameron's data.
I do feel that is a bit of an exagerration. Of course there are different times floating around ranging from the commonly given 6.00am to 5.51am. I wouldn't call Cameron's data totally speculative. We are not arguing about hours of time. His Mother has told Annabel Herriot that he was born at 5.55am. As a midwife she has speculated it may be a few minutes earlier as her experience is that data is often earlier than recorded. However, in this nativity the divergence is literally minutes.
As thou conversest with the heavens, so instruct and inform thy minde according to the image of Divinity William Lilly

6
Just an update on the Nick Clegg data displayed by the Astrological Association of the UK website. Roy Gillett has got back to me and confirmed the chart displayed as 00.56am on the AA website is an error and the 5.56am time is correct. So the charts I have already put up here are the correct ones.
As thou conversest with the heavens, so instruct and inform thy minde according to the image of Divinity William Lilly

7
Hi,

just found my way here as a result of my interest in the UK election. Is it correct to assume the 5:56 am time is rectified by Roy Gillett from the "offical" time 5:30 am?

As 5:30 is said to be given by the LibDem campain I guess it can be said to be official, but it's not really clear who the "private source" is and as it's a time given down to the minute it would be interesting to know more what's behind it, so to speak.

8
Hello Mark

I'm sorry but we can't regard the Clegg or Cameron times as 'correct' at all.

They should be regarded as speculative since there are no documents in the public domain to substantiate them.

Chances are they're 'mother's memory' but could equally be 'Clegg's memory of mother's memory' or even 'false data released to confound the astrologers'.

The sources for Clegg and Cameron's data are not known, we only know the reporters and message passers. The actual sources of the data are not known.

What we do know is that unlike Brown they were born in a part of the UK that did not when they were born officially record birth times. So any records that might exist of their birth times would almost certainly have been made by the family (my family wrote my birth time, which was rounded off, in my 'baby book' shortly after I was born). We don't know if Clegg and Cameron have consulted those documents or even if they exist.

In other words we are 'taking their word for it'.

For various reasons then the birth times of Clegg and Cameron should be treated with caution.

We can use the times but we shouldn't suddenly jump on them as if they're solid. We should be careful.

Even just the 'nice round figures' times of '6am' and '5:30am' should give us reason to pause. These were then altered to 5:55am and 5:56am for Cameron and Clegg respectively. We know that people estimate their own birthtimes (e.g. 'my mother said it was just before breakfast so let's say somewhere around 7am' or 'I was born at 11:55am' 'are you sure?' 'yes, my mum said it was just before midday' etc) but they don't necessarily tell us that they have done so. The fact that there is a second time in circulation gives us even more reason to pause and then proceed with care.

Regards

H.

9
I'm sorry but we can't regard the Clegg or Cameron times as 'correct' at all.
I think you may have got confused by my use of the word 'correct' above. By' correct' I was simply clarifying what data the Astrological Association were referring to on their website about Clegg. They were displaying a chart for 00.56am but describing it as 5.56am. I was making clear the 5.56am time was 'correct' in terms of a time given by the private source cited by Roy Gillett.

Generally, as there are two proposed times for Clegg 26 minutes apart its clear his data can only be seen as approximate at best. I am not God. :wink: I have no way of knowing if either of these times are ultimately 'correct' or wildly innaccurate. I distrust 'private sources' that remain anonymous and I agree many birth times are probably rounded off to nice round figures.

As for Cameron I agree a recollection of a parent is not half as satisfactory as a birth certificate. Mothers can be wrong...very wrong! I had one person's chart where her Mother confused 8.30am with 8.30pm! Thankfully i was able to verify the correct time with a birth certificate. Still, Cameron clearly had the general understanding his birth was around 6.00am before the further clarification of 5.55am provided to Annabel Herriot by his Mother. We can argue the semantics of 'speculation' vs 'approximate' but for me that is not wild speculation. Its an approximate time that is subject to human error. Human memory is fallable I fully concede. However, a speculation is a guess based on next to nothing.

I haven't studied the Rodden data system but a family source must count for something. In England ( unless you are a twin) that is often the best you are going to get. Of course many might suggest this kind of chart necessitates rectification and cannot be accepted on face value. Indeed some astrologers routinely do this with celebrity charts they study even when they have a birth certificate.

If you check out the mundane forum you will see I did not use the natal charts of Cameron or Clegg to predict the election. For example, a difference of a few minutes dramatically changes Cameron's Solar Return chart for this year.

Mark
As thou conversest with the heavens, so instruct and inform thy minde according to the image of Divinity William Lilly

10
Several members have pointed to the importance of Mars station at 1' Leo

Interestingly it hits both Cleggs and Camerons Jup at 2' Leo,


THE SCHOOL CLOSED BY AN EPIDEMIC, CHILDREN PLAY TOGETHER

Constructive result of inconveniences of life in developing communal values.

In effect Parliament is in paralysis engendering a situation where people are forced to join with each other.
Mad Daz's Place, quiet but never boring
http://pinkmelon.proboards82.com/index.cgi