A native what?
Under what circumstances is it required, then?
Surely you're joking?
Either the position of the stars is important and the place and time of my birth allow you to trace them, or they are not important (to the degree of a few minutes or kilometres), right?
How can the competence of the astrologer make any difference?
Yes. that number is 100% and has always been 100%.
And at yet other times, different made up ******** stories were used instead. The question here is: How is one made up rationalisation justified as being better than another?
No, I am not joking. In order for you to learn anything about Astrology - and I am talking about Serious Astrology - you will need to at least learn some of the basic language used - especially in knowing if there is any kind of competence of any so-called "astrologer."
There are a lot of game players in both the astrological and non-astrological sectors - and both are jokes in my perspective. They mean nothing simply because they are surface feeders who pass off their own personal "beliefs" and ignorance as facts when nothing could be further from the truth when it comes to the real story of Applied Astrology.
For instance, in weather forecasting, which was the first use of applied astrology, you will find that celestial configurations throughout different geographic regions lead to various kinds of climate and weather. This has been seen for many centuries, and there is proven data to show the accuracy of astrological weather forecasting, mainly long-term climate and weather forecasting.
There is a very serious history here, for Astrology gave birth to many of the sciences many now take for granted.
Natal astrology cannot be "proved" in the sense that most people would like to see it "proved" or "disproved." It is a waste of time. This is a
metaphysical area, and there is not determined way to prove natal astrology except to the native along (that is, the person who is forecasted for) - and, remember, that so-called "personality readings," in my mind, are bogus and a waste of time.
It's like trying to prove the existence of "love" and then to measure it. Now, we all know that love does, in fact, exist, and that we cannot see it, yes?
How to prove that love really exists? Is that a waste of time or what? Of course it is.
I never tell a person about themselves when I read their own transits. I always say to a client that they know themselves much better than I ever could.
The Sun, Moon, and planets and stars do not require your "belief" for them to operate in our world, which they do electromagnetically. Distance is not an issue for those who know something about this, it is all in angles, movement, and the strengths and weaknesses in magnetic resonance.
I only read their personal transits, and forecast potential future events in the physical world in a practical matter, much like a weather report for a period of time that can be used by the person.
Everyone has free will, but we cannot escape the laws of physics, such as the weather. We can plan in advance, and "dress" for the weather. This is the proper way to navigate through our personal lives.
I find these kinds of forecasts much more useful for a person, since they can use astrological reports to navigate their lives better, and, also, can note their own "weather" forecasted in advance.
