By all means to Ravenest, that sounds interesting - probably a fruitcake but worth checking out.
I must admit to being very sceptical when it comes to modern takes on what is often a romanticised view of the past, or even worse claiming ancient authority for what is essentially somebody's latest idea -the number of times I've come across someone claiming 'the wisdom of the last three thousand years' to support an Astrological idea invented 50 years ago and with no previous astrological provenance at all would fill a very thick book.
However my objection is to 'fraudulent' or specious claims, which is, I think Bee's point. Astrology is a dynamic art and it has changed and evolved over its lifetime. Some of these changes prove fruitful, others prove to be a dead end. I've nothing against someone adopting or inventing a new technique, as long as they make it clear that they are indeed doing something quite new - it may indeed prove to be very useful and as Oein says, all systems start somewhere. When we meet such claims we tend to be more careful and critical and more willing to test thoroughly before we accept and that is a good thing.