"Dormant" ingresses and "flow-through"

Q&A and discussion on Sidereal Solar & Lunar Ingresses, and transits & quotidian progressions of solar ingress.
Post Reply
User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 4803
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

"Dormant" ingresses and "flow-through"

Post by Jim Eshelman » Fri May 12, 2017 10:24 am

(This is a pivotal post, showing a significant shift in thinking that has been the key to much of value in Sidereal Mundane Astrology since then. It was posted August 31, 2013, 4:44 PM PDT.)

I've just come across something that is rather stunning... in the sense of knocking me for a loop. If it's true, it is a significant new finding. If not, then it's a land-mine. May I share it and solicit other views?

Background: General Ingress Behavior

1. We have known since Bradley's original discovery of Sidereal solar and lunar ingresses in the mid-1950s that all four solar ingresses and all four lunar ingresses are operative more or less all of the time. This makes for a very complicated picture. Happily, most of them aren't relevant most of the time, and there seems to be a firm pecking order on which ones have the loudest voices (and, therefore, are worth watching at all).

2. One place where all of the ingresses seem to have continued say is this: Bradley observed from the beginning that all four solar ingresses remain sensitive for a full 12 months to transits to their angles. I've seen this working frequently also. The only reason for not tracking them rigorously is that we generally don't need to.

3. No such observation was ever made / published concerning lunar ingresses. One might speculate... but, I'm just saying, this hasn't been part of the doctrine historically.

Background: Ingress Dormancy

1. During my current project, I've identified a principle of ingress dormancy. The principle is, simply, that an ingress that has nothing to say can be treated as if it doesn't exist. Mostly this means: An ingress that says nothing is NOT saying that nothing will happen - it is simply a silent voice in the chorus, and the song goes on around it. As a working fiction, I've suggested we act as if the ingress simply didn't occur.

Background: Observations of Cansolars

1. Cansolars and their quotidians have shown themselves to be nearly as strong as Capsolars, including having some level of operative hand for a full 12 months. However, this doesn't hold up uniformly. Cansolars (treated as "year charts") come up with overall scores far inferior to that of Capsolars. Cansolar Quotidians score little better than HALF as well as Capsolar Quotidians for timing events.

2. Yet, in the absence of a Capsolar voice, Cansolars are champs! Out of 108 events, the CapQ alone timed and described the event in a satisfactory or very satisfactory way 88 times, or 81% of the time. Of the remaining 20 instances, the CanQ provided satisfactory or very satisfactory contacts 14 times. With the principle of "CapQ times it or, failing that, CanQ backs it up," 94% of the events were identified accurately by time, place, and nature of event - an astoundingly high figure!

3. Similarly, for events occurring between mid-January and mid-July (the first 6 months after a Capsolar), Cansolar accuracy was poor. 40% of the time it was silent or contradictory. Most of the rest of the time it was (at best) no better than the Capsolar. HOWEVER, if we only count the 15 instances where the Capsolar was dormant, the Cansolar was satisfactory or better in all but 2 instances, that is, 87% of the time. That's very good!

4. This led to the idea that a "best practices" approach is to ignore the Cansolar on its face (that is, not counting transits and quotidians) if the Capsolar actually has something to say (is non-dormant).

Background: Flow-Through

1. These findings with regard to the Cansolar led me to an idea we might call "flow-through." At least in the specific case of the Cansolar (which is nearly as strong as the Capsolar, though mostly contained in the first six months of its life), the Cansolar effects flow through into the Capsolar period if the Capsolar is silent.

2. That's as far as I'd taken the "flow-through" idea until an hour ago...

What about dormant Caplunars?

Several cases exist where a significant event occurs immediately after a Caplunar occurs, but the Caplunar has nothing to say about it. Nearly all of these became non-issues with the doctrine of dormancy - that is, I simply ignored the Caplunar - it had nothing to say, so we ignored the chart.

And dormancy is really the only noticeable problem with these charts. It's not alike a major event happens right after a Caplunar and the Caplunar provides opposite symbolism - that is very rare. I do have two examples of that in front of me - and both are "problem events" in other respects. One is Pres. Harding's death (a story in its own right, where the universe, from almost any angle, seemed to be saying it was a happy event!), and the Ludlow massacre. But these are rare.

The usual problem was that the Caplunar would occur and say nothing. Ignoring a "silent" or "dormant" chart solved that problem.

But it left me wondering...

If "flow-through" worked with a dormant Capsolar, did it also work with a dormant Caplunar?

Preliminary (I repeat, preliminary!) checking suggests... grumble!... that it does.

Flow-through on Dormant Caplunars

If we take literally (rather than just figuratively) that we are to treat a dormant Caplunar as if it isn't even there, does that mean that the prior ingress is still operative? Bradley did think, after all, that they each had a life of their own. Is this what distinguishes whether one of the minor charts seems to continue "working" past its week?

I have 5 examples in front of me where the "chart of the week" was the Caplunar, and it was dormant. I decided to check the Liblunar right before (unless it, too, was dormant) and see if it described the event. Here is what I found...

1. JFK Assasination. Bingo! Prior Liblunar had Saturn rising (2°), 18' from square Neptune. (For Washington, Pluto was exactly setting - a Jupiter-Pluto opposition across the horizon.)

2. Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire. Bingo! Prior Liblunar had a Mars-Uranus conjunction straddling the Ascendant, Uranus 0°37' above, Mars 2°20' below, their midpoint within a degree of the Ascendant.

3. Reagan shot. Bingo! The Liblunar Ascendant closely squared an opposition of Jupiter-Saturn to Sun-Mars - everything necessary do describe an attempt to kill the President (Sun + malefics) that failed (Jupiter). All the planets' positions averaged 10°17' Gemini, or 15' from the Ascendant.

4. Friendship Theater Fire. No cookie! Venus exactly rising. (No, no, no, "Friendship" in the name doesn't make this a hit <g>.)

5. Ycua Bolanos market fire. The prior Liblunar also was dormant. Rolling back to the prior Canlunar, we get at least half a bingo: Exactly rising was a 0°23' Sun-Moon conjunction. (Sun-Moon conjunctions and oppositions have an extraordinarily high frequency in ingresses for major fires.) The only other foreground planet was Saturn, though it was a bit wide.

So there you have some samples. Mostly damn good, not perfect. Enough to show that maybe... just maybe... there is something to examine here.

I'm interested in examples known to others and, secondarily, any thoughts on this.
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 4803
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: "Dormant" ingresses and "flow-through"

Post by Jim Eshelman » Fri May 12, 2017 10:25 am

SteveS wrote:Jim wrote:
If "flow-through" worked with a dormant Capsolar, did it also work with a dormant Caplunar?
Imo, it makes good common sense that “flow-through” could/would apply when we see a dormant Caplunar.

Jim wrote:
If we take literally (rather than just figuratively) that we are to treat a dormant Caplunar as if it isn't even there, does that mean that the prior ingress is still operative?
Again, common sense should allow any “non-dormant” Cardinal Lunar to operate for a 30 day period when we see “dormant” Caplunars.

Jim wrote:
Bradley did think, after all, that they each had a life of their own. Is this what distinguishes whether one of the minor charts seems to continue "working" past its week?
IMO, I think any “non-dormant” cardinal lunar should be allowed a ‘life of their own” for a "flow-through" 30 day period. However, we must not forget research proves most significant events with Cardinal Lunars will be symbolized with the “non-dormant” Caplunar.

Jim wrote:
"So there you have some samples. Mostly damn good, not perfect. Enough to show that maybe... just maybe... there is something to examine here."

Damn right! Your insight strongly suggests to me, that at times, a so-called ‘minor’ lunar ingress can and does symbolize significant events (within a 30 day "flow-through" period). Its possible Bradley’s tern “minor” ingresses is somewhat misleading from a lunar ingress analysis standpoint, which has created a mental block by not paying enough attention to a prior “non-dormant” minor lunar ingress. Good thinking Jim!

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 4803
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: "Dormant" ingresses and "flow-through"

Post by Jim Eshelman » Fri May 12, 2017 10:25 am

DDonovanKinsolving wrote:
SteveS wrote:Your insight strongly suggests to me, that at times, a so-called ‘minor’ lunar ingress can and does symbolize significant events (within a 30 day "flow-through" period). Its possible Bradley’s tern “minor” ingresses is somewhat misleading from a lunar ingress analysis standpoint, which has created a mental block by not paying enough attention to a prior “non-dormant” minor lunar ingress.
This may explain the inconsistencies of Anlunar returns as well. Being an inherently derivative chart, maybe it's inherently weaker, but can come through as significant when it pulls in the same direction as the other standard charts, or when they are dormant.

It would be nice if someone has kept a record of the hits and misses of their Anlunars for a study. I stopped using them a long time ago, because they were too much work to calculate, and then they became too time-consuming to take into consideration, all for uncertain usefulness. Following the 80/20 rule, I decided that, whatever the Anlunars' validity, they fell into the category of 80% effort to get 20% results. Mr. E.'s process may be the key to a decision process of when to move on to the Anlunar, and when it's unnecessary to do so.

-Derek

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 4803
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: "Dormant" ingresses and "flow-through"

Post by Jim Eshelman » Fri May 12, 2017 10:26 am

On Anlunars: A few years ago, I had all of my Moons lined up so that the SLR, KLR, and SAR occurred at about IIRC two-day intervals, and I scrupulously watched the full and demi of all three for a year. A pattern emerged which either was uniform throughout the year, or so consistent that I don't offhand remember there being exceptions.

The pattern was this: You know how you can feel a new lunar return coming in? The whole tone changes, and usually events happen pretty fast? Well, this happened with the SLR (and its demi). It happened with the KLR (and its demi). But with the SAR (and its demi), which even got the "last word" of the three, it was "very little or nothing." At most, the shift was resembling a minor one-day transit. So I stopped watching them.

I still think the Anlunar is important in the timing of specifically SSR-inaugurated items (especially bringing non-angular SSR items to the angles). It's in a "timing hierarchy" for a narrow group of things. But I don't think of it as a major chart worth watching in general.

I do agree with you, though: In the absence of strong astrological factors for a period of time, less strong factors become more dominant. Increasingly, I'm "going on Kepler on ya," thinking of planetary patterns in musical terms, as a chorus. In this case, the metaphor is that when all the major, strong voices go quiet, one hears the softer voices quite clearly.
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 4803
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: "Dormant" ingresses and "flow-through"

Post by Jim Eshelman » Fri May 12, 2017 10:26 am

DDonovanKinsolving wrote:
Jim Eshelman wrote:I still think the Anlunar is important in the timing of specifically SSR-inaugurated items (especially bringing non-angular SSR items to the angles).
This particular point is exactly how I've always understood the Anlunar. :)

This is starting to get off-topic, so I'll ask a simple question that hopefully has a brief answer.

Should natals be included in the Anlunar, or compare Anlunars just with the SSR? :?

I ask because 1) in the time I began studying Sidereal Astrology Fagan never gave clear instructions on this and 2) the tri-wheel felt like too much data in a chart that already seemed weak (back to that 80/20 rule). Any advice on delineation priorities in the Anlunar, should one choose to work with it?

Thanks.

-Derek

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 4803
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: "Dormant" ingresses and "flow-through"

Post by Jim Eshelman » Fri May 12, 2017 10:27 am

Here's another interesting example of this.

I am not including the Northridge earthquake in the book, not because I don't like the results (which, admittedly, are imperfect), but because the picture is very complicated and I don't want to bog down in tedious explaining of unusual, atypical situations while I'm trying to make the basic case for the basic system.

But here is the analysis - and it almost entirely depends on flow-through.

The Northridge quake hit January 17, 1994, 4:30:55 AM PST, near Reseda, CA 34N12'47", 118W32'13".

It was two days after the Capsolar, and the Moon was in Pisces; so, in the cleanest, theoretically ideal story, the Capsolar and Caplunar should have told the story. They do not.

The Capsolar isn't dormant, but also it doesn't give us anything useful. Sun and Mercury are on the Descendant - big deal! There was a lot of news coverage, communication and traffic mess-ups, and the government got involved. Big deal! And Venus is foreground also.

But the Cansolar - even without a "flow-through" principle - is still valid for the whole year. (It's just that we don't have to compulsively check it all the time.) The prior Cansolar had Mars exactly setting. Not perfect, but adequate.

The interesting thing, though, is the lunar ingress situation. The January 11 Caplunar is dormant. So... let's check the Liblunar for the prior week. There it is! Saturn at 2°48' Aquarius is conjunct the Ascendant which, for the epicenter, was 2°03' Aquarius.

Flow-through. And, again, the evidence is that it is the prior Liblunar that does the flowing.
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 4803
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: "Dormant" ingresses and "flow-through"

Post by Jim Eshelman » Fri May 12, 2017 10:27 am

Jupiter Sets At Dawn wrote:Is there anything that would show an ingress is dormant before the fact? Or is it something that can only be seen in hindsight?
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 4803
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: "Dormant" ingresses and "flow-through"

Post by Jim Eshelman » Fri May 12, 2017 10:28 am

SteveS wrote:Jupiter asked:
Is there anything that would show an ingress is dormant before the fact?

Definitely. With cardinal lunar ingresses, whenever we see a lunar ingress chart which does not have planets within 2-3 of the angles, including the auxiliary angles, and IMO the vertex which is not an angle but a very sensitive point—this would classify the cardinal lunar ingress as ‘dormant,’—to be ignored. Jim’s insight about possible ‘flow-through’ with cardinal lunar ingresses simply means we have to now allow any prior non-dormant cardinal lunar ingress before a new Caplunar to operate through-out its full time period for possibly producing a significant event. If I understand this possible ‘flow-through’ with cardinal lunar ingresses, it would somewhat change Bradley’s original teachings with cardinal lunar ingress teachings, which taught (maybe with our assumptions) when a new Caplunar began we need not concern ourselves with any ‘non-dormant’ 3 prior cardinal lunar ingresses. But with Jim’s recent research with ‘flow-though,’ we now need to include any ‘non-dormant’ prior cardinal lunar ingresses before a new Caplunar. Or, in other words, Jim has been ignoring any ‘non-dormant’ cardinal lunar ingresses before a new Caplunar, but his recent research is showing results where a prior ‘non-dormant’ lunar ingress before a new Caplunar is calling certain events with appropriate symbolism.

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 4803
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: "Dormant" ingresses and "flow-through"

Post by Jim Eshelman » Fri May 12, 2017 10:29 am

Jupiter Sets At Dawn wrote:Is there anything that would show an ingress is dormant before the fact? Or is it something that can only be seen in hindsight?
Oh, yes, it can be seen in advance. It's simple math.

I've adopted a working definition. (I thought I gave it here.) It's possible that this would evolve over time, or that it shouldn't be considered invariable but, so far, checking against close to 700 charts, it has held up dang near like a law of nature.

An ingress chart is dormant unless it has at least one planet within 3° of an angle (or 2°-3° of a minor angle ). -- A quotidian chart is dormant unless it has at least one planet within 2° of an angle.

The "2°-3°" for minor angles... I actually have a precise rule I follow. I'm hesitant to give too complicated a system with too many rules and subrules, but this, again, holds up in practice. It really means 2° if a single planet is involved, or 3° if two or more planets in mutual aspect are in that range.

I encourage completely ignoring the Vertex in these charts. (This, of course, is my opinion and NOT a law of nature <g>.)
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 4803
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: "Dormant" ingresses and "flow-through"

Post by Jim Eshelman » Fri May 12, 2017 10:29 am

SteveS wrote:If I understand this possible ‘flow-through’ with cardinal lunar ingresses, it would somewhat change Bradley’s original teachings with cardinal lunar ingress teachings, which taught (maybe with our assumptions) when a new Caplunar began we need not concern ourselves with any ‘non-dormant’ 3 prior cardinal lunar ingresses.
Actually, that's part of the beauty of the new point of view I've adopted: It doesn't require any change in the original rules. Bradley was clear that all of these ingresses are alive for the whole course of their existence: all solar ingresses for a year, all lunar ingresses for a month. He added that the lunar ingress that was "chart of the week" often would stand on its own without any need of support. As Steve indicated, subsequent practice modified this - probably from confusing the ingresses with the behavior of personal return charts. But the only distinction Bradley made was that the Cap ingresses first, and Can ingresses second, were the strongest, and that (aside from the current week's lunar ingress standing on its own) there was rarely any reason to look at the "lesser" ones (especially the Aries and Libra ones).
But with Jim’s recent research with ‘flow-though,’ we now need to include any ‘non-dormant’ prior cardinal lunar ingresses before a new Caplunar. Or, in other words, Jim has been ignoring any ‘non-dormant’ cardinal lunar ingresses before a new Caplunar, but his recent research is showing results where a prior ‘non-dormant’ lunar ingress before a new Caplunar is calling certain events with appropriate symbolism.
BTW, I'm not introducing this in a book. I might add it as an appendix in a 2nd Edition or as a separate research paper, but it conflicts with the goals of presenting the system in a straightforward, persuasive way that doesn't busy itself with apologizing for seeming failures. It's also too new a point of view, and I'd like us to shake it down here for a while before we add it to anything that might get taken as "the canon."
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 4803
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: "Dormant" ingresses and "flow-through"

Post by Jim Eshelman » Fri May 12, 2017 10:30 am

Jupiter Sets At Dawn wrote:OK, that wasn't clear.
(Having a brain-fart which is expressing itself as difficulty in expressing myself. )

I mean is falling through to the previous chart the usual and expected thing when an ingress is dormant? Or is it more usual that it's just nothing much happens?
And how do we tell the difference?

If the Liblunar for Town X shows Hellfire raining from the skies, and the following Caplunar is dormant, can we tell that Hellfire will rain during the period of the Caplunar, and not much will happen during the Liblunar? It would appear Jupiter may have acted as a stopper for the Bath event you described in another thread. Is it common for a benefic to put off the malefic influence in an Ingress? Have you seen Venus act with the same kind of effect?

Am I making any sense here at all?

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 4803
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: "Dormant" ingresses and "flow-through"

Post by Jim Eshelman » Fri May 12, 2017 10:31 am

Jupiter Sets At Dawn wrote:I mean is falling through to the previous chart the usual and expected thing when an ingress is dormant? Or is it more usual that it's just nothing much happens?
What I believe I am consistently seeing is that flow-through happens - that the universe behaves as if the dormant ingress simply never existed.

One area where I am less clear: Dormancy doesn't stop (for example) close Moon aspects in a solar ingress from working. Dormancy only affects the relevance of the chart for a specific location, and these Moon aspects are effective for the entire world INCLUDING that one particular location. This being so, I'm unclear whether flow-through occurs in that situation (since there is an active element operating)... but it appears that the answer is Yes.
If the Liblunar for Town X shows Hellfire raining from the skies, and the following Caplunar is dormant, can we tell that Hellfire will rain during the period of the Caplunar, and not much will happen during the Liblunar?
If a Liblunar shows pink stars falling and the following Caplunar is dormant, then pink stars are likely to fall sometime before the Arilunar occurs.

This doesn't make the timing any more difficult than the usual situation with a Caplunar (for example). If a current Caplunar shows a UFO landing on the White House lawn, it likely will land sometime before the next Caplunar occurs four weeks later.
It would appear Jupiter may have acted as a stopper for the Bath event you described in another thread. Is it common for a benefic to put off the malefic influence in an Ingress? Have you seen Venus act with the same kind of effect?
This is a different topic, but I'm happy to answer it.

I've seen many examples of the following: A series of charts looks like it's building to an event. In general, one might not be able to tel in which week (for example) something will manifest. But Jupiter (and, less frequently, Venus) keeps sticking its nose in on the charts and the Bad Thing keeps not happening - until they the Venus or Jupiter is suddenly gone. Then the Bad Thing happens. It is as if the benefic held things back.

OTOH the benefic won't stop the Bad Thing from happening, just like a burglar alarm won't stop a house from getting burgled - it will just make it more likely that the burglar goes to the house next door instead of yours. But if all the houses have alarms, the dedicated burglar will pick whichever one he wants. Similarly, if there is a Jupiter-less window for a Bad Thing to happen in, then that's likely when it will happen. But if there is no such window, then the Bad Thing will just happen when it otherwise feels like it.

In personal return charts, it's pretty well established that accidents etc. happen with malefics on the SLR angles and an absence of benefics. If the benefics are there, either the accident won't happen, or it will be softened. This is most definitely NOT how it works in ingresses. The Bad Thing will happen regardless of the Jupiter. It will just do its best to make the Bad Thing be a Jupiter-related bad thing: It will happen at a public celebration, or during a festival, or at a high-attendance major entertainment event, or it will be a distinctly religion-related scenario, etc.

Fun stuff, no? This is a blast to see in action! (I'm just adding the Great Chicago Fire. I'm not sure why Bradley didn't include it in his original report.)
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 4803
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: "Dormant" ingresses and "flow-through"

Post by Jim Eshelman » Fri May 12, 2017 10:31 am

DDonovanKinsolving wrote:
Jupiter Sets At Dawn wrote:(Having a brain-fart which is expressing itself as difficulty in expressing myself. )
We'll try to help you with that. :)
Jupiter Sets At Dawn wrote:I mean is falling through to the previous chart the usual and expected thing when an ingress is dormant?
That's the idea being discussed and evaluated here.
Jupiter Sets At Dawn wrote:Or is it more usual that it's just nothing much happens?
... during some period of the dormant ingress. - Is that your meaning?
Jupiter Sets At Dawn wrote:If the Liblunar for Town X shows Hellfire raining from the skies, and the following Caplunar is dormant, can we tell that Hellfire will rain during the period of the Caplunar, and not much will happen during the Liblunar? It would appear Jupiter may have acted as a stopper for the Bath event you described in another thread. Is it common for a benefic to put off the malefic influence in an Ingress? Have you seen Venus act with the same kind of effect?
And how do we tell the difference?
Am I making any sense here at all?
Here's how I understand you, which I think are two questions:

Q.1)If the Liblunar indicates Hellfire-from-the-Skies, and the subsequent Caplunar is dormant, does the Caplunar contra-indicate the Liblunar?
A.1) No. The Caplunar's dormancy at Town X means we set it aside and ignore it. We would, however, go on to examine the Arilunar, Canlunar, and also the prevailing Cardinal Solar Ingresses.

Q.2.) If the Liblunar indicates Hellfire-from-Above and the subsequent Caplunar indicates Salvation-from-on-High (sounds like we're playing "Magic: The Gathering here! :D ), does the Salvation negate Hellfire entirely, or during a certain period of time during the Caplunar (like its first week), or does it force the Hellfire to manifest before the Caplunar's Salvation?
A.2.) Is that a fair characterization of your question?

-Derek

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 4803
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: "Dormant" ingresses and "flow-through"

Post by Jim Eshelman » Fri May 12, 2017 10:32 am

Jupiter Sets At Dawn wrote:Jim understood what I was trying to ask, and answered it. Thanks.
Jim Eshelman wrote:This is a different topic, but I'm happy to answer it.
It is, now you point it out, and I was conflating the two questions.

It's peak ragweed bloom, with the attendant antihistamine fog, coinciding with transiting Neptune drifting back into opposition with natal Sun.

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 4803
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: "Dormant" ingresses and "flow-through"

Post by Jim Eshelman » Fri May 12, 2017 10:33 am

DDonovanKinsolving wrote:
Jim Eshelman wrote:(I'm just adding the Great Chicago Fire. I'm not sure why Bradley didn't include it in his original report.)
I've looked at that also. A really amazing set of ingresses, especially if you compare the Mars lines to maps showing the concurrent fires outside Chicago!

-Derek

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest