1. Oftentimes, the more popular or famous the astrologer, the less they understand or know about astrology.

2. Sun-sign astrology is not astrology (at all). Sun-sign astrology is a consumption good of contemporary western capitalist society that stems from Chapter III of British entrepreneur Alan Leo’s «Astrology for All» (1903).

3. False belief sustained despite clear evidence to the contrary is delusion. A delusional astrologer is therefore void of the science (or scientific art) of astrology.

4. In medicine, a physician may be a fine surgeon and a poor doctor (or vice versa), as in law an attorney may be a fine litigant and a poor jurist or law professor (or vice versa), as in astrology an astrologer may be a fine interpreter and a poor astrological academic or historian (or vice versa).

5. It is the house system now in vogue, whole signs, that does not distinguish houses from signs or signs from houses by using signs as both signs (segments relative to the sky or Earth’s ecliptic) and houses (segments relative to the ground or Earth’s surface) simultaneously. Only quadrant house systems distinguish between two astrographic planes clearly. Only in a whole-sign chart then, can signs and houses be considered completely conflated (regardless of the recognition of two fundamental Heaven-and-Earth intersection points, as these do not constitute house cusps).

6. Any given placement can and is necessarily common to hundreds of thousands of people, just as any given human eye colour and/or gene. It is but the specific astrographic composition or arrangement that establishes the true identity of a birthchart, just as a specific DNA sequence or code. Say, Mercury in Pisces can be common to hundreds of thousands of people, whereas Mercury in Pisces *as* ruler of the 3^rd House in conjunction with Saturn *as* ruler of the Ascendant in trine with the «secondary ruler» (Morin, Book 17) of the 3^rd House in Cancer or Scorpio cannot (or only to a very small number of people).

7. Any statistical analysis requires from the analyst to understand that no two politicians, serial killers, or writers have nearly the same chart (even though we may establish common variables that, still, will be only «sufficient» cause, not «necessary» cause). In other words, any given trait (becoming a politician or a serial killer or an attorney, or contracting cancer) is not produced by one unique astrological arrangement. These traits may—and do—come about via different chart compositions or arrangements, just as one and the same disease may be contracted in different ways by different people.

8. Any chart can be—and actually is—a chart of over 1,000 events (minimum) in that location on Earth for which said chart was or is going to be drafted. Every few minutes in a specific location on Earth a child or a creature of other species is born and a person dies or is killed, a document is signed and trips, journeys, and work shifts begin, not to mention land and air traffic collisions, among many other events. How, then, is a competent astrologer to distinguish the subject-matter of any given chart, which is the same as asking how can a competent physician determine the patient or person to which any given laboratory results (e.g. bloodwork) correspond? He/She cannot (which has nothing to do with skill or competency).

9. In genetics, geneticists take environmental variables into consideration to determine the extent to which this stimuli can or will modify the expression or manifestation of a specific DNA sequence (person) in a given region, country, and/or culture, and inform their analyses or predictions thereby, as in astrology astrologers too must respect environmental variables in order to be able to determine how said stimuli may modify the expression or manifestation of a specific birthchart (native’s behaviour) and inform their analyses or predictions thereby. The influence of environmental variables on DNA expression is known as epigenetics. The influence of environmental variables on birthchart expression may be regarded as epiastrology.

10. Like meteorology, medicine, genetics, psychiatry, forensic psychology, and economy, astrology, although a science, is not an exact science (like mathematics, astronomy, chemistry, and physics to a certain degree). Because of this, astrologers, like meteorologists, physicians, geneticists, psychiatrists, forensic psychologists, and economists, are not to speak of predictions but of prognoses. Predictions correspond to exact sciences only, whereas prognoses to nonexact sciences. (Nonexact sciences entails the assessment of multiple variables. Nonexact sciences are not independent, like exact sciences are, including those made or created by humans such as mathematics and formal logic, nonnatural exact sciences.)

_________________________

For more information, please go to:

IG: https://www.instagram.com/sagittariusdb_/
Research: https://davidbustamante.academia.edu/research