skyscript.co.uk
   

home articles forum events
glossary horary quiz consultations links more

Read this before using the forum
Register
FAQ
Search
View memberlist
View/edit your user profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Recent additions:
Can assassinations be prevented? by Elsbeth Ebertin
translated by Jenn Zahrt PhD
A Guide to Interpreting The Great American Eclipse
by Wade Caves
The Astrology of Depression
by Judith Hill
Understanding the mean conjunctions of the Jupiter-Saturn cycle
by Benjamin Dykes
Understanding the zodiac: and why there really ARE 12 signs of the zodiac, not 13
by Deborah Houlding

Skyscript Astrology Forum

Hillary Clinton-Birth Certificate sourced?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Mundane Astrology & World Events
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
waybread



Joined: 05 Mar 2009
Posts: 925
Location: Canada

Posted: Tue Oct 04, 2016 11:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mark, there is a discussion about this on the Astrodienst Forum, as well. I found this post #2682 (big thread!) by "Pisceen" to be really interesting. I assumed Marc Penfield was at least honest about his phone call to the vital records office. I thought Penfield said he phoned the Office of Vital Records in Springfield, IL, the state capitol; not Cook County, IL (where Chicago is located.) However, both offices are repositories of vital records.

http://forum.astro.com/cgi/forum.cgi?lang=e&num=1430611006/2680#2683

Quote:
I called the Cook County Clerk's office [US Phone 1 (312) 603-7788] and spoke to a woman named Fatima in David Orr's office. I recorded the phone conversation from start to finish. I told her about Penfield's claim. This is what she had to say:

1) Any astrologer calling "would be completely shot down" in their request because they do not give out vital records over the phone. The only thing they do over the phone is process payment requests. This is the criteria for getting info over the phone, astrologer or not:
http://www.cookcountyclerk.com/vitalrecords/birthcertificates/Pages/default.aspx

Phone – Phone orders via VitalChek can be made by calling toll free (866) 252-8974.
You will need to know the city of birth listed on the birth certificate, the child’s full name, the exact date of birth, and the parents’ first and last names.
In addition to the standard record fees, VitalChek online orders charge $12.45 for processing and standard postage.
Processing time averages 10-14 business days for regular mail (included), 5-7 business days for 2-day air ($17.50), and 3-5 business days for UPS Air ($20).
Credit cards (MasterCard, Visa, American Express & Discover) and checks are accepted.

2) The only people outside of Clinton's family who could possibly get the info over the phone would be a major media outlet, who would have to go through a VERY substantial request-vetting process for verification. (Someone quick! Get David Fahrenthold at the WaPo on this!) They would have to go through the Communications Dept. of the Clerk's office, and even then, "Something of that magnitude would be guarded because birth info is not public record," she said.

3) This has been their policy for forever because it's embedded in the state statutes in Illinois. So it's not like Penfield did this before the law went into effect.

So then I spoke with Brenski Coleman, who is the Director of Vital Records there, and recorded that convo as well. He informed me that "no one can do a search without a formal request."

He also said that not all birth records prior to 1960 required a time on them. It was hit and miss based on what the various hospitals did,....


Pisceen doubts that Penfield even made the phone call.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Chris Brennan



Joined: 22 Sep 2005
Posts: 188
Location: Denver, Colorado, USA

Posted: Wed Oct 05, 2016 7:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

waybread wrote:


Pisceen doubts that Penfield even made the phone call.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cphNpqKpKc4
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
james_m



Joined: 05 Dec 2011
Posts: 2837
Location: vancouver island

Posted: Wed Oct 05, 2016 9:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

chris,

marc penfield is cuter then i thought!!


Last edited by james_m on Sun Oct 09, 2016 3:55 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tom
Moderator


Joined: 11 Oct 2003
Posts: 3452
Location: New Jersey, USA

Posted: Wed Oct 05, 2016 10:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Often there is an hour/minute listed on the hospital record of birth at the time a child is born, but the time isn't carried over to the birth certificate. A hospital record would probably be more accurate than a certified copy of a birth certificate. Today parents have copies of both, but in the 1940s I doubt there were the same standards for paperwork and what was given to parents. Copying documents was much more difficult than it is today.
*


During the brouhaha over Obama's birth certificate we all should have learned something about the process. What follows is generally followed in all 50 states. The hospital records the birth time with varying degrees of accuracy. We just don't know if a particular birth time was accurately observed and recorded. It is still the best we have.

A form is sent to the appropriate agency: the Hall of Records, board of health, whatever. That is the so-called "long form." It has all the detailed information about the birth, the time as recorded, the attending physician, names of the parents addresses etc. This record is retained by the appropriate agency. When you ask for a copy of the BC in effect you get a paper certifying that the birth is on record at the appropriate agency. This is the so called short form and the one that we are all most familiar with. This form may or may not have the time on it.

As Waybread pointed out, no one is going to get that information over the phone. Would you like your records so easily accessed? However, if I bribed someone who worked where the records could be accessed, I would make up a story as to how I got it, but it would have been a better story than Penfield's.

The hospital where she was born might still have the record of her birth. It depends on how long they keep them. 50 years is about normal since the hospital birth certificate is not official. Curious since this is the only one that can prove you are the person named on the document via the footprint. However now that records can be scanned and retained with duplicates and take up no more than a few thumb drives worth of space, they might keep them longer. I'd try to bribe someone at the hospital if they kept the records for, say 75 years or longer. But even then, we assume the hospital is still there. The one I was born in isn't.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Mark
Moderator


Joined: 30 Sep 2005
Posts: 4954
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland

Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2016 1:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ray Merriman the President of ISAR released this statement on his Facebook account on October 7th:

Ray Merriman wrote:

Quote:
Seems some people are purporting the idea that the video was not really breaking news, or that Marc Penfield’s data does not merit consideration of a AA Rodden rating, or that ISAR didn’t handle this announcement well.

So, let me make a couple of observations here.

“Breaking News.” To us, and most in the astrology community, this was “Breaking News,” because the vast majority of astrologers were using either the 8 PM or 8:02 AM birth time for HRC. Now I realize that the data junkies (I say this with admiration, not disdain) have been aware of the 2:18 AM time for some time. But this time has largely been dismissed, and not been brought forth as one of the major considerations in the consciousness of the broader astrology community. Since the majority of astrologers had no idea of this 2:18 AM time, it was therefore considered “Breaking News.”


As to AA Rodden rating. Yes, we are well aware that Astrodienst has rated it DD. However, after reviewing the steps Marc took to obtain this birth information, and given that it did involve a claimed “citing” of 2:18 AM from a birth record, and given that he himself conducted an interview with a clerk at the State records division that denied several other times presented, but remained silent only when he gave her the 2:18 AM birth time, it does qualify as AA Rodden rating according to Rodden’s definition. Not that this is “definitive,” as even members of ISAR’s own board state, and of which I agree.

But ultimately, unless there is a valid (and not a photo-shopped adjusted) copy of the record, the determination of the rating in cases like this, is purely subjective. Astrodienst rates it DD (a “subjective” evaluation, I think); others have rated it higher (subjective also) and some will rate it AA, based on the actual definition provided by Rodden.

The idea that ISAR did not handle this announcement very well – it could “have been handled better” – well, granted, any effort can always be improved upon. But I think the criticism is based on another factor - the idea that we took an issue of great interest to astrology AND applied a marketing effort to it for the ISAR 2016 Symposium is somehow wrong, or tarnished.

You know, it is possible that you can present this material both as a serious research matter, which we do, AND apply useful marketing tools to generate more interest in the Presidential panels that will take place at ISAR 2016. One does not exclude or negate the value of the other in this case, and I will easily own up to this. It is not a problem, and it does not negate the seriousness, value, or integrity of the process and interview itself.

This subject was developed with the idea of being a service to astrologers, and an announcement was then developed to create greater interest in ISAR 2016. This is quite true. We were given what we knew would be explosive information, and we attempted to turn it around to something useful (making lemonade from what might have been a lemon). We do not believe the announcement was misleading or done in poor taste just because it also involved a marketing component for the panels of ISAR 2016, which in fact very much relate to this issue.

Is not the critic him/herself doing this very same thing for marketing their own work in the field? In our case, we are doing it to help create awareness of an important conference coming up that has relevance to all astrologers involved in the art of Forecasting. Yet, we owe a debt of thanks to those who find issue with these stylistic points, because it actually serves ISAR well by creating increased interest in the subject and the conference. Registrations to one or both of the panels has spiked since last weekend, assuring a lively on site discussion, I am sure.

Now, what about the time of 2:18 AM for HRC that Penfield has shared with us via this interview? What are serious, professional astrologers finding out when examining it objectively, and without bias?

I had a talk yesterday with Dave Campbell of the Astrology Store here in Phoenix (big and popular astrology store). He related to me the independent research he conducted in March, before we (I) even knew Marc's time proposed for Hillary.

He stated that he likes Bernadette Brady's JigSaw rectification software program. When he got it, he inserted all the required dates of important events in his life, as the program asked for. He then ran it and it came up with his exact birth time. Strange? Coincidence? Perhaps.

So, in March 2016 (over 6 months ago), he did the same thing with important dates requested of the program, for Hillary Clinton. Guess what came up? The most likely time of birth came out 2:20 AM. It has a 4-minute orb because the program relates to degrees on the Asc and MC which were 14-15 Virgo and 12-13 Gemini respectively.

The second most likely time was 7:24 AM, but far less likely than the 2:20 AM one. The 8:00 PM time had no correlation, and the 8:02 AM very little, in comparison to these and others that were ranked lower than these two. You can see his results in the article he wrote, which appears in this month’s or next month’s, edition of the AFA journal.

I have no experience with JigSaw, so I cannot personally say how reliable it is as a rectification tool, but these reports are already of interest. I hope astrologers look at this chart closely and make a first-hand appraisal of it themselves, rather than discounting it simply because of the messenger.

I liked the 8:02 AM chart (double Scorpio, 12 house Sun). That spoke to me about her secrecy nature. But then this new one has Virgo rising, with Mercury ruling it, in Scorpio, square her Pluto (and Saturn and Mars) in Leo. So it highlights the same secrecy principle (among other things). And, on top of that, she does seem very well organized and scripted, as well as a policy wonk, like a Virgo rising (I should know, being one myself).

That’s all. It is now time for me to prepare for next week’s ISAR 2016 Symposium and the panels that will take place.

_________________
‘’As thou conversest with the heavens, so instruct and inform thy minde according to the image of Divinity…’’ William Lilly


Last edited by Mark on Sun Oct 09, 2016 10:59 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
james_m



Joined: 05 Dec 2011
Posts: 2837
Location: vancouver island

Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2016 3:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mark,

i know when i've researched these 3 times in the past that i kept gravitating towards the 218am time.. i regard all the times as speculative and until we have a concrete birth time, they will remain that way to me... however, this post of rays that you've shared with us here is interesting. thanks.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AloisT



Joined: 19 Oct 2011
Posts: 9
Location: Zürich, Switzerland

Posted: Mon Oct 10, 2016 8:32 am    Post subject: The ADB rating was DD since ever Reply with quote

I want to reply to the claim the "Astrodienst rated DD".

Each entry in the Astrodatabank wiki has a tab 'view history' on top, where one can see how the entry developed over time.

The entry for Hillary Clinton was rated DD since ever. DD represents: conflicting data.

There was a quote for 2.18 before in the source notes, from birth registry.
This makes the claim of Penfield not really new, in terms of data. We still face conflicting information from different sources, and all from hearsay. No documents.

So, the DD rating is not from Astrodienst. We kept the exiting rating, because the new evidence is still in the realm of hearsay, and it conflicts with other sources, including Hillary herself and her mother.

What we have done: moved the 2.18 am time to the top of the three alternatives Astrodatabank presents as variants.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SIDERUM



Joined: 06 Sep 2006
Posts: 199
Location: Salta, Republica Argentina

Posted: Tue Oct 11, 2016 1:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hillary in her cobweb
From the discussion that was generated by the opinion of American Astrologer, Marc Penfield, regarding the schedule of 02:18 AM as the time of birth of the candidate for President of the United States of America, I have worked in a correction , which seems more possible.

Natal Chart

subefotos

Hillary Problems
The health of the candidate for president of USA, would jeopardize her own candidacy or winning would risk her presidency, but not only health is worrying but also delicate situations surrounding Hillary, this was observed from the disputed post mails that she sent containing state secrets, these two issues will become the focus of the campaign from now on, where it is about to celebrate years, and as we shall see in the Lunar and Solar return, nothing comes easy .

RETURN Lunar October 2016.
sube imagenes
The Lunar Return which will run from next October 13, 2016, aspecting directly to MH Rx, from the angle opposite the Sun Uranus, the latter antiscian Neptune, indicators of sudden events of high risk, such as addition, this aspecting the Uranus USA, would indicate a state of surprise shock. This Lunar Return, repeats the aspect of Mars / Pluto, and does so in an elevated position, if the proposal for Hillary's time is correct, something very strong would be to (pass.) no entendi eso.

SOLAR RETURN 2016
sube

Solar Return shows with greater intensity, the conjunction Mars / Pluto, present in the radix, where is aspecting the axis VI / XII, with the addition aspecting Uranus Solar, this planetary group Mars / Pluto / Uranus, also in the radix, and an aggregate PM Mars / Uranus is at 19 ° 54'Cancer and this PM antiscian the MH, all risky aspect. The MH of the Solar conjunct South / Neptune Node, in turn squared the pair Venus / Saturn Live square aspect to the MH rx, all affecting Uranus USA, and Saturn block the ASC Hillary and set the ASC US, things do not look very good for this country, which is next to events of great delicacy, remember that the grade 9 mutable is under the effect of Eclipse last September 1. We are coming to events that could be very enlightening hour of birth undisclosed Hillary Clinton, which so far is mere speculation, since her official birth certificate is unknown.
Life Hillary was always surrounded by scandals, from marriage, to the questions of real estate dealings, deaths of friends, investments, donations and scandal Benghazi, where he served as Secretary of State, here come more than 30,000 emails which are under suspicion. Scandal is synonymous with Neptune, being in the radix Hillary sesquisquare the North Node and semisquare the South Node, Neptune would be the regent of House VII and the Moon, that is, her husband and partner / friends, which evidence that would be "unholy" and precisely in this year and Hillary entire next, Neptune would be aspecting the MH and ASC / DSC axis, indeed lost in the Neptunian cobweb of great interest and great lies, that they are weaving at the "full view of everyone."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
lifestudent



Joined: 27 Nov 2013
Posts: 94
Location: Earth

Posted: Tue Oct 11, 2016 7:40 pm    Post subject: Re: The ADB rating was DD since ever Reply with quote

AloisT wrote:
I want to reply to the claim the "Astrodienst rated DD".

Each entry in the Astrodatabank wiki has a tab 'view history' on top, where one can see how the entry developed over time.

The entry for Hillary Clinton was rated DD since ever. DD represents: conflicting data.

There was a quote for 2.18 before in the source notes, from birth registry.
This makes the claim of Penfield not really new, in terms of data. We still face conflicting information from different sources, and all from hearsay. No documents.

So, the DD rating is not from Astrodienst. We kept the exiting rating, because the new evidence is still in the realm of hearsay, and it conflicts with other sources, including Hillary herself and her mother.

What we have done: moved the 2.18 am time to the top of the three alternatives Astrodatabank presents as variants.


Actually, nobody seems to be able to put forward a real credible reference. Someone says Hillary said that or that - but it cannot be cited. Someone says Hillary's mother said "in time for breakfast", but nobody has been able to cite a real source for that. The 2.18 AM time cannot even be cited since no BC has been provided. Until then, it is just hearsay and we do not know her birth time.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Astraea



Joined: 04 Oct 2004
Posts: 351
Location: Colorado, USA

Posted: Fri Oct 14, 2016 6:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Marc Penfield has walked back his claim about Clinton's birth time. Chris Warnock posted a link to the Washington Post article about it this morning.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/local/wp/2016/10/14/this-is-not-to-be-trusted-astrologers-are-battling-over-hillary-clintons-true-birth-time/


Last edited by Astraea on Fri Oct 14, 2016 6:59 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Deb
Administrator


Joined: 11 Oct 2003
Posts: 4130
Location: England

Posted: Fri Oct 14, 2016 6:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

This article in the Washington Post is a bit shocking

‘This is not to be trusted': Astrologers are battling over Hillary Clinton’s true birth time

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/local/wp/2016/10/14/this-is-not-to-be-trusted-astrologers-are-battling-over-hillary-clintons-true-birth-time/

Quote:
Penfield, who said he was 75 and in ill health, said he saw the 2:18 a.m. birth time reported on the Internet in 2007, but his comment in the ISAR video about confirming it was “a bit of an exaggeration.”

“It’s part of my personality,” he said.


A a consequence Alois Treindl has stated on Facebook:

Quote:
Astrodatabank has taken the 2:18 am time off the top of the list of three alternative times, and returned to the state as it was before the Penfield claim, with 8:02 am on top of a list of DD data.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SIDERUM



Joined: 06 Sep 2006
Posts: 199
Location: Salta, Republica Argentina

Posted: Fri Oct 14, 2016 10:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I note that at the conference in Costa Mesa, hundreds of Astrologers agreed to issue the forecast that Hillary would win the elections, but these same astrologers, did not issue an opinion about which is the time of birth. From time indeed: 02: 18 AM, would not be correct, since the presence of Saturn / Neptune affects Hillary MH therefore winning by this time should be ruled out.
_________________
www.siderum.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Mark
Moderator


Joined: 30 Sep 2005
Posts: 4954
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland

Posted: Fri Oct 14, 2016 10:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks Deb,

I had been going to post this link myself but you beat me to it!

To me this news is the nail in the coffin for claims of a 02.18am chart time. Penfield effectively admits he sourced the chart time from the internet in 2007. The original source for that time Zayin Cohen is a person who has shown himself to be completely unreliable in regards data. Cohen now claims the 02.18am chart was a mistake by ADB. But in making this point he gave Patrick Watson and myself conflicting times of 01.18am and 02.08am respectively. He also told me he deliberately gave out an incorrect time 01:18am to Patrick Watson as he he irritated him. This account by Cohen is not supported Patrick Watson's Facebook record of this conversation where the 01.18am time is readily given out right at the beginning of their discussion. Moreover, by his own admission Cohen admits giving out false data. And there are other examples of Zayin Cohen being economic with the truth to people in the astrological community as Unique-Astrology has demonstrated. By his own admission Penfield's claim to have independently sourced the time from the Illinois Vital Records Office has now been retracted.

Mark
_________________
‘’As thou conversest with the heavens, so instruct and inform thy minde according to the image of Divinity…’’ William Lilly


Last edited by Mark on Sat Oct 15, 2016 9:36 am; edited 4 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
waybread



Joined: 05 Mar 2009
Posts: 925
Location: Canada

Posted: Sat Oct 15, 2016 5:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I am so glad that Penfield retracted his claim, and admitted that the clerk in the Vital Records office "wouldn't play along." Had she done so, this probably would have been a Class A misdemeanor in the state of Illinois for her.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mark
Moderator


Joined: 30 Sep 2005
Posts: 4954
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland

Posted: Sat Oct 15, 2016 9:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Waybread wrote:
Quote:
I am so glad that Penfield retracted his claim, and admitted that the clerk in the Vital Records office "wouldn't play along." Had she done so, this probably would have been a Class A misdemeanor in the state of Illinois for her.


Well its certainly good that Penfield retracted his claim before this got more serious for him. I suspect he didn't have much choice but to back down as Patrick Watson confirmed with the Manager of the Illinois Vital Records Office they had never and would never issue sensitive data details like this over the telephone. So the credibility of Penfield's account to have identified the time in a deep throat style from a worker at the Vital Records Office was totally undermined.

My hunch is that this started off as little more than informal chat between Marc Penfield and Ray Merriman the President of ISAR. This whole story would never had mushroomed in the way it has if ISAR had not decided to make this data a major promotional issue for their 2016 Conference.

The earlier attempts of Ray Merriman to support Penfield's claims by arguing for AA Astrodatabank status for the 02.18am has now looks rather ridiculous and is a salutory lesson in the fact that data collection should be a methodical, impartial and ethical business.

Mark
_________________
‘’As thou conversest with the heavens, so instruct and inform thy minde according to the image of Divinity…’’ William Lilly
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Mundane Astrology & World Events All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Page 5 of 6

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
. Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

       
Contact Deborah Houlding  | terms and conditions  
All rights on all text and images reserved. Reproduction by any means is not permitted without the express
agreement of Deborah Houlding or in the case of articles by guest astrologers, the copyright owner indictated