posted November 22, 2010 01:18 AM         

In fact, overall, I must have seen more than 60 cases of convicted men and women from wikipedia where we had the Natal Information.

Then, I have the sociopath's info as well.

Overall, there were very clear patterns.
I explained that many months ago.

There are multiple planetary triggers [Afflcited Mars or Sun or Venus or Mercury or Moon from Saturn, Pluto, Uranus and mostly Neptune] that initiate the problems.

Without Nessus, the problems become psychiatric. With Nessus, the criminal motivation becomes sexual or emotional abuse, with further Asteroid squares like Kaali or Lucifer, this degenerates into extreme psychopathy. And with women, afflicted Nessus often shows up as victimization. Even when Dejanira is not affected. This I cannot understand.

What I have with me is a treasure trove of information for criminal and forensic investigation, very systematic and once we have birthtimes, it will be just fascinating.

posted November 22, 2010 02:00 AM         

I think we can all agree Manson was at best a sociopath and is considered a serial killer by many. He did do murder before the Tate-Labianca cases, too. He has no bad aspects from nessus unless you count a square to pluto and a wide conjunction to uranus. I don't.

Do you define afflicted differently than I?

>>>Without Nessus, the problems become psychiatric>>>

How do you explain killers who have no nessus contacts or afflictions? It's not psychological if they still kill, even without nessus, and those are the majority of criminal charts I see -- no nessus.

I actually take them from all the many news articles I read as well as court dockets. Sociopaths are included in this, because I look at other violent crimes besides murder and serial killers.

I'd like to see the thread you're talking about. I probably read it and decided to start using nessus in my studies, but that didn't pan out how I thought it might.

posted November 22, 2010 02:20 AM         

Ottis Toole -- No aspects to nessus. At least 7 murders.

Chester Turner -- no aspects with nessus. 10 murders.

Maury Troy Travis -- no aspects with nessus except a 4 degree square to saturn, which is wide for an asteroid, I think, and saturn I am not sure I am using, but even so, 4 degs is wider than I like for asteroids. Killed 17 women.

William Suff -- only aspect with nessus is a square to pluto. Killed 12 or more women.

I'm going to stop here, because I am tired.

I am wondering if you're using really wide orbs and outer planets?

While I did see some nessus/personal planet aspects in some of them, a lot were pluto or uranus or saturn. I saw few so far with personal planets.

You did say ALL.

posted November 22, 2010 02:35 AM         

No afflicted nessus. Over 30 murder victims.

posted November 22, 2010 04:33 AM         

could you please refrain from insulting other members.

I am referring to this passage here.

"i don't experience pms or ims, i'm irritable after having had gone less than 8 pages in this discussion entertaining some twits, all of whom were infantile and stupid, that couldn't even see that everything they might've just said, was said by an idiot just like them a moment before.. kinda like you're doing now.

honestly, it's exhausting. i'm sure some with half a brain would understand that after a while, you just don't give a f(ck anymore about anyone trying to twist your words or turn the scenario around on you as if that accomplished or did anything or made the previous point invalid.

you guys want to have a discussion with someone who is part illiterate about things dealing with astrology where most of the teachings are done through writing.. i don't.... i don't wanna talk with a nitwit about anything they surely don't know of.."

posted November 22, 2010 04:59 AM         

Robert Yates: Nessus weak square Pluto, weak square EROS, weak conjunct Mercury and quincunx Neptune and quincunx LUST. The effect is very much strong when you have 4 weak planetary aspects. And these are weak according to me, standard astrologers very much count them as valid. The bloke has LUST and Neptune exactly conjunct. Surely that counts in boosting his Nessus to satsify that Pluto conj EROS exact "talent" and all the weak aspects taken together?

Richard Ramirez: NESSUS conjunct KAALI. He also has Sun conjunct LUST as trigger. Both Conjunctions are less than 2.5 degrees orb.

Chester Turner: NESSUS opposed EROS, less than 1 degree.

Wiliam Suff: NESSUS square KARMA exact exact exact. To the second.

I too am tired too of having to constantly prove myself even to sensible people who should understand the seriousness of Nessus afflictions to personal planets and relevant Asteroids by now. We cannot waste time proving Asteroids to all and sundry when we have already documented these for more than four years using tens of thousands of examples. They can read the older posts and come to their own conclusions.

I have found that every serial killer has afflicted Nessus or afflictions from Nessus, and when we have their birthtimes, they will be even more precise. These afflictions are dangerous thanks to other planetary aspects that trigger their Nessus aspect to act wildly and influence the killer's free will choice. Ladies with afflicted Nessus are mostly victims especially when their Dejanira or Venus is hit.

I do not have anything else to say on proving Nessus' malefic side [it has a good side too, to help investigators, have written on that too], everyone is happily free to believe whatever they choose.

Cheers!

P.S: Look at Bundy's Chart wth the Asteroids, and genuine astrology students will learn how relevant Asteroid Aspects work.

Saturn square Nessus by 1 degree.

Nessus trine LUCIFER by one degree.

Nessus quicunx Moon [likely by 2 degrees]

Uranus oppose KAALI exact.

Mars conjunct South Node
Squares DEJANIRA by 1 degree.

Pluto square LUST by 1 degree.

And an intriguing Planetary Trigger: Uranus quincunx Retrograde Venus exact.

===========================================

------------------
http://tamsoft.co.in/articles.html

posted November 22, 2010 05:50 AM         

The 11-year old girl made the SUGGESTION about the name of pluto, it was a group of adults that took that suggestion into consideration and approved it.

posted November 22, 2010 06:02 AM         

"Anyways, analyzing planets by their mythological meaning is faulty anyways."

maybe, but that is what the astrological symbolism of the planets are based on. Their mythological meaning.

EDIT:
Actually there were two different approaches, happening simultaneiously.

As everyone knows western astrolgy stems from the Babylonians, who identified the five planets with their Gods, which were later on transferred to the Greek panetheon.
The "translation" was this:

° Jupiter = Marduk
° Venus = Ishtar
° Saturn= Ninurta
° Mercury = nabu
° mars = Nergal

If you study the various cultural epochs and their pantheon (at least in Western culture), you will find that each culture has their own name for a God/Goddess, that also is part of another culture, just under a different name. But the symbolism is basically the same or at least very similiar.

Example: The goddess of love and fertility

Sumeria: Inanna
Assyria/Babylon: Ishtar
Phoenician/Semitic: Astarte
Egyptian: Isis and Hathor
Greek: Aphrodite
Roman: Venus
Germanic: Freia

they all have the same basic symbolism, surrounding love, fertility, female sexuality, beauty etc., with local differences.

The babylonian astrologers came to the interpretation of the planets through two methods.

1)
One was based on SYNCHRONICITY (two, often seemingly unrelated things, happen simultaneously, like for example an ecclipse happening simutltaneously with the breaking of a war), repeated synchronicity of course.

The basis for this was recordings of the simultaneous happening of a celestial phenomenon and a certain event on earth (which of course had to occur repeatedly with the same result to deduce a connection there).

This is of course completely independent of what name is given to a planet or star.

2) The second method of interpretation was based on ASSOCIATION, or as IQ calls it, name frequency.

the astrologers based the meaning of planets on associations of ideas - sometimes even mere wordplays, in connection with the observed phenomenon.

posted November 22, 2010 06:12 AM         

And wth is up with that fidel reference made to runaroundscreaming's thread?
http://www.linda-goodman.com/ubb/Forum24/HTML/206293.html

You sound like a person that has issues not only with women but with other minority groups you were obviously trying to belittle her cuban heritage with that pic and reference to fidel.

In my opinion, you have personal and maybe mental issues you need to work out with a psychiatrist. You are coming onto an online astrology forum belittling other female and minority members and it comes off as a mechanism you have developed because you feel "weak" in your normal and daily life.

And to DD, maybe the focus on mythological meaning is what is faulty in astrology. I mean ... humans assign names. Humans are not perfect by nature, so how can we assume that the names assigned are accurate? Besides, mythological meanings can be multifaceted, some might correspond accurately to a planets influence, others might not.

It is important to ALWAYS question ALL possibilites ... no matter WHO came up with it, come on you guys!! lol.

edit:

to DD,

posted November 22, 2010 06:31 AM         

but at the same time I don´t think we are any more intelligent or perspective than our anchestors were. Just the tools have changed.

personally I like to delve into something new, using the tools we have now, without forgetting or denying where it all stemmed from.

posted November 22, 2010 06:56 AM         

We are not MORE intelligent, but, we have the technology and there have been many more findings that allow us to come to more complete and complex solutions that are ancestors weren't able to because lack of present technology.

You have to accept that maybe your ancestors weren't completely accurate about their findings, or maybe they were too scared to come out with their findings because of the condition of society at that time.

posted November 22, 2010 07:09 AM         

I see your point.

"but, we have the technology and there have been many more findings that allow us to come to more complete and complex solutions that are ancestors"

but I am not completely sure that our ancestors were lacking in their ability to comet to complete and complex solutions, at least int erms of interpreting what they had already discovered. Of course they couldn`t use Uranus or Pluto or the asteroids back then, simply because they haven`t been discovered.

Surely we have to keep in mind that they had a different historical background than we have now, agree with that.

I was also only stating how they arrived at their conclusions and interpretations; I didn`t want to judge it in any direction.

But if you look at current astrology, are astrologers really that different?
We are still using the symbolism of the planets that have been arrived at by these two mentiond "archaic" methods, and they seem to bring pretty good results.

Of course maybe it is all a big selfdelusion. Could be, certainly.
but I don`t believe that. I can`t prove it though, obviously.

But astrologers, who are using asteroids in their analyis, usually base their interpretations using these two methods, at least as far as I can see it.

I just wanted to point out how it is (or how I observed it happening, which needs not be the same thing, I know), not to say it is good or bad,r ight or wrong.

BUT the thing is if we criticise that we are coming to our interpretations of asteroids on the basis of these two methods, then we have to criticise the same thing in terms of planetary symbolsim, too, as the interpretation-finding is based on the same methods.

I think the question is: are these methods valid and have they led to a successful use of astrology?

If they have, imo, there is no basis to damn asteroids because of the method of the finding of their symbolism. There may be other things to criticise though.

For example we could talk about why we are considering astronomical objects being relevant, which are not ont he eccliptic.
The planets are all on the ecliptic. The same cannot be said for asteroids or other galactic objects.

Is the eccliptic our valid reference frame? a limitation even? Or what meaning do these objects have, outside the eccliptic? And if they have, is there a difference if an object is on the eccliptic or not? Or maybe it doesn`t matter at all?

There are still many questions about astrology I am pondering myself. And I am sorry to say this, but I fear I don`t have the answers.

posted November 22, 2010 07:12 AM           

Lindaland was not like this when i 1st came here...and before i forget:i make many gramatical errors,and i dont mind this at all! english is not my 1st language,and if it was...certainly that these errors dont mean that a person is not worthy.

Duke

is it me or you dont post a lot here?before creating this thread,did you actually saw all the threads where we talked about asteroids?

it is not the 1st and it wont be the last time that someone creates a thread like this,but these kind of things only tells me this:

people are starting to become really judgmental around here,and nobody has the right to do so.
we can study whatever we want,and we´re free to show our studies without having to be consistently "oblidged" to proove ourselves.

what´s the matter with you people?IQ is one of the most brilliant people ive ever came across with and seems to me ( and this is not a judgment it is a fact) that because of his brilliant Mind and discoveries,the more skeptical people he attracts.

to me,your whole posts show me that you´re not actually trying to understand us,us who use asteroids,you re simply judging.

do you really think that for instance,a person whose gramatics is not perfect,is not worthy of consideration?

i lost my time reading many of your next posts after the thread,but really...just by reading that,i could instantaneously predict that you only are here to get attention,and by your way of treating people,this only shows that you are the one with some serious problems here.

posted November 22, 2010 07:18 AM           

if we continue to give time and interest to threads like these,more and more judgmental people will come here to say things like Duke.

if Duke had really showed genuine interest on trying to comprehend;on respecting people,and treating others how they really deserve to be treated,i would happily show him some of my own findings about asteroids....but seeing all this?????

no way....im like DD on this one: it is a waist of our precious time and knowledge feeding Duke´s ego...which seems to me,,,it is pretty HUGE.

but i wish you the best of luck in your life Duke and i sicerely hope that in "Real" life,you actually are a nice guy.

IQ

posted November 22, 2010 07:56 AM           

We all here respect you and see your hard work IQ.