posted August 26, 2015 01:46 PM            

------------------
Want to Read Simple, Fun,Sexy Articles on Astrology? Check Me Out, DUDE.

posted August 27, 2015 05:44 PM            

I do not claim that there are never any chart situations of 'unaspected' planets. But they are rare -- just as astrotheme states:

quote:

---

It seldom happens that in a natal chart, a planet is totally disconnected from the nine other planets. Why does such a phenomenon rarely occur?

---

There is a simple way to determine if a planet truly gives/receives no aspects: simply look at the aspectarian columns for every planet. If there are no blank columns under or alongside the planet, then it is aspected. If there is such a blank space in both columns for a planet, then look in declination. If there are no parallels or contra-parallels there, then that planet could be without aspects.

My article lays out numerous detailed illustrations that show how many supposed 'unaspected' planets in people's charts are actually well aspected in declination or by minor aspects. And that the term is a misnomer -- mis-named, misleading as to definition and application. Both those points are undeniable. It is an example of a rare occurrence blown out of proportion and in need of demotion at best to allow room for declinations information.

The 'unaspected' planet theory was created during a void of declinations use by astrologers. What would it be like if a cosmology student started touting theories of the universe without first having a well-rounded, working knowledge of some foundational branches of science, like physics?

Some here may think that I have somehow not been educated in prevailing astrology interpretation. Not so. I studied the McEvers-March course and they cover all these notions. But broader understanding and more advanced studies can easily sweep away some of them.

'Unpasected planet' was an understandable theory given this deficit of information that could not explain why a planet could have at least some of emphasis in a person's life, but not show major aspects in longitude. That is because you cannot locate any planet or describe its condition unless you use a two-axis approach.

If I told you to meet me at 122 degrees west, and you said, "Okay", and trotted off ... would you go to California, or Oregon, or Washington, or British Columbia? If no latitude was given you don't know where you are going except to the U.S. west coast. Same with the sky. Every planet must be located with its east-west longitude and north-south declination measures.

Gabby - look at my chart and tell me if you see anything unaspected:
https://kannonmcafee.files.wordpress.com/2014/02/kannon-validated-birth-chart.gif
And look at the declination positions for your Sun & Moon & Neptune. They are in parallel at 20-21 degrees. This creates emphasis, and a strength, not 'disconnection.'

I am dealing with physical facts first, not subjective, anecdotal information. That information is also useful, but only after astronomical facts have been established fully.

It is understandable that those who have engaged in applying the misnomer 'unaspected' planet theory are reluctant to chagne their perspective. But astrology doesn't have to be about beliefs that become perspective-limiting dogmas. Its too complex a phenomenon to narrow ourselves into such beliefs. And astrology (or anything else) moves on with or without us. I don't want to see people left behind.

posted August 28, 2015 12:56 PM            

Interesting conversation.