posted April 23, 2013 05:20 AM            

First, and not at all insignificantly, Omarr names "five of the greatest scientists in all history" who were themselves astrologers: Nicolas Copernicus, Galileo Galilei, Tycho Brahe, Johannes Kepler and Sir Isaac Newton -- the last of whom has been widely recognized, on account of his many contributions to both science and mathematics, as perhaps the preeminent example of unsurpassed scientific genius. To this day, he is the hero of scientists everywhere who, yet, still cringe to admit his long association with astrology, alchemy, and religion.

Next, Omarr passionately recommends the work of Evangeline Adams, a brilliant astrologer who published in the 1920's and '30's, and won a landmark court case in defense of astrology in 1914, when she was arrested and charged with fortunetelling. She could easily have settled out of court, but insisted on trying the case and, at even more risk to herself, further insisted on having her skills tested before the judge. She came equipped with a wealth of quotations from sources both modern and ancient, and impressed the hearers with her extensive learning and command of history. She was provided with a chart belonging to "Mr. X" and proceeded to interpret it to the glowing satisfaction of the judge. As it turned out, the chart belonged to his own son. Ms. Adams is responsible for making astrology legal in the state of New York.

Then we have John O'Neill's historic letter to Mr. Omarr in 1951. O'Neill was an accomplished astronomer, as well science editor of the New York Herald Tribune, and winner of the Pulitzer Prize and of the prestigious Clement Cleveland Medal. His letter is reproduced in Chapter 5 of Omarr's book, and significant portions of it may be found here: http://www.astrology-and-science.com/h-evol2.htm O'Neill expressed his own approval of astrology along with his regret and disappointment at the systematic stigmatization of astrology within the scientific community, and the failure of most scientists to accord it a fair hearing in conformity with the scientific method. He writes:

"For years I condemned it as unscientific and totally irrational. This was the usual formula for astronomers. Just as they have done for a long time, I condemned without making an adequate investigation of what I was condemning. Such a procedure is the utter negation of the scientific attitude, but I was quite blind to the fact at the time and mistakenly assumed I was rendering a useful service to science."

One of the most compelling pieces of evidence in favor of astrology is the work of John Henry Nelson of RCA (the Radio Corporation of America), who used astrology to predict weather patterns. Specifically, in the process of five years of experimentation, Mr. Nelson found that magnetic storms occur during significant conjunctions, squares, and oppositions, while trines and sextiles coincided with fair radio weather. Through the application of his findings, Mr. Nelson was able to save his company thousands of dollars in broadcasting costs.

Omarr mentions, -- but does not go into any depth, -- the work of Paul Flambert, who, he says, conducted statistical research into the scientific basis of astrology, yielding significant results. I have not yet looked further into the work of Paul Flambert.

Perhaps most compelling, and certainly most eminent, is Carl Gustav Jung's book, "The Interpretation of Nature and the Psyche", wherein Jung presented the results of his own statistical research into which astrological configurations appear most frequently between the charts of married couples. Jung, who had utilized horoscopes extensively in his psychological practice for years prior to conducting this study, compared the data of 966 charts (483 couples). Jung concluded that the three best (or most common) interaspects for marriage are: Sun Conjunct Moon, Moon Conjunct Moon, and Moon Conjunct Ascendant -- the former two being stronger than the latter one. Jung's intention, or hope, was to corroborate the findings of astrological tradition, which he succeeded in doing. Most noteworthy would be Ptolemy's assertion that the absolute strongest correlation in marriage is when the man's Moon Conjuncts the woman's Sun. Also in conformity with tradition, Jung found that Mars and Venus are especially strongly placed, in synastry, when either conjunct or opposed, though these aspects tended to correspond to love affairs and physical attractions, and not usually to marriage. Other statistically significant interaspects, according to Jung, are Conjunctions between the wife's Ascendant and the man's Venus, and Conjunctions between the wife's Moon and the man's Ascendant. Jung writes:

"Had one wanted to falsify the statistical findings so as to bring them into line with tradition, one could not have done it more successfully."

And Omarr reiterates: "Jung's findings bore out classical astrological claims in relation to marriage."

posted April 26, 2013 07:31 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doux Rêve:
Very interesting, thank you!

The big three were considered of paramount importance in synastry, back then. There seems to be less emphasis on them, nowadays.. But I still think that having compatible Sun, Moon and ASC signs - especially if there are aspects between them - is very important for a long-lasting relationship and especially marriage. There are many couples who don't have conjunctions between them, though.

---

posted April 26, 2013 07:34 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by somethingexcellent:
I don't like the way this Sydney Omarr writes, especially since this is supposed to campaign the vindication of astrology, and the only info I found compelling here was Carl Jung's study in married couple's synastry. Everything else seems flimsy, though the John Nelson bit about magnetic storms and transits could strike up a lot of merit if it were expanded upon more.

---

posted April 26, 2013 07:34 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by tgem:
Great article! Ironic this was posted as I was just defending the practice of astrology to someone last night...thank you for posting this

---

posted April 26, 2013 07:39 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by 12thhouser:
Thanks for the story about Evangeline Adams. I'd heard of the story, but I'd forgotten her name. That story alone would silence most naysayers and critics of astrology.

---