Your Numerology Is From Atlantic City, 1908
Here is a sentence I could write about the numerology in your read:
Drawn from an ancient system of number meanings passed down through millennia.
It would sound better. It is also not true, and you would find out eventually, and then everything else I told you would be worth less.
So: the numerology I use was systematised by a woman named L. Dow Balliett, working in Atlantic City, and published in 1908.
That is not ancient. That is roughly the age of the Model T.
Why I am telling you the unflattering version
Because the whole thing I am selling is that I will tell you the truth about yourself, including the parts you would rather not hear.
If I will not tell you the truth about my own inputs, why would you believe me about you?
There is a version of this business that runs entirely on vagueness. Never name a date. Never name a source. Say “ancient wisdom” and let the reader’s imagination supply something older and grander than anything you would be willing to write down.
That works right up until somebody checks. And people check.
I would rather hand you fewer things you can verify than more things you cannot.
So does the date make it worthless?
No — but it changes what kind of claim I am allowed to make about it, and that is the honest distinction.
If it were three thousand years old, tested across a hundred generations, that would be one sort of argument for it.
At a bit over a century, the argument has to be different. What numerology actually offers is a consistent structure applied to two fixed facts about you — your birth date and the letters in your full name. It is a system for producing a reading from inputs that cannot be fudged after the fact. Same inputs, same output, every time, regardless of who runs it or what mood they are in.
That is worth something. It is not worth what “ancient” would be worth. So I do not say ancient.
The same honesty applied everywhere else
Once you start doing this you have to do it all the way, so:
Human Design is from 1987. It is younger than most people reading this. I calculate the parts of it that are pure arithmetic from your birth moment — the profile, the gate positions — and I stop there. I do not guess your Type or your Authority, because those require judgement calls I am not willing to make on your behalf and then present as fact. And I never repeat its neutrino explanation as established physics, because it is not.
BaZi is genuinely old — the calendar is somewhere around 3,200 years. But the method of reading a person from it, the way it is practised now, is more like 1,000 to 1,400. Those are two different ages and lumping them together to get the bigger number would be dishonest.
The planetary positions are not old or new. They are just correct. They come from the Swiss Ephemeris, built on NASA’s own JPL data — the same numbers used to fly spacecraft, matching to a thousandth of an arcsecond. There is a real argument to be had about what those positions mean. There is no argument at all about where the planets were. You can check any of it against any source on earth in about thirty seconds.
Three tiers, marked
This is why your read is labelled rather than delivered as one uniform block of certainty.
Exact math. Where a planet was. What the solar time correction came to. Arithmetic, checkable, not my opinion.
Convention-dependent. Places where traditions genuinely differ and a practitioner has to pick one. I tell you I picked one, and which.
Inferred, or supplied by you. Things that rest on what you told me in the five questions, or on a reasonable reading rather than a calculation.
Certainty sells better. It also breaks the moment somebody checks — and it takes everything else down with it.
What I want you to take from this
Not that numerology is rubbish. I use it, and I think the convergence across systems is genuinely informative in a way no single system is.
What I want you to take is a standard for judging anyone in this field, including me.
Ask what the source is. Ask what the date is. Ask what they will not claim.
Anyone who cannot answer those, or who answers with “ancient” and a change of subject, is asking you for faith rather than offering you evidence. That may be fine. Just know which one you are being sold.
If you want the whole thing
The free Core Read takes ten minutes and gives you eight pages, with every claim tiered the way I have described. It is genuinely free, and most people never go further than that, and that is genuinely fine.
If you want the full version rather than the ten-minute one: the complete assessment and the ninety-day programme run inside my group. Fifteen thousand words about how you are built, forty habits scored against your own report, and a live call with me every week.
It is ninety-seven dollars a month and it lives inside the group — it is not sold anywhere else, and no piece of it is sold separately.
I am not going to ask you for it here. Go and get the free ten minutes first. If it does not sound like you, close it — you are out ten minutes and nothing else. And if it does, you already know what it costs, because I just told you.
Come and look around the group first → · Or read how the whole thing was built →
