16
Firstly i would like to express my support and sorrow to the families that have had a loved one that has died in this tragic accident.
Secondly i cannot believe what is written here, how can we support any connection to G.W.Bush, he is only the president by democracy, if we support this thesis, then i would say we are unable to see the big picture, that by gradually chipping away, can give insight.

There is no doubt when G.W.Bush was born being 6th July 1946 at 07:26, that Sirius was conjunct the Sun, by projected, thus when the Sun rose in New Haven, Connecticut, it was conjunct the Asc. , Sirius, Sun.

I fail to see when i have material that has numerous connections, that everyone is debating G.W.Bush's involvement in a tragic accident.

I would have thought as no one can rubbish my observations with American and English history, or Catholic for that matter, in regards to our calendar, and indeed American and English cornerstones/Groundbreaking ceremonies, Coptic calendars, and dates aligned to different perceptions to the start of the day, that this debate hasnt found anyone to attack my findings.

Am i to persume that i am a too difficult nut to crack with observations with history and electional astrology?

Okay, blow this out of the water, as George W. Bush was born on a day and location that Sunrise experienced Sirius, Sun, and Ascendent were all conjunct, it is a matter of speculation that he may have been groomed for high office.

This makes a mockery of democracy, many feel he won by the skin of his teeth, but did he win because of ancient beliefs holding sway, because of the dawn alignments, and a lot of money?

I will say i dont know, but at least i go into a great deal of depth in analysis, chipping away constantly, if there are secrets here, dont think we can get an answer by one alignment, that is stupid!

17
Hello Tom,
Tom wrote:

The supports on the ends of the bridge, and at various places along the span sit on concrete footings that are mostly under water, underground, and very deep.
I will presume you've never looked at the underside of the average bridge, where steel that spans meets up with the concrete that supports it. Concrete which finds its other end sunk deep into the ground. Knock the steel off the concrete pier, and the steel will fall.

Google "bridge demolition" if you're unsure. There's some spectacular videos out there. Bridge falls into the water, piers left standing.

Imagine four legs holding up a piece of lumber spanning about 12 or more feet and not too thick. Now imagine jumping in the middle. The wood would snap and the "bridge" would fall.
Cars were not jumping up & down in the middle of the Minneapolis bridge when it collapsed.
Notice the multiple pilings or footings. Are you suggesting that they were all dynamited? The dynamiter would have likey been drowned given the strength of the current.


The bridge in question, the one that collapsed without warning at 6 pm, August 1, collapsed from points both over land. Not the Mississippi, as is clear from the photos.
Me: The trusses bend, they flex, and, ultimately, the various joints fail, one by one. The process is never instantaneous
You: Put enough pressure or send enough energy to anything and it will collapse or otherwise fall almost instantly.
True. Bombs & explosives are good for precisely this.
Try to catch a falling two-ton steel beam and see how long it takes your skelton to collapse.
Good idea. My bones weigh maybe 80 pounds. 80 goes into 4000 50 times. Drop 50 times the weight of the bridge directly upon the bridge, I'll agree with you. The bridge will collapse. But that's not what happened on Wednesday.
Furthermore, any sensible dynamiter would know that he did not have to explode all four corners to achieve the desired result - meaning that if, as you say, the bridge fell at once into the river, it is evidence of an accident not an attack.


That's true & I've been wondering about that. Knock out just one piling & the bridge, while it will remain standing overall, will be so badly damaged as to be worthless. On the other hand, if the idea was, "Let's take out this bridge. What's the minimum we need for a good show?", then the flunkies who actually plan the work & plant the charges will presume the boss wants the entire structure to go down. Anything less than a good show & the boss will complain. It's a moot point anyway. Investigators will have a good look at the pilings.
If the villain is smart enough to bring down the structure he wouldn't be so dumb as to unnecessarily increase his chances of getting caught by take multiple trips to the site to place charges all over the place or hope that a squadron of dynamiters wouldn't be noticed as they simultaneously placed the charges. A terrorist only wants to cause havoc. He isn't interested in the aesthetics of a neatly falling bridge.


Which may be the reason terrorists don't go around blasting bridges & why no group, real or phony, has claimed this one. Terrorists are rarely imaginative. They want the tried & true. Whenever they're lucky enough to get a new idea - car bomb, for example - they beat it to death.
At this point it is possible that terrorism is involved and it is also possible other things could have caused the bridge to fail. A possibility is not the same thing as evidence, and to use a possibility to reason from our conclusion (it is possible there was terrorism) to our conclusion (therefore it was terrorism) is classic circular reasoning. Let's wait for some evidence and the inevitable cry of "cover up" from the paranoids.

You can have the last word.
Which is precisely why I brought GWB's chart into it. The synastric aspects are spectacular.

Here's a neat trick: Take a president's natal chart, combine it with his inauguration (composite), what do you get? His administration, for better or worse.

Take a criminal's chart, combine it with his crime, do you get his motive? What would happen, I wonder, if GWB's natal was combined with his declaration of hostilities against Iraq in March, 2003? Would it be the story of our horrible experiences there?

Dave
www.AstroAmerica.com
Better books make better astrologers. Treat yourself!

18
Deb wrote:I?m not a fan of conspiracy theories (except in the case of Diana, who did afterall leave a letter saying that her murder was being planned and it would look to the world like car accident). I just can?t understand how George Bush could profit from this. The speculation will be terrorist action or poor maintenance of infrastructure (as Amelia points out). He?s between a rock and a hard place either way, surely? If it is terrorist action, then won?t that heighten his unpopularity amongst those who believe that he invites trouble by maintaining his defence policy? I think Amelia presents a good alternative suggestion as to why the event connects so strongly with his birth chart. Almost immediately he becomes the focus of attention in the event. Whatever the investigation turns up, this is likely to have some impact upon him personally.
Hello Deb,

Everything you say is true & I am sorry that I ever fell into the conspiracy crowd, but,

GWB has a history of crude behavior. He was not a terribly nice guy back in the days when he was "happy" & "carefree". He was not a terribly nice guy when he signed every death warrant that was presented to him back in the '90's. And he's not been a terribly nice guy as president. As of one year ago, some 650,000 Iraqis were dead because of him (Lancet et al), not to mention the current toll of 3500 US dead & around 30,000 badly wounded.

So I think he needs a joker to hold his feet to the fire. If a pin drops & you don't like the way it did that, then let's haul out his chart. Uniquely, astrology lets us see relationships that are not otherwise obvious.

Take the chart of the accident that killed Diana & compare it to the charts of the various suspects. Maybe you will find one with tight aspects, or maybe you will merely determine how various people thought about her passing, or maybe you will find something different.

As the Canard famously says, Freedom of speech is no use if you don't use it. Speculation is like a batter with his bat. Mostly, you swing & miss. But every now & then you hit a home run & a bit more often, get yourself on base (ie, into trouble). I've probably shot my mouth off (3 strikes, etc.) but it was fun doing it.

Dave
www.AstroAmerica.com
Better books make better astrologers. Treat yourself!

19
The interest seems to be in conspiracy theories and bridge construction. I feel the awkwardness of having over-dressed for the occasion.:oops:

At this point I would even appreciate a couple of planets conjuncting. :?

20
The interest seems to be in conspiracy theories and bridge construction. I feel the awkwardness of having over-dressed for the occasion.
Please don't - we thank our conjuncting planets that you remembered this was an astrology form

22
Amelia,

Oh well. Their diversion is our study time. :wink: They will never be able to figure out how we managed to surpass them in astrology. :sg

:D

Monk,

Try as I might I haven?t been able to work up an interest in asteroids. Besides, there?s already so much to master without them. But future directions are now unknown.

23
Kirk wrote:Amelia,

Oh well. Their diversion is our study time. :wink: They will never be able to figure out how we managed to surpass them in astrology. :sg
Astrologers calling each other names is an old story. Goes right back to the Greeks.

It's also widespread. The best astrologers in India do it all the time. Always have.

Too many astrologers also believe their way is the only way.

An offshoot is specialization in some obscure area. Such savants often look down on the less advanced. India has taken this to extremes. How many conditional dasas of Sage Parasara are there? Only the learned Sage ever knew. Chinese astrology is obscure on its face. Can you make any sense of Derek Walters? Stems & branches, anyone?

Lee Lehman got into asteroids a quarter-century ago, but her interest seems to have faded. She was picking up where Eleanor Bach, Emma Belle Donath & Zip Dobyns (all deceased) left off. Martha Lang-Wescott is the reigning asteroid champion. She's worked herself up to around 60, plus the Transneps & the most intense cosmobiology you've ever seen. She's now semi-retired. Demetra George had a couple of rounds with asteroids, but, like Lehman, has since gone elsewhere.

It was Donna Cunningham who warned that astrologers speak in gibberish & that we should try to do better, but, on the other hand, why? We never have in the past.

If you really want a good story, put the TransNeptunians in the chart. I saw this too many times back in the '80's. I didn't need to see the Transneps to know they would be found at critical points in the chart.

So I ran the collapse with them. Sure enough:

Apollon turns up exactly conjunct the MC: Expansion, amplification. Bigness, in other words. Its symbol looks like Jupiter & Gemini combined.

Hades is exactly on the DSC, opposing Pluto. It rules crime, ugliness, secrecy. The seventh is traditionally the house of the guilty party.

Note that the seventh ruler, Mercury, is in the 7th, though intercepted, which means his exact identity is hidden. Clues, however, are found further along the chain of dispositors: Mercury in Cancer is disposed by the Moon in Pisces in the third, which can be read as smooth, well-oiled, day to day transit & oh by the way did we mention driving over water that we don't pay any attention to? It, in its turn is disposed by a retrograde Jupiter in Sag. Since Jupiter rules Sag, we would have a ruling person, someone of nobility & respect, except that it's retrograde, which means a noble-born turncoat, but a secret one, as its domicile is the 12th - which it rules. This, along with the intercepted Mercury, is our second clue that the identity of the person, or cause, of the disaster, may never be known. That Jupiter then turns out to be the ruler of the ascendant. Consider the freight it's carrying!

Given that the ruler of the 7th is in the 7th, and that it can be traced to the chart ruler itself, would indicate that human agency was responsible for the collapse. Not natural causes. But I digress. Continuing with the Transneps:

Zeus is sextile the sun & sextile Jupiter. It rules thunder & lightning & perhaps by extension, loud noises & explosions.

Admetos is inconjunct both Apollon & the MC. It signifies stoppage, aloneness & death.

Vulcanus is sextile Admetos & square Apollon & the MC. It signifies drive, compulsion & fated action.

Poseidon squares the 8th house cusp. It rules spirituality. Did all the dead go straight to heaven? It also has an affinity with water, which in this case (square the 8th) would be death by drowning.

There are only eight Transneps. They move more slowly than Pluto. To find six of them making one degree aspects to both angles, the chart ruler, the sun & the house of death itself gives a small idea of their power in astrology. This is to say nothing of the 90 & 45 degree dials, Aries points, etc.

Penny Bertucelli, in Florida, could give a fine TransNeptunian reading of this chart.

Remember that GW Bush's natal chart has Apollon, Vulcanus & Admetos aspecting his MC at the moment, and that his MC is exactly opposed the collapse MC. So whatever is said of those three Transneps in the collapse chart, can also be said of dear old George on the day in question. And Poseidon square his ascendant.

It's also noteworthy that his ascendant is exactly conjunct the collapse 8th house. It is as if he "brought death to Minneapolis" on that day. Well. That is how it's read.

And, of the collapse chart, Zeus, a retrograde Jupiter, and the Sun all tightly aspect the ascendant in the US chart.

In the back of his book, Synastry, Ronald Davison highlighted the interesting synastric connections between Charles Mansion & Steven Parent. Not only did the two never meet, Mr. Parent never even knew of Mr. Manson. Manson only learned of Parent & his death in the newspapers. Manson sent his idiot murderers to kill occupants of a selected house. Parent was someone they chanced upon outside the house, who had no proper connection to it. Yet Davison found a number of significant aspects between the charts of these two otherwise unrelated men.

Had enough of one-upsmanship yet?

Oh, heck! I forgot the Sabians.

Dave
www.AstroAmerica.com
Better books make better astrologers. Treat yourself!

25
I have some friends here looking over my shoulder at this thread. They are not Skyscript members but they know enough astrology to identify synastry. By their own admission they can?t interpret it but they sure get excited when they see it ? ?Ooh, look, there?s my Ascendant on the MC - what does that mean?? When they read Dave?s assertion that the guilty party can be identified by natal synastry with the event chart, they all raced to bolt the doors for fear astrologers would arrive with a mob to lynch them for collapsing the bridge. You guessed it ? they all have strong synastry with the collapse chart.

For example, (all exact aspects June 1964) one has natal Asc 24 Libra which is the collapse chart MC. Natal Asc Lady Venus is collapse chart MC Lord. His natal Venus is 26GeminiRx exactly conj collapse chart Descendant! Opposition collapse chart Asc-Pluto. Descendant and planets in 7th = the enemy = he is the enemy! His natal Mars is L7 (also collapse L4) in natal 8th square collapse VenusRx mutually applying to his LoA VenusRx (he is in cahoots with a malefic killer). His MC is conj collapse chart Mercury, his Saturn conj collapse NN, his Uranus conj collapse chart SN, and on and on. He had not heard about the bridge collapse until this moment, yet he trusts astrology and figures his astral body must have done it (he is very gullible). Jabberwocky ? or, in statistics, a simple spurious correlation.

There is definitely a correlation between the charts. What might cause it? There are four possible reasons for two variables (e.g., a natal chart and an event chart) to correlate positively.

1. Variable A causes variable B. (e.g., My friends & Pres Bush caused the collapse)
2. Variable B causes variable A.
3. It is a coincidence.
4. Some other variable, C, causes both variable A and variable B.

There is a positive correlation between ice cream sales and violent crime. When one increases so does the other and vice versa. Does one cause the other? No. It is a ?spurious correlation? where one variable only appears to cause the other.

The causal variable is really C, in this case, an antecedent variable (comes before variables A and B). The weather comes before increase or decrease in ice cream sales and violent crime. Increase in temperature causes both increase in ice cream sales and increase in violent crime. IOW, in statistics, when you control for weather the correlation between ice cream sales and violent crime disappears.

Not all spurious relationships are as easy to see as the ice cream/violent crime example. Astrology is tricky and navigating valid, non-spurious correlations is complex. Fortunately, this one is easy.

Probable antecedent variable C for spurious correlation (synastry) between natal charts and I-35W collapse chart: humankind born on earth and not dead yet. Therefore, any ?guilty party? synastry correlation disappears.

Caveat: I am not saying astrology is causal, only that when measuring validity it behaves as though it is causal and can be evaluated similarly.

Dave, I?m all for brainstorming outside the box but concepts need to be honed for plausibility. What kind of world would it be if we banned ice cream sales every time violent crime went up?

Christina

26
Obviously this thread by S.G. Foxe, deserves better, if you have comments involving myself, please direct them to the thread "Crucial evidence relating to the English Gregorian Calendar".

27
Monk wrote:
There is no doubt when G.W.Bush was born being 6th July 1946 at 07:26, that Sirius was conjunct the Sun, by projected, thus when the Sun rose in New Haven, Connecticut, it was conjunct the Asc. , Sirius, Sun.
At this time Pluto has an altitude of 2 minutes of arc (rising), and while the Sun has an altitude of 20 deg 8 min, Sirius has an altitude of -2 deg 27 min. (Draconic Moon has an altitude of 9 deg 19 min). It is stretching the term to say Sun or Sirius conjoin Ascendant. It would not be stretching the point of an actual, mundane conjoined rising of Sirius and Pluto.

I have not given much credibility in the past to this supposed GWB birth time, as it is dubiously attested, and does not seem a particularly good fit (to me anyway). It now seems that like HM Elizabeth II has two birthdays, GWB may have both a real time of birth, and an "official" time of birth.

Either way, the scenario is too disgusting to think about. Except that we must. Does anyone else have two birthdays we should know about?