One in a Hundred
They say it’s a rare individual that will swim against the tide. My Norma Jeane birth time post hasn’t made much of a ripple effect. It certainly didn’t make a ‘splash’. In fact, the underwhelming response is a kind of “So what? What difference can it make?” In reality, what is true, IS true, no matter how many (or how few) people disagree.
But, what it does show me is that most people are not open to changing their mindset, even when you demonstrate that what they think they know is based on a misinterpretation. (If I were the doctor correcting or rewriting that number, I would make sure that it looked like the number I intended: there is no ‘loop’ which a “9” would have, so her birth time number was intended to be a “7”.)
So, why do I care?
Norma Jeane is one of the most misunderstood individuals in this modern day: her ‘legend’ exceeded even her own expectations. But the person that she was has gotten lost among the noise surrounding her life and death. We no longer see the real person hiding under the mask she wore. We don’t see her.
Astrology isn’t some mumbo-jumbo voodoo art: it’s based on the idea that the stars and our true selves are intimately connected. The ‘events’ I recounted in the post are definitely timed to the ages of 1 and 7 years of age. If her chart is left as it has been since 1952 when the certified true copy of her birth certificate was supplied by the State of California, the planets marking those two ‘events’ should have occurred at 3 months and 5 years, respectively. Do you see what I mean? The stars and planets do not lie. But, unless the timing of the birth chart is exact, the analysis of the individual’s personality will be faulty.
I am just trying to correct that misunderstanding, that’s all.