OK. After watching this, I am slightly tempted to erase everything I have ever written about sun sign astrologers. Because it is such a wicked response to this skeptic.

(hat tip: The facebook horoscopic astrology forum)

I am going to London in March for a week and a friend, who was awarded a Certificate from the Faculty of Astrological Studies in London last year, sent me the link to the Faculty’s Annual Open Day in case I might like to purchase a ticket and attend.

While scrolling down the program page, I noticed at the very bottom that yet another Faculty Diploma holder has been stripped of her D.F.Astrol.S. This would make Debbie Frank the second astrologer to late Princess Diana to be stripped of her Faculty Diploma–the first being Penny Thornton in 1995–for violating several clauses in the Faculty’s code of ethics(pdf), the most serious, of course, being the violation of client confidentiality by speaking and writing publicly about their work as astrologers to the princess.

The second issue may be the “kind” of work done. Recent testimony given at an inquest into Diana’s death in London revealed that the princess had been given many predictions, not only of her own death, but that of other members of the Royal Family–and indeed, if you read accounts given by both women, much time was spent looking for the possibility for “bad” things to happen to her and/or other members of the Royal Family.

At a recent NORWAC conference, the well-known astrologer, Steven Forrest, spoke about the issue of confidentiality very eloquently (youtube link–go to the 35th minute). Of course, if a client wishes to step forward and speak about her work with an astrologer, that is her prerogative, but when an astrologer does so, she not only betrays the trust given to her by her client, she also potentially damages the work being done by many, many ethical astrologers.

It is not often that astrology organizations are willing to take on a prominant member who has violated this code (in fact, I have not heard of a single case in which an American astrology org has taken this step), so kudos are in order for the Faculty of Astrological Studies for stepping up to the plate in this instance and doing the right thing.

Though one does wonder why it took them so long, as I have been aware of an astrologer called Debbie Frank who claimed to have been the astrologer to the late princess for a few years, but until I read the announcement on the Faculty’s web site, I had no idea that Ms. Frank held a Faculty diploma.

Arianna Huffington has launched a new section at the Huffington Post called HuffPollstrology, to push back against the pollsters by treating “them as lightweight diversions on par with horoscopes and political betting lines.” Says Arianna:

To this end, we are introducing a new feature today: HuffPollstrology. It will keep you up to date on the latest poll results, along with the candidates’ latest horoscope predictions, the latest online political betting lines, and the latest weather forecasts for key primary states (and we know how accurate those often turn out to be!). Pollstrology is a great way to see who is hot and who is not — and which candidates’ stars say they might be lucky in voter love today.

So you can feed your poll habit every day, but in the right context — the way people who check their horoscopes every day know (unless they’ve checked their sanity at the door) that they have to take them with a large pinch of salt.

This way, you’ll be well-armed with the fun ways to start a conversation that polling and astrology provide: “I hear Hillary is ahead in California… What’s your sign? I bet you’re a Scorpio.”

The Huffington Post currently hosts two rather superficial astrology features: one a rather typical canned sun-sign treatment, courtesy of iVillage and the other by Michael Lutin (which I commented on here). Arianna Huffington’s equation of astrology to the rather superficial political polling that goes on in the service of U.S. electoral politics rather eloquently makes the case that many serious astrologers have been making for years, that sun sign astrology distorts what astrology is and what it is not, and what it can and cannot do.

Yesterday, there was some pushback from a rather surprising source, the renowned criminal attorney Jeralyn Merritt of TalkLeft (who represented Timothy McVeigh during the sentancing phase of his trial), who reveals that she supported herself while in college with an astrology practice (which seems to me like an excellent training for practicing law!). She writes:

If you’d like my takes, check back in a few days. In case I never mentioned it before, I had my own astrology business during college and law school. (I even cast an election for the Denver Mayor’s race one year at the request of one of the candidates who was then our District Attorney, using a combination of his birth chart and horary astrology. I predicted he’d lose and he did — but don’t forget, I had a 50% chance of being right, just like in a coin toss.)

As for what weight to give these astrological analysis, as I wrote in a brief in McVeigh’s case when arguing that forensic document (handwriting) experts are no more reliable than astrologers,

Mere training and experience is not a basis for establishing reliability. Many astrologers undergo years of training and expertise in the calculation and evaluation of natal charts, the placement and movement of planets through the twelve planetary houses of the Zodiac, and the calculation and comparison of the degree of angles made by one planet in relation to another in a chart. This discipline involves complex mathematical calculations and an understanding of the nature of the planets in the solar system as taught by a discipline that has been in existence for thousands of years. Yet, the specialized training, experience and expertise that is fundamental to the practice of astrology do not make it reliable. Nor do they elevate astrology to “knowledge”.

I am going to assume that what she means by “knowledge” is “certainty,” because there are a lot of astrologers out there who are into knowing an awful lot about astrology! That said, it is clear that she knows enough about astrology to have the good sense to link to Chris Brennan’s excellent tips for learning astrology.

In other words, it appears that she is making the point that people (like Arianna) should not judge astrology until they have learned something about it. And when it is recognized that entertaining sun sign columns are not a good way to begin. . . and are in fact, incredibly misleading.

Jeralyn promises to weigh in with some of her own astrological analysis (and like a good lawyer should, she does practice horary!) in the next week or so. I know I am looking forward to it!

One of most common justifications offered by sun-sign columnists is that they perform a valuable public service by introducing astrology to the public and representing it in a positive way.

So, how does one jibe this rationalization with the misogynistic and hateful pseudo-astrodiatribe typed by former Vanity Fair sun-sign columnist Michael Lutin in the popular political blog, The Huffington Post. He writes:

It should come as no surprise that Hillary Clinton came out swinging after her defeat in Iowa. After all, it was in the stars: she is a Scorpio and Scorpio rules the instinct for survival. Scorpio also rules cockroaches. Did you ever try to spray or drown them? They can hold their breath and play dead until you walk out of the kitchen and turn out the light. Then they scurry away, laughing. Scorpios are loved and hated at the same time. Those who hate Hillary still respect her sheer chutzpah, and those who love her have to put up with the fact that she can be a nightmare to live with, especially if she gets a whiff of betrayal.

He goes on to observe that sneaky little Scorpionic cockroaches have no subtlety when they have a goal in mind.

Back in the 90s when she was laughed out of Congress, her critics believed she was done for. You have to understand how Scorpios operate, however. And Hillary does operate. She operates like a nuclear-powered paper shredder. The whole Congress-health care fiasco was a disaster, partly because Scorpios do lack subtlety when they have a goal. They get fixated. They zero in. Hillary can’t help it. She’s an assertive female. (That’s why Bill married her. He likes to get slapped around once in a while.) She is not the frilly-I-enjoy-being- a-girl type of woman. She’s more like a girl’s gym teacher; just fit her out with a whistle and a pair of sneakers and she’d be ready to dribble a basketball. That image makes it easy for her detractors to cast aspersions on her sexuality.

Cute way to insinuate that not only is she a dominatrix, but she is a dykey one at that, and worthy of something one would expect at Little Green Footballs or Redstate, and not the Huffington Post.

But nevermind that, because Lutin seems to get back on the stereotypical Scorpio track later in the post:

So when she busted into the Senate with six-guns blazing, the Old Boys snickered and thought they could just send her back to the kitchen. Scorpio women are not just women, though.

Hillary backed away. In typical Scorpio fashion, she went into Plan B. Scorpios always have not only Plan B, but they usually have it figured out all the way up to Plan Z. She probably figured, well, if she couldn’t convince those old buzzards to do what she thought was right, she would just have to take over the whole shebang.

The column sputters to an end with this baffling notion:

Some will vote for her just because she’s a woman. Many will NOT for the same reason. In the end, foreign or domestic policies notwithstanding, Scorpio always turns out to be an issue of gender.

Umm, setting aside that there really are a good number of people (including a bunch of men) who have and will vote for Clinton because they actually believe that she is the most qualified candidate, I wonder what Presidents Adams, Garfield, Harding, Polk, and [Theodore] Roosevelt think about that (if they were alive to read it)!

Mikey does seem fixated on the gender thing. On the 14th, he turned up again at the HuffPo, this time somewhat toned down and makes a lame attempt (and illustrating in the process why sun sign astrology is so lame) to analyze the possibilities of all the presidential candidates. In fact, he just touches on the sun-sign transits of what he considers to be the 4 front running Republican candidates (Guiliani was included, even though he has been getting trounced even by Ron Paul), ignores the existence of Edwards (in spite of the fact that Edwards has been routinely garnering more votes than most of the Republican candidates due to the fact that most people don’t seem to be bothering with the Republican clusterfuck of a race) and deals with Obama and Clinton with the following throwaways:

“A woman in the White House, I wouldn’t trust one even AFTER menopause.”

Or “A black man President? Shoot me now.”

There is too much in both of these statement to unpack (I’m betting that most sane people of good conscience can see the problem without it being spelled out), except that I can’t but wonder if there isn’t a whole lot of projection going on here.

Two tidbits that might support this notion:

About a year ago, I posted this excerpt of a Mikey interview:

What’s your sign?

I never tell. It’s not good for my practice. I try to be neutral in my practice, and people have prejudices against certain signs, so that’s why. People have all kinds of crazy notions, based upon their childhood, mostly. They’ll say, “Oh, I hate Geminis,” and I’ll say, “Is your mother a Gemini?” “Yeah, how’d you know?”

You don’t say! Can we infer from this that the real reason Mikey hates Hillary is because she reminds him of his own cockroach of a mother?

The other tidbit comes from an ISAR conference I attended in Chicago a few years back. Mikey provided the evening entertainment at the grand $40. dinner. It was meant to be funny and to provide a laugh. But there was seriously un-funny moment toward the end as he began to rant about the dangerous times in which we live–and, with a straight face–said that since 9/11, life in NYC has become so terrifying and scary (what with all the terrorist hordes hiding out in Jackson Heights and Bay Ridge), he never ever gets into a cab if the driver is wearing a turban. It was a tense moment, and although there was a bit of buzz about it later–most people chalked it up to Mikey being Mikey. Sorta like Imus being Imus, I guess.

Not only is Mikey racist and sexist, but he is dumb. Because Muslims don’t wear turbans, Sikhs do.

On a funner note, some Scorpio women are pushing back.

Update: Lutin is fear-mongering has posted again on the Huffington Post.

This time, because Obama has a Leo North Lunar Node, he has a Messianic Complex, and because he had to grow up fast, he is grandiose (that is, he has forgotten his “place).

And Hillary Clinton is still a bitch on wheels.

If he didn’t have the astrology to hide behind (because the reality is that there are some places even a stand-up comic will not/should not go) this is how this one this reads:

Ambitious African-American man: Grandiose, i.e., uppity.

Ambitious woman: Castrating bitch, i.e, uppity.

Michael Lutin: The Bill O’Reilly of the astrology world.

A year ago, when I posted a video of Fred Mittle of Young@Heart singing Fix You by Cold Play, I was aware that I was entering a crucial Saturnian period in my life. Not only was I in the midst of a 2 year Saturn period via Fidaria, but transiting Saturn in its detriment, was hanging out in one of my angular houses and hitting a number of personal planets by hard aspect. Etc. But I did not expect that a whole year would go by without a single post, even though Saturn is about slowness, halting and yes, even reversals.

But all that is over, I am now in a Jupiter Fidaria (woo hoo!), transiting Saturn is in a Succedent house, and well, the world out there seems a lot more interesting…as I scroll the astrological ‘net, I notice a few things out there that I am looking forward to having some fun with.

Fun being the operative word! To that Jupiterian end, I have taken the liberty of “rectifying” my nome de Blog from daimones to Sunrunner.

(Photo credit: Foundations of Alter to Zeus at Pergamon from Sacred Destinations)

Following hot on the heels of the recent (and to some, heretical) demotion of Pluto to dwarf planet status, and the promotion of Ceres from asteroid to dwarf planet, the International Astronomical Union (via the Central Bureau for Astronomical Telegrams!) has finally seen fit to rename the dwarf planet UB313, more commonly known as Xena:

Following near-unanimous acceptance by the Committee on Small-Body Nomenclature and the Working Group on Planetary-System Nomenclature (in consultation with the discovery team), the IAU Executive Committee has now approved the names Eris for (136199) and Dysnomia for its satellite (136199) Eris I [formerly S/2005 (2003 UB313) . . .

But hold on to your horses! A wing-nut fighting keyboarder has uncovered a liberal plot in choice of the names Eris and Dysnomia.

Naming this "new" planet Eris, and its moon Dysnomia may be a political statement -- and if true, should therefore not be allowed in the realm of science.

[snip]

The article quotes the discoverer of the Planet - Michael Brown - as saying the name was “an obvious choice” and “too perfect to resist”. Gee, what was Brown referring to when he said “too perfect to resist”, and to what world issue was he speaking when he said it was “obvious”?

Come on! The only obvious thing is that they were taking a cheap shot at world affairs . Why assume the anti-war vibe? Because of Michael Brown’s own statements, coupled with the fact that he is from the California Institute of Technology.. located in far west Moonbat country, the 9/11 timing, and the fact that the name had to be picked by Michael Browns team BEFORE the Pluto planet vote.

Mike Brown explains the name choice:

“We were sad that Xena went away,” says Brown, so the team held onto her in subtle ways — through the name of Eris’s moon.

The satellite, now called Dysnomia (pronounced diss-NOH-mee-uh), is named for Eris’s daughter, the goddess of lawlessness — a tribute, says Brown, to the actress who played Xena, Warrior Princess: Lucy Lawless. But Brown is quick to point out that the moon also follows another tradition for “dwarf planet” satellite names: Pluto’s moon Charon was discovered in 1978 by James W. Christy, and the first syllable in Charon matches the first syllable in Christy’s wife’s name, Charlene. Brown’s wife’s name is Diane. “We’re going to call the moon Di,” says Brown.

It seems that this little neo-con isn’t buying any of this:

I question whether they were “making a commentary ” towards the discord in the astronomical community about Pluto, or a taking a cheap shot at the discord in the world … either way the names have ulterior motives behind them… and either way, the names of planets should not be chosen based upon a current controversy.

Why not? Not only has there been a tremendous amount of strife in the astronomical community of late, but the world is rife with discord and lawlessness. He goes on . . .

I’m getting flogged left and right because I hold the opinion that a 9/11 timing, a CIT in Southern California (liberal dominated) scientist / team, picking names which mean War, Lawlessness, Strife, and the Trojan fights of old… all add up to nefarious undertones.

Heh.

But then he loses me:

I must say, the Pluto planet debate wasn’t warlike, didn’t cause strife, and wasn’t lawless… other than those minor inconsistencies, the argument that Brown was referring to the Pluto issue makes total sense. What were Michael Brown and his team were referring to … well… er… maybe they were talking about WAR, STRIFE, and LAWLESSNESS in the real world, not in the astronomy world.

(Be sure to read through the comments – they are quite a hoot!)

I will say, as an unabashed liberal, I am quite pleased with the names, which are wonderfully apropos to the times, which began somehow with the Mother of All Battles.

According to The Oxford Dictionary of Classical Myth and Religion, in several Homeric battle scenes, Eris is personified as the sister of Ares. In The Theogony, Hesiod describes the goddess as the daughter of Nyx (Night), and the mother of Battles, Bloodshed, Lies, Pain, Toil and Ruin. In Works and Days, we learn that there is not just one Eris, but two — a malefic Eris who fosters war and a benefic who stimulates hard work through the spirit of competition. In the Cypria, she appeared the wedding of Peleus and Thetis, and perhaps miffed because she was not invited, stirred up a rivalry between Athena, Hera, and Aphrodite — which, of course, led to Paris’s fateful judgment and the subsequent Trojan War.

Hat tip to the (100% heterosexual) General.

Update: Tom (the friendly and very smart skeptic) makes an interesting catch:

I thought for sure Janitch was satirizing over-the-top far-right foolishness ala Ann Coulter and Michelle Malkin, but in fact he links to those two harpies in his blogroll, along with other neocon Koolaid-drinking ridiculousness, and perusing his blog and links really does indicate he’s serious. And shocker– he’s anti-evolution, too.

Okay. I just have to say a few words about this. My Scorpio friends are beginning to suspect that there is a plot afoot to cut them adrift, to cast then into exile with no planet to call home.

All over the globe this week, charts were redrawn to reflect the change. Unlike astronomers, astrologers seem to have no problem contradicting each other, so there was no need for a convention.

Last weekend in the Miami Herald, Madalyn Tillis-Dineen, president of the dubiously-named Massachusetts-based National Council for Geocosmic Research reassured us, “You could argue that [Pluto's] demotion would cause a problem for people whose charts prominently feature Pluto, but I don’t see those people suddenly losing their jobs or falling on hard times.”

I am not exactly sure what Ms. Hillis-Dineen is going on about. I would think that the elimination of Pluto would herald good times, not bad. But I digress. However this Pluto fandango plays out, I must remind all you desperately seeking dangerous Scorpios out there that there were clever and calculating Scorpios around long before Pluto was sighted by Clyde Tombaugh in 1930. Scorpios have always had a planet to call home; he was called Mars.

When I point out this little part of the secret past of the Scorpio reality, the reaction is always the same.

Dead. Silence.

And then I just when I think I am about to be plutoed right out of what is left of the solar system, I am carefully reminded that one just cannot equate powerhouses like Hillary Clinton, Condoleeza Rice, Susan Sarandon or Jeane Kirkpatrick with a bunch of Aries lightweights like Al Gore or Adolf Hitler. Defeat, simply put, is not a part of the Scorpio lexicon.

As Liz Greene pointed out in her book, Saturn: An Old Look at an Old Devil, even the nastiest planets can have a “good side.” Even though it might not look so good to the uninitiated. And if Mars in its Aries incarnation is a bit thoughtless, as a Scorpio the God of War grows some serious cajones.

Anyway, as Ms. Hillis-Dineen informed the Boston Herald: “It’s all about the placement of the planet in your chart. And we’ve worked with Pluto long enough that we know how it behaves.” Though one wonders how much Pluto she’s got in her chart: Since when did any self-respecting Scorpio Pluto, the Lord of the Underworld, ever “behave?”

You see, he is already threatening to fight back, and if/when he does, it is not likely to be pretty. One simply does not call the Kind of the Underworld a “dwarf planet” and expect anything resembling longevity.

This could mean interplanetary warfare. When the Plutonians learn that the International Astronomical Union has stripped Pluto of its planetary status, they are going to be just so very, very mad. After all, for 76 years, Pluto’s been part of the ‘noble nine,” -Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune - and now, now it’s been demoted to the status of ‘dwarf planet.’ What is a ‘dwarf planet,’ anyway? Could this be called ‘planetary profiling?’ How will the ACLU react? Does this mean that Jesse Jackson is going to fly to Pluto to calm the unrest that certain to be brewing there? As he has so many times before, will George Bush refuse to recognize the ruling of the International Astronomical Union (IAU)? Maybe he’ll declare war on Uranus, just to protect the Plutonians.

I’d like to see him try! Meanwhile, in totalitarian Myanmar, where “astrologers classify planets according to their color, size, number of rings, orbit period and axial tilt to determine how they influence the future of individuals or institutions,” Pluto’s status is undiminished and he continues to reign as always, whereas in India . . . well, even Pluto can’t control that place.

Of course in Los Cruces, New Mexico, a group of Clyde Tombaugh’s family and friends are very clear about about their feelings on the matter: size is not an issue. Nor is visibility, if you think about it. Scorpios are private and they like secrets, so this is what I am suggesting to my Scorpio pals: hang on to Pluto.

But just don’t tell anyone.

One good word can do wonders for blog traffic (blogstats at 220 so far and still climbing)!

Thanks Elsa!

And this is . . . well, about as good as it gets.

As a whole (except when privately kvetching between themselves behind another’s back), astrologers are quite allergic to criticism; whether providing it thoughtfully or accepting it. It is just not done, constructively or otherwise.

My personal theory is that since the word “astrology” is synonymous with pariah, most astrologers find themselves operating as a kind of functional outlaw, living somewhere on a continuum between a healthy capacity to question authority and a pathological disdain for accountability of any kind.

While various astrological organizations around the world have tried to address this by attempting to boost the “image” of astrology by establishing various qualifying criteria, in practice, there are very few meaningful standards in astrology (particularly in the US), either educationally or ethically. In fact, the US, both ISAR’s and the NCGR’s list of qualified or “certified” astrologers are largely populated with people who either never completed a recognized course of study or took a single astrological exam — that is most of these “certified astrologers” were granted a kind of honorary certifications (generally the criteria was that they were a “known” astrologer, which in practice meant that they were known to ISAR or NCGR board members). The situation with the AFA certification is somewhat different as they have never given a Professional Certificate to anyone who has not completed all exams; the main criticism leveled at the AFA is that it is that the exams lack rigour — a criticism which has also been directed toward ISAR and NCGR).

Fact is, since astrology is not a culturally recognized profession, anyone can hang out a shingle and set up an astrology practice. It is entirely up to potential consumers to figure out whether a particular astrologer has any real astrological education or ability (the two are not one and the same, though the former must by necessity, preceed the former). Many of the most innovative, imaginative and responsible astrologers are self-taught, though there are many so-called “self-taught astrologers, as well as those who boast of being “certified” who should be avoided.

Speaking of self-taught astrologers:

About a week ago, as I listened NPR’s Robert Siegal, host of All things Considered interview Rob Hand about the banishment of Pluto from the conscious solar system brouhaha, I was pleasantly surprised at the way in which Hand responded to one of those proverbial gotcha’ moments:

NPR: You know one of our listeners heard our correspondent David Kestenbaum’s piece yesterday about this controversy and sent us an email saying that he had had his chart done some years ago and the position of Pluto led the astrologer to conclude that he would never marry. Therefore he wonders whether indeed that forecast might be rescinded based on the new status of Pluto, should it change.

Hand: Not necessary to rescind that forecast. It should never have been made. No planet is capable of indicating absolutely that a person can’t get married. All a planet can do is indicate what a person has to do in order to get married.

NPR: Ah ha!

Hand: And sometimes that requires so much work on the part of a person that they are not likely to do it. But it isn’t actually the planet that is preventing it, it’s the person’s own inclinations.

I consider a forecast like that to be malpractice [long 4 second pause; was Seigal stumped?] And I have a lot of company.

NPR: Well Mr. Hand, thank you very much for talking with us.

Hand: You’re welcome. (listen to the full interview here)

Yes it is true that Hand has a lot of company in this respect, but it is also true that there are many practitioners (as well as many people who consult astrologers) who do believe that the placement of Pluto, or Saturn for that matter in–say the 7th house of a natal chart– is indicative of the situation described by Seigal. And that it is the astrologer’s job to so inform the client.

Although not widely reported, Pluto did make a (sort of) concession speech:

Tomorrow morning, our campaign will file the necessary petition with the International Astronomical Union so that we can continue this campaign for a new astronomy of unity and purpose. I will always do what is right for my orbit and Solar system regardless of what the political consequences may be.

Tomorrow is a brand new day. Tomorrow we launch a new campaign — Team Pluto — Asteroids, non-conforming celestial objects and planets.

So this should come as no surprise:

Only a week after Pluto was stripped of its status as a full-fledged planet of the Solar System, rebel astronomers have launched a campaign to have it restored in pomp and glory.

A petition already signed by more than 300 professional researchers is attacking the International Astronomical Union (IAU) decision to expel Pluto from the Solar System’s A-list and doom it to the status of “dwarf planet”.

“We as planetary scientists and astronomers do not agree with the IAU’s definition of a planet, nor will we use it. A better definition is needed,” says the protest, placed on the Web . . . .

After all, as Clyde Tombaugh pointed out, “It’s there. Whatever it is. It is there.”

That’s right, $1,955.89 (And .89!) making it perhaps the world’s most expensive contemporary astrology book.

I do own a copy of Melanie Reinhart’s Chiron and the Healing Journey. Slightly yellowed due to the oxidation of the bad Penguin paper, but otherwise in pristine condition.

I would be willing to part with it for only $977.60. At just half of the Amazon.com price, a phenomenal bargain, doncha’ think?

Update (Sep 3, 2006): The price has now increased to $2,121.54! My offer to sell my personal copy for only $977.60 still stands.

Update (Sept 14, 2006): the 2,121.54 copy has presumably been sold.

According to Sheldon Drobny (of Air America) over at the Huffington Post, the recent outbreak of war in Lebanon can be at least partially understood by the fact that the hostilities commenced while Mercury is [apparently] traipsing backwards.

The global crisis has intensified recently with the recent Israeli military incursions into Gaza and Lebanon. This intensity of human crisis has fallen into an astronomical period in which the planet Mercury is in retrograde. In astronomical terms, retrograde is a time when the planets appear to have a backward movement in the sky.

Before I get into the meat of this post, I just have to mention a few factoids:

• Mercury enters its (approximate) 3 week retrograde cycle about 3 times a year (this phase began on the 4th and will end on the 28th). We all know that wars do not begin 3 times a year.
• The planet Mars, like the god it was named for, is considered to be the astrological significator of war. Not Mercury. It does signify communication, and when communication breaks down, war can be an inevitable consequence . . . but communication “broke down” long before this current retrograde cycle.
• Venus is generally considered to be the planet that rules diplomacy and other kinds of consensual human relationships (love = getting along, working it out, and yes, compromise) and it is not retrograde.

To explain his reasoning for mentioning his interest in Mercury Retrograde, within the context of a post which was really about extremist thinking, Drobney goes into a personal story in which he describes how he was “sold” on the relevance of Mercury retrograde when a wholistic healer “an expert in energy medicine” explained that his treatments were not having the wished for effect because they were being applied while Mercury was retrograde. Drobney then explains that he felt much better a few weeks later “after Mercury turned direct.” Well, that may be, but studies have shown that most minor illness will take care of themselves if given time, rest, and good nutrition. So who knows?

He continues:

Before anyone thinks that I have gone mad, let me explain what I think about the unexplainable. I am agnostic as to the existence of traditional religious beliefs about god as described in Judeo-Christian scriptures. It is my belief that the god of Abraham is used as a rationalization of an unexplained powerlessness that those who wrote the scriptures were inclined to believe in as an explanation of unforseen human events. Death, earthquakes, plagues, and other unforeseen events were all explained in terms of forces of good and evil. But, I believe that modern science has shown us that the forces of nature are indifferent to human affairs. And that we may actually be connected to the cosmos in ways that have nothing to do with our current beliefs in good and evil.

One can say the same thing about astrology — that it is also used by many as “a rationalization of an unexplained powerlessness” . . . [and] “explanation of unforseen human events.” Not that I have any problem with the use of symbol, myth, and religion to make peace with the inexplicable. As long as it doesn’t harden into dogma.

The point being is that dogmatic types will express their belief system in a dogmatic way, regardless of whether that belief system is a religion or science or astrology.

BTW - the word “disaster” is derived from a Latin word, which means literally “against the stars.”

Even voice-overs named Greg Tufaro.

Yesterday’s New York Times features a hilarious article about about how a Brooklyn, New York couple gamed a new reality show “What’s Your Sign? Design” (debuting on cable’s Home and Garden channel) to get a free do-over done on their neglected front parlor.

Alex (wife) and Andrew (husband) Postman put their heads together to present a captivating (for a tv producer, at least) dilemna. She hates color and likes it, though in reality, he doesn’t much care and she really really doesn’t like it. It didn’t hurt that they are a good-looking couple (Alex is “glamorously Pregnant”) and (theoretically) it can’t be hard to make a front parlor room of a Brooklyn Brownstone look good. Eventually they were chosen to be the headline couple:

Can a practical Capricorn and a headstrong Taurus really agree on the look of a room? Find out on What’s Your Sign? Design where zodiac charts and fresh paint mix to create incredible makeovers. Watch an expert designer and a talented astrologer make it work using creative design and a little help from the stars in this innovative series that brings design harmony to couples all over the country.

Andrew describes the process:

The producer called to prod me on the color issue. “So you love color, and Alex hates it,” she said, which struck me as a tad leading; I wondered if another producer was on the phone with Alex, good-cop-bad-copping her about my decorating inadequacies.

“I guess,” I said to the producer. “I like color. I don’t think Alex is a big fan.”

“Good, that’s good,” she said. In the next segment, the astrologer told Alex, a Virgo, that she had a moon in Capricorn, which made her, like, a super-duper Virgo: very meticulous, very organized, intellectual, literary. What he sensed she sought for the room, design-wise, was … country flavor.

Huh?

At least my style would be easy to nail — boy from Queens, end of story.

A Taurus with Mercury in the 10th house, the astrologer said, I was all about work and communication. I liked “to put my ego out there.”

“Is that a euphemism for ‘jerk’?” I asked.

My sensibility, he said, was regal, noble.

Huh?

Is that a euphemism for a Leo Ascendent?

But, as Andrew points out — the room was designed before either the astrologer or the designer laid eyes on the couple (the minions had already been sent over to photograph and measure the room) — they were saved for the big taping day.

Of course. The fix was in. The room had already been designed — furnishings purchased, colors chosen. The astrologer had read our charts before meeting us, the team played up our differences and they went to town. What — I expected them to interior-decorate in real time? There wasn’t the luxury for anything else; the network had bought 24 episodes of the show, we had been told, and the hard-working crew was filming two episodes a week for three months. Astrology and reality TV were soul mates: predictability masquerading as intrigue.

The unmasking of the “real event” continues, the repeated takes, the problems getting a wall color which would look good on camera, the upset to the family routine. But in the end, neither member of the couple seems too happy with the result. The problem? Neither the astrologer or the designer seemed to “get” that Alex (the “super-duper Virgo”) wanted white walls, while her husband could care less. And it is hard to imagine that the astrologer or the designer were either informed of Alex’s “concerns” or even looked at her chart!

The room was a deep, deep lavender. Call it grape, mauve, pale eggplant. But that wasn’t the most notable thing. It was that three colors I’d never thought could coexist — purple, orange and green — were, well, kind of coexisting.

[snip]

In the exit interview, Alex tried to be charitable for the cameras, though she still detested the color of the walls and wasn’t crazy about the 15 framed sheets of music hung near the piano (toomatchy-matchy ) or the flowing olive-colored drapes. Our boys watched us through repeated takes, while we tried our best not to appear fake. But it seemed a little late for that. After I told the camera what I thought of the room, emphasizing the pleasant, I felt mostly relief: the filming, finally, was done.

Or maybe not. “That’s great and I don’t want you to say anything you don’t feel,” the producer said, “but in the next take, could you say the same thing, only use words like ‘amazing’ and ‘incredible’?”

Heh.

And so here is the room. (The drapes have already been taken down!)

I mean where on earth did they buy that white - thing - on the floor?

Mr. Tafuro, astrology 101 time here. He is a Taurus. She is a Virgo with a Capricorn Moon. They currently have two children. Another is soon to arrive. An “earthy” couple with three children how ’bout . . . Earth Tones! Natural Fibers!

Much more could be said about what is wrong with this room from both a design and and an astrological perspective. And of course, to really unravel the mystery as to how this mess came to be, we would a love peek at the designer’s chart, which would likely hold a significant key. Or perhaps a composite between the “designer” and the “astrologer”?

But hey, it was a free re-do. Live within 45 minutes of NYC and want to get a room done over for free? Here’s your chance!

I gotta tell you — even though I thought I had seen every single possible kind of stupidity which falls within the signification of stupid, nothing, and I mean nothing prepared me for this.

The secretive Magi Society (which I have heard from a number of well-placed sources is really nothing more than the latest venture of Henry Weingarten, formerly of 666 Fifth Avenue in NYC) is trying to find common cause with the likes of Pat Robertson and James Dobson. Now referring to him themselves as The Christian Guardian’s Fellowship, they have announced that “Evolution is nothing but a hoax.” The site basically says that since the Magi visited the baby Jesus in the manger, and because the Magi were astrologers, astrology can prove that, according to the Bible, the universe was designed by an Intelligent Designer. Then (as any good salesperson will, they ask money question and immediately answer it):

At the Christian Guardians, we believe that astrology is much like most other things. Just as there is good and bad in almost everything else, there is bad astrology and there is good astrology.

You must be wondering what has any of this to do with Intelligent Design?

We talk about all this because we have discovered a way to disprove Darwinism by using good astrology, and we have improved Intelligent Design by using good astrology. The astrology we are using is the astrology of the Three Wise Men who foretold of the Bethlehem Star and successfully followed it to Christ’s birthplace. The Three Wise Men were MAGI and their special form of astrology is called Magi Astrology.

Magi Astrology is so different from any other form of astrology that 95% of Magi Astrology contradicts other forms of astrology. The beauty of Magi Astrology is that it disproves Darwinism and proves Intelligent Design. Magi Astrology helps to move Intelligent Design to the very high level needed so that Intelligent Design can make accurate predictions about genetics, the weather, and other areas that presently baffle scientists.

If you proceed on and read the material on this website and our other websites, we promise you what you read will improve your life, help you to believe in our Savior, and you will see the world in a much brighter light than ever before.

Click here for the first part of a twelve-part essay written with the purpose of helping Christians to defend Intelligent Design.

Isn’t that sweet? Of course, all this definitely comes from the goodness of their brotherly-loving Christian charity.

Of course none of this has anything do with the legal judgement levied against this same Henry Weingarten:

3.19.2002 A final judgment was entered against Henry Weingarten by a federal district court in New York, who had been charged with failing to disclosing certain conflicts of interest to clients. Mr. Weingarten, according to the SEC complaint, had purchased $75,000 worth of U.N. Dollars stock for his advisory client accounts. He failed to disclose in Part II of his Form ADV that he had been paid 250,000 shares of U.N. Dollars stock to promote the company’s securities on Mr. Weingarten’s Internet site and in his newsletters.

Mr. Weingarten was also censured by the SEC and ordered to provide prospective clients with a copy of the SEC order for a period of one year.

More details on Henry Weingarten’s difficulties with the SEC here.