posted on Oct, 7 2008 @ 02:28 PM
One of the problems I have with so-called modern astrology is, if it is calculated by an inaccurate man-made calendar how can it really be accurate?
For example, how can anyone really say this is the year 2008? Just because somewhere around 2008 years ago a group of men came together and said lets
make this the start of the calendar, and now it's been approximately 2008 years since then? So what? What really makes this the year 2008 beyond
You can't make a birthchart or predict anything with astrology without the correct year. So if this isn't really the year 2008, how can astrology be
even nearly accurate?
Perhaps the sun sign could be at least somewhat correct because the months always recur at the same time and season each year. Though there are other
astrological systems that place the ruling planets at completely different times of the year than so-called western astrology. So if you followed one
of these other systems, your chart would be completely different.
In the case of numerology (from the so-called western system), why does A = 1, B = 2, C = 3, D = 4, etc? Just because A is the first letter B is the
second? Why not A = some other number? Seems far too juvenile and inaccurate to me to correlate the system that way.
Or let's look at your birth number. How can it be correct if we don't even have the right year to calculate it properly? And again, why should
January be a 1, February be a 2? Why not start in March like astrology? Or on the longest day of the year, or perhaps on the shortest? Some cultures
started the year at the beginning of winter.
Humankinds inventions of date and time etc. are just man-made systems that that are unable to be used to calculate these systems, with our current
understanding of them, and therefore you can't really get an accurate form of astrology or numerology from them imo.