Delicious Astro Data (Synastry Edition)

[12YearsABlob]

P.S. I think this thread popped up on my browser because I keep googling food and astrology.
Google decided to be clever and serve me up some "delicious astrology".

Thanks, GooglePuff.

[Ava]

Feb 2, 2018 3:05:07 GMT 12YearsABlob said:

P.S. I think this thread popped up on my browser because I keep googling food and astrology.
Google decided to be clever and serve me up some "delicious astrology".

Thanks, GooglePuff.

ROFL 

You crack me up! 

[12YearsABlob]

Ava , Muah. :*

As promised, here's the paper on serial killers:
*Dun dun dunnnn*
Statistical analysis of the birth charts of serial killers by Jan Ruis.

TL;DR version:

• A sample consisting of two datasets of male serial killers was analysed: one set consisting of birth data with a reliable birth time (77) and another set with missing birth times (216).
• These are not terribly large sample sizes, but considering the scarcity of this type of information, I'd say this is fair enough.
  
• Three different types of control groups were used.
  
• The major hypotheses were that serial killers had the following characteristics :
  1. Emphasis on the Mutable signs, especially the Moon sign.
  2. Emphasis on certain aspects of the Moon, such as Moon-Saturn aspects.
  3. Emphasis on the sign Pisces, the 12th house or Neptune.
• Minor hypotheses:
  4. ‘Stress’ aspects of Mars: Mars-Saturn and especially Mars-Neptune.
  5. Moon-Chiron and Mars-Chiron aspects.

The results were that the three major hypotheses could not be rejected, whereas the minor ones did not prove significant. There could be many reasons for this, some of which are discussed in the paper. And one that I discuss below.

*****
Footnotes:

The burden of proof is on 'disproving' the astrological hypothesis. The paper starts off by assuming these things are true and will only reject them if the evidence is overwhelmingly against the claims. Clearly, that's an easier way to prove something than proving that there is overwhelming evidence that a certain obscure relationship does exist in the data. We'll have to say "By default, we say that there is no astrological correlation between aspect ABC and the person being a serial killer" - and set out to prove otherwise. That's a more acceptable "default" if you're really trying to prove astrological validity.

^This could be one of the reasons this study worked out the way it did. If the burden of proof was on astrology to prove some correlation exists, the results might be different(?). 
*****
Kay, let me know what you guys think!

[lumina]

So i guess p is secretely a serial Killer. 😂

[12YearsABlob]

Yeah, and about 80% of my friends! *weeee*

[lumina]

Maybe, however, it is similiar to:

It is raining, therefore the street gets wet.
- true statement -

The street is wet, therefore it must be raining.
- not necessarily a true statement-


I think it might be similiar with astrological deductions.
Maybe we can expect in a serial killer these aspects to be present, but that does NOT mean, that anyone with these aspects will turn out to be a serial killer.

So in this instance, it would be the ABSENCE of certain aspects that is most insightful.


But even that I don`t believe to be true in a large majority of cases. But who knows?

[12YearsABlob]

lumina ,
"It is raining, therefore the street gets wet.
- true statement -

The street is wet, therefore it must be raining.
- not necessarily a true statement- "
^Exactly.

That's why the 'burden of proof' should be on astrology, for any meaningful analysis.

Also, correlation is not causation. Even if certain aspects/signs/modalities seem to turn up frequently - that does not mean they themselves cause aberrant behaviour.
The energy of the planets may exacerbate pre-existing tendencies, or twist experiences into something more sinister.

They are, in and of themselves, neither 'good' or 'bad', imo.

[Ava]

Nov 5, 2017 19:31:57 GMT Ava said:

I think it's funny, they say:

Her sun sextile his node - OFTEN
Her sun trine his node - SELDOM
Her sun square his node - SELDOM

-> My sun is exactly sextile my husband's NN.

Looking at this again, it didn't make any sense. 

If her sun is sextile one of his nodes it will be trine the other.

I had to read the text again to see that when they say node they mean "lunar mean north node."

Anyway, my mother's sun was sextile to my father's NN. My oldest brother's NN conjunct my father's and his first wife's sun conjunct my mother's sun, so that repeats the sextile. 

In no case are these the world's happiest marriages but I guess the sextile implies both people are putting in the work.

My ex's first serious girlfriend after me has her sun sextile to his NN and they weren't happy, either, but didn't know how to put the breaks on it.

---

Some other "often" aspects I have with my husband:

* His sun opp wife's Mercury
* His Juno opp wife's node 

That's not a lot. But I'm not finding any of our aspects in the "seldom" category.