posted January 24, 2015 04:01 PM            

first, DST can change - the dates we observe it throughout history have changed over time and it was revised several years back. so, you have to actually see (for your birth year) when DST was observed. i looked on your behalf, and DST was in effect from April-October 1994. So, when astro is calculating your chart for Sept. it is adjusting it for DST and then when you switched your date to Dec. they also switched it back to Standard Time because DST ended Oct. 30 that year. so, astro was doing the correct switch and going back to ST was right. bottom line, don't switch your date of birth to try different options, because you are, in effect, going to get a wrong reading and time.

you don't adjust your time of birth. if you were born at 4:09, you were born at 4:09. you keep that the same. most reliable programs will adjust the time for you. if you are subtracting your birth by one hour (3:09) and the program you use are using is using -5 then two adjustments are being made (one for time of birth by you and one for time zone by the software) and that will be inaccurate, and is what is causing your rising to be cancer (which is wrong). keep your time of birth the same and just adjust the time zone/DST and it'll give the right reading (leo). even if you didn't adjust your time and just left everything as is - your rising still won't change. you're definitely a leo. even with no adjustments at all (for DST or TOB) you'd still be leo, but at 28 degrees instead of 19 degrees.

most online programs are free which can equal unreliable. a paid astrology program (software at home) can run more accurate readings. you are a leo rising. i don't "feel" like my rising either, but it is what it is. it just means you likely identify more with other signs in your chart.

posted January 24, 2015 04:21 PM            

and with no adjustments at all, for anything, it lands at 28.

posted January 24, 2015 08:25 PM            

If you read these descriptions of Cancer rising and Leo rising and clearly relate more to Cancer than Leo, then you are right to adjust your chart, regardless of what a piece of paper says and regardless of other issues...

http://kannonmcafee.wordpress.com/rising-signs-2/#cancer

Because I don't see the entire birth data here I cannot give you any more specific answers than that. Just that it is common for someone to actually be the rising sign previous to what is suggested by their recorded birth time. Many supposedly Leo rising people are in fact Cancer rising people.

---> Edit: I just saw the rest of your birth data in your original post. (Just got up from a nap...)

I concur with you. You are not Leo rising. There was no possible Asc in Leo for the date/location/time frame in which you were born. This of course does not pinpoint the degree of Cancer that is correct for your Asc, but now you can at least have it in the correct sign.

posted January 24, 2015 09:28 PM            

Your chart is probably accurate at 27 Cancer on the Asc (about 3:06). This puts the Moon opp Asc, which generally fits your self-description.

The answer to your question is far more complicated than you'd like, but since you asked I will answer best I can and as clearly as I can...

Even though astrology is firmly computerized the programming task can be monumental. There are oddities in the practices related to DST in the USA. Having said that I don't think that is the basis for your chart perplexity since you were born in 1994 when these oddities are long history.

Virtually all astrologers have the simple understanding of what creates The Ascendant, which is the mundane definition, calculated as the meeting place between the eastern horizon and the ecliptic (sun's path). That Ascendant works for a mundane event, but not for the monumental, interdimensional event of the birth of a soul as a human being. Other factors come into play (which I will not go into here). But it means that you cannot just be born anytime you like. There is order in the universe. For the Asc of the horoscope of the birth of a human to be defined as only the meeting point of the eastern horizon with the ecliptic means utter total chaos, a total lack of boundaries between dimensions. Yet that is not what we experience, because that is not the reality. There is a boundary (or vail or membrane) between this dimension and the one we came from that does not allow random jumps. There is a time 'warp' effect between the two which means that there is an elastic relationship between the moment of physical, observable birth and the instant of the enaction of spiritual intention by a soul to be that baby in that body. That means sometimes the two moments are virtually simultaneous, but usually they differ by minutes, even hours.

In other words, birth is not a singular moment, but a process and the end of the mother's process does not reliably mark the enaction of the incoming soul's intention -- which is what marks their correct Asc. Astrology does not happen to us, we choose it using free will.

This was covered by Edgar Cayce in some of his readings relating to astrology, but unfortunately was never well understood by more than a handful of astrologers. The Cayce readings involved a lot of arcane language and questions posited by unfortunates who most often didn't even know what questions to ask or how to ask them (on this topic).

Common practice for how the Asc is calculated is very common-sensical and I don't expect it to change. But for those who know they do not match their supposed rising sign it becomes more relevant -- not the technical or metaphysical details, but the fact that their chart may need to be adjusted to be accurate.

It would be nice to have a less technical/mathematical way of arriving at the answers for these things, but we don't dumb down the universe to our level, but lift our intelligence up to it's level. Basically, we have to go by the time of record, look at that chart and adjust if necessary as time goes on.