哈哈～今天又收到Zoller老師的newsletter
裡頭承認預測錯了，
呵呵～
這次知道是誰預測的了，
是師兄Luke Andrews ... 嘻嘻～～
還好不是Zoller老師 哈～

----
This is a special note from the Editor of the Predictive Astrologer following on from the last issue. In that issue the following prediction was published:

"John Kerry will win the US presidency in November 2004. John Edwards will be Vice-President. John Kerry will not finish his term of office and John Edwards will succeed to the presidency."

There has now been a lot of email over this prediction and so, in an effort to stem the tide, I have prepared the following statement.

The prediction published in the newsletter came from the predictive circle, a group of astrologers in London and was largely based on the work of Luke Andrews of the Academy of Predictive Astrology.

Today's events have shown the prediction to be incorrect. It is not yet known what went wrong. The application of the techniques may be wrong, or the data that was used for Kerry may be wrong. I see that there is now widely varying birth data for Kerry. No doubt many of you will be investigating this.

It was my decision to include the prediction, with the intention to later publish the charts with an eye to examining fundamental metaphysical principles that are thought to underlie astrology. I saw that they [the predictive circle] had been right on Kerry winning the party nomination and then Edwards as the running mate etc. and so, took the leap and included the prediction; alone unfortunately, as there was not enough room to publish the charts/analysis this time around.

For this, I take full responsibly and no doubt there will be a lot of criticism - indeed the acrimony has already started. So I want to make my position clear.

I think that students learning astrology need good, solid examples so they can see the application of techniques applied and the more clear examples we have, the better the understanding. I also think that we will get it wrong and when we do, we have to look at our work again to uncover our mistakes. We must not be shy about admitting our errors. We hope our errors will encourage constructive debate and more importantly, lead to others not making those same mistakes. And all this needs to be out in the open.

So, I will still publish the charts with analysis, and endeavour to add more predictive examples in the coming issues of the newsletter. Good predictive astrology courses include chart examples, but these courses are essentially only repositories of information providing a core body of knowledge for the student. It is this core knowledge that we seek to augment. You can never have enough examples. For myself, I learn best through seeing the working of examples and I think this is common to a great many students, particularly those just starting out in astrology.

Nevertheless, I do feel a bit like a weather reporter, who has announced fine weather and instead it snows. Even the best of professionals get it wrong and the real test of their mettle, I believe, is that they accept their error and try to educate others on where they went wrong. I have enormous respect for these brave people who are prepared to go out into the wide world and make a definite statement, based on their Art and knowledge. More importantly, they are prepared to be wrong and take all the abuse and ridicule that is now, in the case of the predictive circle, flooding their way. I would also like to add a final comment, which was the root of my desire to publish their prediction - that is, even if they had the prediction right, that would in itself, not have proved anything. It would not have vindicated astrology, just as one wrong prediction does not destroy it, nor the hard, hard work that is done by so many to help raise up our Art.

Western predictive astrology is only now, once again, emerging out of the shadows. We are still learning so much and have a long way yet to go. But if we make it, I am convinced that the ramifications will have a profound effect on this world of ours.

Regards

Nicoline Eicke
Editor
Predictive Astrologer