posted April 01, 2005 12:11 PM         

Composite Horoscope midpoint method
PLANETARY POSITIONS
planet sign degree house
Sun Virgo 23°09'41 03
Moon Libra 06°03'11 03/4
Moon is technically near the end of house 3 and is interpreted in house 4.
Mercury Virgo 25°13'42 03
Venus Scorpio 08°17'42 04
Mars Leo 22°23'33 02
Jupiter Libra 26°22'31 04
Saturn Leo 03°45'08 01
Uranus Scorpio 02°22'25 04
Neptune Sagittarius 10°33'58 05
Pluto Libra 10°09'53 04
True Node Taurus 14°13'43 11

posted April 01, 2005 01:26 PM         

Rememember Mendel's theory? Hereditary variations are based on genes. Genes retain their identity as they pass from one generation to the next. They do not blend with other genes. Like eye color, etc.

Same with the composite chart. The composite chart is supposed to be how the couple presents themselves to the outside world. Okay. So - I can't see that the composite chart makes any sense whatsoever. 2 people, 2 unique people. Same as Mendel's theory - the dominant traits that they each have will be what the "outside world" notices - not the average of the 2 people.

Who thought this composite chart up? Defintely not a scientist.

posted April 01, 2005 04:46 PM         

key, your logic is admirable. i like your mind and the way in which you present your argument. makes sense. Had it not been from my own personal studies, you would have had me convinced the midpoint method is a sham.

Having said that, in all kindness, I'm assuming you haven't delved too deeply into the subject?

posted April 02, 2005 04:57 AM         

because this kind of analysis shows who is going to be driving the relationship and can give great insight into where it is going, what the problems are, who is going to be more dominant and submissive.

The composite chart by its nature of averaging assumes that both partners are equally important/contributing, thats not true in most cases, for example
1. if youre interested in someone and theyre not interested in you
2. love triangle cases
3. cases of dominance and submission in relationships
4. relationships with large age and status differences

total equality of contribution is what we strive for, not what is, so the process is kind of unrealistic and ambitious i would say.

by its definition it only shows what the couple shows to other people, but who really cares about that unless your a couple in the spotlight like Brad and Jen or something, or political figures like Mr President and First Lady, what we really want to know is what is going to go on UNDER the exterior, inside it all, between the two people in their most private time. Composite gives little to no insight regarding this,

Its been years that I have not done a composite.

I find that they oftentimes give an 'after the fact' kind of analysis. Comparing aspects and houses etc can give a predictive outlook as well as analyze what is and what was happening. Composite says this is what was portrayed to others period,

that is boring and uninteresting. *yawn*

posted April 05, 2005 11:22 AM         

Only fair that I should answer your question. No, I haven't really delved into the composite chart theory. But - I check out astro.com regulary, and Robert Hand seems to be a hot-shot, when it comes to astrology. By the way, you certainly have a lovely way of disagreeing!

Still, I'm with SG. The synastry makes more sense to me - the comparison of the relationship between the combination of signs and planets in the two charts. +, it is fun to figure it out.