Tropicalists vs Siderealists !

This fight between the Tropicalists and the Siderealists have been going on for years. There are Siderealists in the Western ( Fagan,Cheiro who developed their own Ayanamsas ) and there are tropicalists in the Eastern !

About ten years ago, in a Western list, I quoted the Vedic Astrologer, Jeff Armstrong and was labelled as " arrogant". Jeff Armstrong's article was " You are not the Sign that you think you are, the Greek blunder". I said the Greeks have blundered and Moser Sirgar II, the Moderator got hot with me and said "Kumar, do you know how arrogant you are?". Now I am far more mature and avoid Tropical vs Sidereal fights !

I did not blame the Western scholar. How will you react when somebody says  the Indian Astronomers, Brahmagupta, Bhaskara, Aryabhata, Madhava, Parameswar, Jyeshtadeva, Neelakanta etc were wrong ? Similarly he reacted. He was influenced by Hipparchus, Ptolemy, William Lilly, Kepler, Laplace etc and how else can he react to the statement  that his forefathers have blundered ?

According to the Tropicalists, the Siderealists are arrogant. And according to the Siderealists, the Tropicalists are arrogant ! (Thibeau and Whitney  said the ancient Indians did not know Astronomy or Maths ).

There is no need for such fights. Astrology can never be proved as a physical science.

There are 13 Ayanamsas and Hari's is the 13th. Cheiro's Ayanamsa takes 72 years per degree precession. Cyril Fagan established Western Sidereal Astrology.

Since Astrology is a mystical science, let us be tolerant. Paddi ji pointed out yesterday that in some cases, Hari's Ayanamsa worked. Fine. If Lahiri's works, fine. Or Raman's Or Cheiro. Or even  the Zero Ayanamsa of the Tropicalists. Astrology should work and we should come out with good results !

We will be happy when that happens !