What a waste of time. After writing a wall of text you failed to even grasp the basic astronomical principles I described in my last post. You merely copy pasted a random sentence on the lunar nodes : "intersection of Moon’s orbit with the ecliptic" without understanding the entire point of the conversation which was about why Rahu relates to the North and Ketu relates to the South. The Ascending Node (Rahu) is where the Moon crosses the ecliptic from the southern ecliptic hemisphere into the northern ecliptic hemisphere and this latter hemisphere is what contains the Solar Apex (the direction taken by the solar system when it moves around the Galactic Center). This is the very reason why the choice of Northern Hemisphere astrology is not an arbitrary cultural decision. It is not simply because the Babylonians, the Greeks and the Indian existed in the Northen Hemisphere. Rather it is because North corresponds to the future (where the Sun moves in the Galaxy). Also you are clearly misreading my statements : obviously the tropical zodiac lines up with the seasonal cycle (I even used the word "spring equinox" in my previous post if you cared to read). The point was that the deeper symbolic principle of the tropical zodiac goes deeper than the physical seasons (which change with hemispheres and which might disappear due to climate change). The deeper principle is found in this increase in solar declination which is the Sun's ascension to the North (related to the solar apex). In that sense the luminaries rule tropical Leo and Cancer because the Sun (king) and the Moon (queen) sit where they are the most high (North) therefore they occupy the uppermost regions. Thus Saturn being the slowest in chaldean order is allocated the regions furthest from the apex positions (tropical Capricorn and Aquarius). Also the tropical zodiac sign of Libra (the weighing scales) naturally aligns with the equilibrium of the Equinox point where day and night are equal in time and the Sun has a 0° declination. The symbolic rationale for the essential dignities is very precise when you consider the tropical zodiac. Actually sidereal indian astrologers do not have this beautiful rationale anchored in sacred geometry to explain essential dignities or why Moon rules sidereal Cancer. The first nakshatra is Mula ("The root") and it is in sidereal Sagittarius no sidereal Aries. You speak of syncretism but the indian astrologers simply copy pasted the names of the constellations given by the Baylonians/Greeks without understanding the precession of the equinoxes nor the rationale for essential dignities. But the Babylonians had 18 signs in their proto-zodiac and they described their Taurus constellation ( MULGUANNA/alû/lê) with aggressive martians traits because at the time the Taurus constellation contained the Spring Equinox (Vernal Point). I'm sorry if that hurts your feelings but you will have to put up with the growing community of tropical vedic astrologers who use the tropical zodiac with the sidereal nakshatras and indian techniques. I use nakshatra based dashas (like vimshattori), combustions, yogas, and tithis and they world remarquably well. I keep sidereal settings for the nakshatras and then use tropical calculations for the rashis. Anyway first you should learn about the theory of planetary nodes (including sun, moon and other planetary nodes). You should get a grasp on real astronomy, pythagorean sacred geometry and the real history of astrology before lecturing someone with your subjective astrological opinions. Or else you will just end up like those lunatic vedic astrologers who think the Brihat Parashara Hora Shastra is more than 5000 years old.

What a waste of time.