It’s SaTerraday.
Education, Memory, Grains of Sand, and Scientology
How we learn doesn’t jive with LRH’s paradigm of the human mind. Since Ron was so “stats-oriented,” let’s start with the numbers.
He said we’ve all lived for quadrillions of years. By multiplying this number times all the pictures in all our memories over this period, we come up with an amount greater than the number of grains of sand on Earth. Whoa.
Terra Math
One quadrillion (ten to the fifteenth power, 10^15, or 1,000,000,000,000,000) times (x) one trillion memories per lifetime (completely arbitrary figure) equals (=) one octillion (10^27.) Just to put things into perspective, planet Earth has roughly 7.5 quintillion (7.5 x 10^18) grains of sand. (Lord Google and I stopped counting at 5 quintillion and extrapolated the rest.)
As I’ve scientifically illustrated, each of us has more memories than there are grains of sand in the world. And yet after years of auditing, we’re able to access but a miniscule fraction of these “facsimiles”—an amount less than the number of grains of sand on that patch of Waikiki Beach in front of the Westin Hotel.
If we add BTs (body thetans) to the equation, our memories approach a number called a “googol”—which is 10 followed by 100 zeros. Which is more than anything in the known universe. How do I know this? Trust me; I just do.
Promises, Promises
Despite what LRH guaranteed, we’re somehow not able to access all the knowledge and experience contained in this vast wealth of memories. As evidenced by what they’re doing in life and how they’re affecting their communities, even OT 8s haven’t been granted admittance to this other-dimensional server farm.
Wouldn’t you think these OTs would be smarter after all those years spent delving into memories from their past lives? Especially if they were truly cause over matter, energy, space, and time. I’d like to think a person is either “at cause” over his “time track” and can recall everything… Or he’s not. Which means he “false attested,” or was brainwashed into believing he’d actually achieved this state of beingness.
If what Ron said is true, and auditing really works, wouldn’t you think it’d be more efficient to “recall” math, calculus and trigonometry than suffer through years of studying at one school after another? Why should we have to slog through text books and instruction manuals if all the data is already tucked away in our minds? Haven’t we already studied this stuff thousands of times?
Wouldn’t it make more sense to recall “the wheel,” than have to invent a new one? [Or how about recreating one of those DC 8 spaceships that traversed galaxies — Ed]
Random Thought
If LRH was correct, Scientology should experience a boom in the near future from all the Clear and OT Scientologists who’ve died, picked up new bodies, and have returned to carry on before the Psychs forced them to go PTS and develop cancer. (PTS: Potential Trouble Source—one connected to a suppressive person; Cancer: something really, really bad.)
Perfect Recall
Why don’t OTs have perfect recall? Why do they still forget where they put the car keys, how to speak Mandarin, or how to build a force field from Legos and old Atari computers? Why can’t they remember how to keep their bodies alive for more than seventy or eighty years? Something to do with gluten, maybe?
Why do they have to keep re-doing all of LRH’s courses? Do they forget everything they learned the first time? Hasn’t every word they studied been recorded perfectly in their “cleared” minds?
Why do we remember some things and forget others? Why do our memories fade? Are we simply suffering from long chains of MUs (misunderstood words)? Or are we running into ancient implants commanding us to “forget,” “look the other way,” and “stick your head where the sun don’t shine?” Are BTs to blame? Or did we skip a gradient? Like that time a quadrillion and three years ago when we became Byzantine-King-Like-Guy without having first mastered the art of Byzantine-Prince-Like-Guy. Or are faulty gray-matter connections responsible for our shoddy recall? Improperly aligned synapses, perhaps? Short circuits? Frayed wire? Built in obsolescence?
Why aren’t kids at Delphi taught to direct their “file clerks” to find the answers to all their questions? Are their file clerks so busy that they can’t take the time to help these poor kids?
Why did LRH invent study tech to learn how to drive a tractor if all one had to do was go back to that time 67.8 billion years ago when Jorge Xenamoscovich invented the first John Deere? We were all there, right?
Ron devised Method One word clearing in which people recover all their education. Why didn’t he invent a “Memory Rundown” instead where people recover their whole time tracks? Then again, what’s the difference?
Last Words
All answers point to a model of the human mind that doesn’t match up with what LRH presented to the world. What he “discovered” about memory, recall, and learning simply doesn’t pan out in real life. Either the man seriously miscalculated or he was lying.
One more question: Why does brain injury affect memory?
One more question more: Why do so many non-OTs live longer than OTs?
Still Not Declared,
Terra Cognita
I was unable to get this reply from Foolproof to load, so am putting it here as a new comment as I spent some time responding and don’t want it to go to waste:
Foolproof wrote:
The answer to your question about how do you freeze a thetan in glycol is in the text from Hubbard you have triumphantly provided. I will explain by paraphrasing the material in the assumption that you won’t be Method 9ing the materials: “…very often a needle into a lung” – er, thetans don’t have lungs but they might be inhabiting a body which does. And “… Because if he tried to exteriorize from the body, there he was frozen.” You seem to have the mistaken idea that somehow a thetan (without a body) has lungs and veins/arteries etc. which can be injected with alcohol and glycol. The answer to your question in which you hoped to somehow invalidate Hubbard’s statement lies in the now obvious fact that you have misunderstood Hubbard’s text and somehow thought Hubbard was talking about injecting a spirit (thetan) with a needle, when of course he says nothing of the sort.
Thank you for providing the references. I do recall them now. They are not actually in the OTIII (student) pack itself but they don’t need to be.
In reply to Foolproof:
Foolproof, you are incorrigible. But you are a terrific example of the sort of lockstep think that is bred into die-hard scientologists.
I started by asking you for your understanding of two things and wondered how you reconciled them.
You circulated around not really answering and I reiterated the questions about freezing thetans in glycol and how new thetans appear on earth which you say are already answered by Hubbard and then go off into a rant about how “freezing in glycol and DC8 space planes” are just made up by Jon Atack or Miscavige and dont appear in Hubbard’s writings.
So I find the Hubbard writings for you and ask you again. Now you say “Oh yeah, I forgot” and “they were not really relevant anyway”… Now you go off on how I have misunderstoods on the materials (another favorite ploy). Somehow you parse the sentences of Hubbard with your snide “You seem to have the mistaken idea that somehow a thetan has lungs and veins/arteries etc.” to demonstrate he really did not say what he said.
Here, let me do some child level word clearing on you:
“The trick was to shoot somebody, disable somebody, very often a needle into a lung,” this does NOT say a needle full of glycol or alcohol to the lung. This is how you STOP THE BODY.
“and at the same time to hit him with frozen alcohol and glycol, which preparation is guaranteed to pick up a thetan.” You see these words “at the same time”? That is not the same thing being referred to as the “shoot, disable, very often a needle into a lung.” And you see the end of the sentence “guaranteed to pick up a thetan” — that IS in reference to the glycol and alcohol and is in reference to capturing the thetan.
And beyond that, you completely ignored THIS reference that even you could not misinterpret:
“The R6 bank was implanted while the Thetan was caught in a compound of frozen Alcohol and Glycol.”
Are you going to argue more? I could find more references for you, but I am not going to bother. I am sure you will hold firm to your “understanding” of this, but then ignore the irrationality that your theory then engenders: How many DC8’s would it take to carry one billion bodies (or just 100 million — assume 400 bodies per rocket ship) and even worse, how does a BODY frozen with alcohol and glycol “trap a thetan”? Thetans are trapped by THOUGHT not by alcohol or glycol or Elmer’s glue in a body.
I only spent this time out of curiosity about how difficult it can be for someone to shake themselves out of ingrained patterns of thinking and reacting, something I also struggle with. I really tried to get you to look, but clearly I have not succeeded.
I hope you find the peace of mind you are looking for. There is a certain comfort in not having to think and letting the words of Hubbard do all your thinking for you. Unfortunately, that is sold as freedom and it is really mind slavery.
Mike, as owner of the blog I didn’t want to get into an argument with you on this. And yes, of course I am going to “argue more” – haha! But there was no time I got “snidey” with you, until my last statement, but then only when you seemed to be triumphantly getting snidey with me because I had forgotten a reference. And my “snideyness” was more my exasperation than snideyness as such – honest injun! I do realize it must be annoying or irritating when I post retorts to some of the technical untruths posted here by some of the “favorite sons” such as Terra, but you let me do it and you let others try and shoot me down in flames, but nevertheless I think even Terra appreciates me posting such as he once said. I think also that others enjoy the banter as well and I presume it makes the discussion more interesting and certainly “lively”.
Now, as to the rub of the matter: A needle into a lung can be done in a local hospital, maybe with a local anesthetic but of course that doesn’t trap a thetan, does it. But when you pump the body (housing the thetan) full of alcohol and glycol I presume that might just knock him unconscious – just a needle into a lung is not going to do that, is it? What would be the point of putting a needle into the lung if there is no contents of the needle (syringe presumably)? As to your statement about a thetan being caught with alcohol/glycol etc. my understanding again is that the thetan is still in the body when I read the Hubbard text – your understanding is that he is not, and therein lies the rub in this question and hence the (in my view) false premise of your question. You are right that you can’t pour alcohol or glycol over a thetan without a body and trap him or whatever. But in my understanding Hubbard didn’t say that.
As to how “new” thetans arrive on Earth I answered your question by stating that I presume they are still being dumped or sent here, not by DC8s or anything to do now with the OTIII incident which occurred once 75 million years ago or so. I personally do not know how they are arriving, and neither does anyone else on our current planet AFAIK. I haven’t had any recent trips around the universe in space planes to confirm any theory I might have on this – so I don’t have a theory! Hubbard gave a theory of which I cannot find a better one and which seems somewhat logical that “new” thetans are still arriving, as there is almost an exponential population increase. I didn’t evade any issue on this at all and my reply certainly isn’t “circular”!
I answered your question about “BTs having BTs” by stating that in my personal auditing that is not the case from what I “see”.
My “rant” was hardly that either. All I stated was that I couldn’t find anything on this when I looked at the III materials but could find something written by Jon Atak on the net. The material you found is in a III C/Sing HCOB and which does confirm the DC8 story, and not in the III student materials, where I looked. So the simple fact that these data are not in the III pack does somewhat support my statement that they are not (that) relevant, does it not? It is certainly not important then to the running of OTIII (as if so it would be in the student pack). As I said it is 30 years or so since I did OTIII. You found it, fine.
Ok, I’m done.
What a psycho. He still didn’t answer how an entity NOT part of the physical universe is affected by cold alcohol. Truly a study in brainwashing.
Foolproof, I do not understand why you bother to try and correct and/or educate these people about Scientology.
I assume you were once a QUAL terminal perhaps?
You should realise by now that the entire content of this blog is about trying (and failing) to destroy Scientology, and STOP the technology from being used.
when this fails they attack LRH
Have you forgotten about what happens to beings when they obsessivley try to stop things?
I am all for free speech and constructive viewpoints.
It is true Miscaviage is a piece of shit and an SP.
But let us remember that Mike was happy to work under this bastard for a VERY long time and is cut from the same cloth of course.
At then end of the day there is NOTHING whatsoever on this blog that will actually do anything about spiritual healing and helping man better himself.
It is ALWAYS carping, criticism and “what has been done to me” types.
The only thing that is on this blog thats worth reading now is the Thursday funnies.
Mike only publishes that which aligns with his own twisted view of the Tech, as it has failed him completely.
That is what happens when you get out-tech on an already overloaded false attested case.
Just curious. If you are such a product of standard tech and in control of your life and at cause, why are you hiding your real name? You want to take potshots at me but are too at effect to even use your name?
Tells you everything you need to know.
I for one would be fine if FoolProof or Miraldi or whoever this is went elsewhere to post. The whole purpose of these posts are obviously to make posters wrong and create upsets, which is not beneficial to this blog and does not contribute to the conversations. I have no problem with people stating their opinion but I do have a problem with those who are being covertly and overtly hostile and personally attack…..the end!
What you are saying is that commenters should be allowed to post any old technical nonsense and you all sit back and giggle gleefully. The whole purpose of Terra’s articles and the resultant replies to my comments are to make the technology wrong and create upsets, is it not? The only person who is attacked here, overtly and covertly and personally, is me for simply stating my understanding of technical issues. You will notice that I never start off attacking anyone, certainly personally, only the technical errors in the comments which I see. Please do not try and tar me with the brush that others use to paint me with.
What you are saying is that commenters should be allowed to post any old technical nonsense and you all sit back and giggle gleefully.
And who exactly does this hurt? You are so sure your viewpoint is correct, perhaps it might be helpful for you to get some other perspectives and have a sense of humor?
Mike, the reference I used to resolve that question is a Phoenix Lectures tape where LRH says a thetan is IN a very, very small amount of mass. To quote:
“The static is capable of considerations, postulates and opinions. It also has qualities, you understand? Something, in other words, a life form, a thetan let us say, who is very, very close to being pure static, he has practically no wavelength. He’s in a very, very small amount of mass.” (Phoenix Lectures – “Axioms, Part 1”)
At least you gave a relevant quote. Contradictory to dozens of other things Hubbard said, and cannot be true when compared to what else he says. But that is not unusual.
Marildi that excerpt gibes with HUbbard’s claim that a person carries around (constantly creates) pictures (mental mass). Good catch. But doesn’t really explain how spraying a “thetan” with cold Everclear could effect one in any way, shape or form. (Which I know you weren’t claiming it did)
This is the problem writers face when creating imaginary settings. Verisimilitude becomes extremely hard to maintain as your story gets more complex. Logical holes appear and those who posses a native ability with logic or those trained in logic notice them. Which is why Hubbard told his followers that studying the subject of logic would drive them insane. When in fact it helps keep one sane.
I never thought about it when I was in Scientology that lrh had a war on logic. Because I got in pretty young. What you say about logic keeping us sane really hits a nerve for me. I think this is my favorite comment you’ve ever left Wynski.
This blog and the comments are very sanity enhancing. These discussions parsing quotes from lrh from different viewpoints, I find very helpful.
Having more than one point of view and having my mind open now that I’m out, I still find I have stable datums that are unshaken that need to be looked at.
Looked at, poked at, viewed through the lens of logic and other people’s various viewpoints and then finally I have my own thought about it and dislodge what was the stable datum that I recognize now was false.
I don’t appreciate thinking with someone else’s mind. I sometimes catch myself judging or deciding on a situation based upon the mindset of lrh tech and policy.
when I spot this happening I pull back in kind of a moment of freaking out.
Then I take another look at the situation take a deep breath and really ask myself what is going on here and what do I really think and then I listen to my own response and my own true response is not the tech response or the policy response it is my own and it makes me smile.
The quality of the comments that really dig into the topic here, are very valuable to me.
I thank you whether I agree with you or not for helping me take a look at some fixed idea and open the door of decision that was closed long ago.
Clearly not clear: “I never thought about it when I was in Scientology that lrh had a war on logic….These discussions parsing quotes from lrh from different viewpoints, I find very helpful.”
In that case, I hope you noted that no direct quote was given by Wynski where Hubbard “told his followers that studying the subject of logic would drive them insane.” What was actually stated about logic is the following:
“Logic or the ability to reason is vital to an organizer or administrator. If he cannot think clearly he will not be able to reach the conclusions vital to make correct decisions.” (Modern Management Technology Defined)
The above definition is taken from Data Series 2 “Logic.” In that PL, the purpose of the whole Data Series is shown to be focused on logic:
“BY ESTABLISHING THE WAYS IN WHICH THINGS BECOME ILLOGICAL ONE CAN THEN ESTABLISH WHAT IS LOGIC.”
There was no “war on logic.” Just the opposite – an attempt was made to improve upon it by making sure that, to start with, the data used in reasoning was itself logical.
More lies by you marildi. Hubbard DID state to NOT study the subject of logic or it will drive you crazy. Your lack of knowledge about ‘Hubbard’s writings doesn’t erase what he wrote.
Nope. You are the one who has no quote to back up your false claims. Either that or you have completely twisted the meaning of what was actually said. Wouldn’t be the first time.
Now, if I were Wynski at this point I would say something like – prove what you’re saying or admit you are criminally insane. That’s Wynski logic! LOL
Marildi, the reason what Wynski wrote was a mental sanity bath came from my empirical observations in retrospect to my time in the cult.
The most insanity producing moments occurred when studying the tech and policy. If I pointed out a logical fallacy to my mind in something I read, the sup said I had an MU, skipped gradient or had lack of mass. Or I had other fish to fry, or that I was weirdly fixating and complexifying something so simple. If I persisted, I was deemed ‘critical’ and went to Ethics.
For questioning what didn’t make sense to me. I was clearly already pretty messed up if I couldn’t see how wrong it was to have to do a lower ethics condition for asking questions.
Wanting to get through the course and wanting to have wins and learn, I turned my back on the illogic and demoed madly with my demo kit, situations where this could be true in life. I’d make shit up till it didn’t seem illogical, just a stretch.
I’d think, well lrh experienced it and understood it. So ergo I must too. He’s smarter than me and braver than me and has pierced the veil of terra incognita. So he must be right, right?
That was my experience over and over again. And it did not lead to happiness, it was the way to fantasy, uncertainty and a rock hard ‘certainty’ that lrh must be hecka smart and I must not be.
It also made it easier to make shit up in session.
For the record I studied some of his policy letters on investigation and found them complex and difficult and not helpful in sorting out problems and difficult situations.
I was in for 40 years, staff breifly. I studied a lot while in and trashed my books in an act of rage and rebellion once out.
Marildi, I know what I know and what I studied stifled my logical thinking abilities. Whether I have references or not my opinion matters to my healing from this mentally damaging experience.
I don’t have references to hand as my very expensive materials are covered in bird shit at the dump. I don’t feel that my opinion and observations are empty and useless with no backing up of some quote or other about logic.
Just like quoting the bible, you can find a quote to fit most arguments.
I don’t want to fight you.
This story I share is just to tell you that what Wynski said rattled me to the core in a very good way.
You never know what will illuminate a shadowed place you thought wasn’t there. Then someone says something, and the light shines into shadow and you see newly with a burst of happiness. At that moment you have the win of realization of truth for you. That is what Wynsky gave me.
Clearly not clear: “I don’t feel that my opinion and observations are empty and useless with no backing up of some quote or other about logic.”
I fully agree with you on that. However, Wynski wasn’t just giving his opinion. He made a claim about what was actually stated – and it was a false claim.
“This story I share is just to tell you that what Wynski said rattled me to the core in a very good way.”
Then I’m sincerely happy for you, and I don’t doubt what you say about your experience.
Based on my own experience, not all Sups and other staff handled students the way you described. I have experienced both good and bad handling, depending on the org and even individual staff members. My experience tells me that that what happened to you was the same kind of misapplication and alteration of the actual materials as what Wynski was doing, even if it was unknowingly and based on the misunderstanding of others.
I appreciate your valid viewpoint Marildi. And I appreciate Wynski. I even like the sparks that fly.
Boy there was something that wouldn’t have been allowed back when I was in.
The KR’s would have been flying over this back and forth, like fruit flies on last week’s peaches.
We get to discuss, dissent, rib and question each other, each other’s views and when it is handy quote lrh.
I’m having more fun with the tech now than I ever did then. And to think I thought it was a fun group and that helped stick me in.
The ex’s are a lot more fun and open with views, and what we really believe.
?
Clearly not clear: “Boy there was something that wouldn’t have been allowed back when I was in….We get to discuss, dissent, rib and question each other, each other’s views and when it is handy quote lrh.”
So true! That’s one of the valuable lessons we learned – that we should speak up, and that NO ONE should have the authority to disallow discussion.
“I’m having more fun with the tech now than I ever did then.”
I can understand. In my own mind, there are at the least some parts of tech and admin that are valuable, and I see no rational reason to throw it all away. This is why discussion to sort it out is worthwhile.
And there’s a bonus – which is to learn how to discuss things calmly, honestly, and without bias or agenda. That’s the only way to have a valid discussion and come to valid conclusions. Thanks for your contribution!
Just for fun here’s an explanation of why there are so many BTs hanging around earth.
Even with all the billions of galaxies in the universe there would be a drastically less number of planets which could support life forms capable of housing conscious entities. Add to that cosmic and planetary cataclysms along with conscious entities themselves continually causing mass extinctions and you have a rather large waiting line for a nice warm human body.
As earth civilization heads toward extinction from overpopulation the word gets out that there are still an increasing number of available bodies on earth and ever more BTs swarm toward earth. The Pope needs a revelation from God that birth control is okay!
The conversation continues below – lol
Terra, I can’t answer the questions you have posed. I believe, though, that there is much more to memory, from one lifetime to another, than meets the eye.
No one in my family can explain how one of my aunts, my mother’s youngest sister, could, from the time she was able to sit on a piano stool and reach the keys with her short arms, accompany anyone on the piano.
In other words, someone could start singing some song, any song, in any key, and my aunt, from the time she was a tiny girl, could play chords on the piano in that key, to that song.
She never had a piano lesson. She had never done scales, she could not read music. There was no money for lessons. This was a large, decidedly poor immigrant family living crowded together in a cold water flat on the top floor of a tenement in the 1920s. God knows how they had a piano. It was probably already there when they moved in.
But if you could sing, she could play in your key. From the time she was very small until the end of her days she could do that. She didn’t even have to know the song. She’d just listen, and her fingers would play the chords in the key you were singing in. She didn’t know the name of the key, like “D-flat” or whatever. That nomencalture meant nothing to her. She just listened, and played the chords on the piano. Nobody understood how she was able to do that. It was just accepted in the family as something she could do.
PS: I thought I should add that this aunt with this seemingly in born ability did not go on to be a musical prodigy nor did she have any career out to the ordinary. She worked ordinary clerical jobs, her life was the life of millions of other first generation Americans. She had fun with a piano when one happened to be handy. Her playing was better than mine and I had lessons for 4 years!
Aqua, I think past lives can explain what you say about your aunt and many other phenomena as well (like tramsgenders and how some people have an unexplained affinity for another race or nation a great distance away).
You know, Joe, I don’t have any personal reality on past lives as my auditing didn’t trigger any such cognitions. That said, I agree with you and with the concept of living life after life. This is a belief, because it makes sense to me. Everything else comes back – the leaves, the flowers, etc., all after their own kind, so, why not us? Again, I don’t know, but it seems sensible. Far more sensible to me than any other explanations about what happens after we die. But then, like everyone else, I’ll find out, won’t I 🙂
Some Buddhists believe the universe continually ends and is recreated. Science has people hypothesizing about multiple or parallel universes. Existence has always existed. Existence outside of spacetime? – (quantum metaphysics) Maybe it’s a Prime Directive from the Big G like in Star Trek – never interfere with a developing civilization. Scientology can sure get you thinking.
Wow Terra, you mean to demonstrate (which you did grandly) that scamology is a scam? 🙂
As per usual, all of Terra’s “questions” are adequately answered by a simple referral to all of the references under “memory” in the Technical Volumes and various and many LRH tapes on the subject – try for instance PDC 16-12-1952 “Memory (not human memory)”. There are many other tapes. But of course that means a bit of study instead of glibly tossing off a few negative and vacuous remarks and garnering the usual supporting negative comments from people who again have probably never even read an HCOB or listened to a lecture, let alone received an hour of ARC Straightwire, or opted out of Scientology at the first hurdle of being told that their OCA graph was at the bottom on both sides. Or have some other bee in their bonnet about Scientology.
And it seems that Hubbard is now being held responsible for why thetans have “elected” to lose their memories on the track. It wasn’t Hubbard that made you lose your memory nor was it psychomancy from other beings! So the upshot of this “story” from Terra is that the only person in history (Hubbard) who has presented any useful information on what memory is and how it can be recovered and improved, is ridiculed for doing so. Shame on you!
So, let’s hear then of any other philosopher’s useful data on what memory is? Any offers? I promise not to ridicule! The silence will be deafening I fear.
In my opinion what can be ridiculed, alright let’s say “criticized”, is the fact that Terra and others here did not get adequate case gain from their auditing and studies due to the misrepresentation of the subject administratively and technically by Miscavige and his gang of followers. But even Hubbard says and warns about that with several policies at the start of every course in Scientology!
Do you actually believe the OCA is a valid measure of anything? Why?
Again, not a sarcastic question.
The OCA is rigged. No matter how you answer the questions, they will tell you that you’re FUBAR (Fucked Up Beyond All Recognition). Everything in Scientology is FUBAR.
Foolproof, let me save you some money. OTVIII’s big revelation is that all those whole track memories are not yours. They were the body thetans. Therefore, you spent a lot of time and money trying to clear yourself of unpleasant memories that weren’t yours.
You are who you are.
You shouldn’t listen to all the tripe you sometimes get on here, especially about “OTVIII”. The watered down version of OTVIII that the Church is delivering is still, nevertheless, a valid way of discerning whose memories are whose, and the clarification of that which, whilst false memories could be BT’s memories, could also be caused by other factors. And “unpleasant memories” also has nothing to do with it – it is targeted more at identities – engrams are handled before Clear. Please don’t attempt further to try to teach me (and thereby misinform others) on technical matters – I am too long in the “HCOB tooth” to meekly accept uninspected pearls of wisdom on such matters.
I am suddenly so sad for you.. As a Never-in, I have not read anything beyond Dianetics and cannot debate this subject with you. I just feel very sad that you are still a believer of this cult’s practices. LRH bashing aside, there exists so much evidence and testimonials, which I hope you are exposed to (since you are able to access this blog) that should give enough evidence to, at least, begin a questioning process for yourself. It is undoubtedly a scary thing to question a strong belief..one that your life is predicated on. You’ve invested so much of your time, huge amounts of money (more will follow) sacrificed much (which you will undoubtedly deny), to chase an illusion.
It appears you are well-versed in LRH “science”. You are, obviously, an intellect, though misguided. i just can’t help but wonder what kind of difference you could have really made or still make on humankind if you could truly see through a clean and healthy lens.
Truly, my heart breaks for you.
You seem to be under the illusion that I am still a member of this “cult” as you say. No, I am not, I am what’s called an “Independent Scientologist”. So I know the story from both sides, so to speak. Many of the practices of the current Church I am in disagreement with.
Am I now supposed to see some sort of light and acquiesce to your concern and say “yes, you are right, I will give up the subject immediately!” But I know that the technology works, not only for me but hundreds of others that I have personally observed. You and many others commenting here have never even tried (the technology side) so really you are being sad (for me) over something which is just your assumption. Thank you for your concern but perhaps you should go in to a Scientology group and get some Dianetic secondary engram running to handle the sadness? Sorry, I couldn’t resist the last sentence which admittedly is somewhat facetious. But then you are quite liberally sprinkling expressions about me being “misguided” and not seeing things “through a clean and healthy lens” and am “chasing an illusion”. So I don’t feel I am being too facetious. Whatever, thank you for your concern if it was genuinely given.
My apologies if I assumed you were still “in” and I’m pleased you are “in disagreements” with current church policies.
I do not recall suggesting that “you see the light and acquiesce immediately”. My comment encouraged you to begin “a questioning process” and I will add this…the questioning process to see. perhaps, the many inconsistencies that others on this blog and others have discovered. However, I can assume, based on your response, that you have done this and have made a choice based on whatever evidence you’ve been witness to or personally experienced, or perhaps researched beyond LRH books, docs, and tapes.
My comments were not intended to malign your belief so I will accept the “facitiousness” in your response, though I obviously hit a nerve. I am sad for you..this was a genuine emotion towards someone who may be following down a path of falsehood founded on the incoherent and unsubstantiated ramblings of someone who really cared not for others. To deal with my sadness, instead of “engrams running”, I’ll do what I believe in and pray for you.
God Bless…
Well, OSD, haha – most are FUBAR are they not? Certainly all I can (fairly) say on your issue with this is that after many hours of processing my OCA changed (upwards – ha!) and it seemed to reflect my personal view of self as well, and that of course without knowing what the “correct” answers are (as I never sought them out in the desk drawers of the Div 6 staff) and also because the test caters for that (cheating) as well, I believe. But I am not an expert on the OCA.
As I wasn’t on Div 6 staff I can’t really say either way but the Div 6 I knew said it was pretty good. It is probably just an introductory tool that is as good as anything else to evaluate someone’s condition. C/Ses however did use it in programming cases, particularly EX DN cases I believe, and again I heard nothing detrimental of its use in this way either.
Thanks. So your belief in the OCA is based strictly on anecdotal reports from others who have used it? Can we rely on others’ anecdotal experiences with pieces of the tech too? Or only if they are positive? You jump all over people claiming they don’t have a a valid view of their experiences because “they are not trained” or “obviously got no gains from auditing” — but no gains from auditing IS their experience?
I am not beating any drum for the use of the OCA. On the other hand is it so important?
All of my friends have gotten gains from their auditing. I appreciate some others haven’t but having worked in Tech and Qual for a long time I know the reasons why and have seen and supervised the correction of such cases, which when done properly, works to correct the case and gets the gains. But then me and thousands of other technically trained staff were purged decades ago so I cannot vouch for recent tech – in fact I believe it is now shot to pieces, of which I can provide many examples, so you again are assuming that I am supporting something which I am not.
Typical circular argument we have come to know and love from you Foolproof.
You brought up the OCA and I asked whether you thought it had merit or not. Now it’s devolved into “is it so important”? No, it’s not. I was curious as to your thoughts about it.
And I love the fact that you were honest enough to say you think it has value because of others’ observations about it. Though I think you should apply that criteria to criticisms too and not just blow them off with “well, if the tech had been applied properly, it would have worked great”… Sooner or later the fact that the tech CANNOT be applied properly to multiple times more people than it apparently can be applied properly to has got to be anecdotal evidence that there is something wrong with such supposedly infallible tech.
It’s like your watch example. If you invented the perfectly accurate watch that kept perfect time forever, but only 1 in 100 people could figure out how to make it work and it told the wrong time for everyone else that is not a very workable watch. No matter how “perfect” some experts are convinced it is. And it is certainly not going to be adopted by everyone on the planet — and if that is your goal, to get everyone using the perfect watch, then you are going to fail miserably if only 1 in 100 people can get it to tell the time correctly. Even if it’s 1 in 10. Or 1 in 5.
Foolpoof/Mike Rinder,
When doctrine/catechism supersedes experience then the person ceases looking any further and ceases expanding beyond that universe. And that is sad because there is so much more out here.
I wish you well Foolproof, may you find all of your answers in the Mind and writings of Hubbard.
Reply to Jim: yet I have just stated the opposite of what you state about me – the fact that I have EXPERIENCED personal case gain and seen and heard testimony from probably hundreds of others over the years of their positive EXPERIENCES. I can’t make it any plainer than that. As to what the nebulous “so much more is out there” statement means, please elucidate, I am all ears!
I think Foolproof brings up some points to consider on this subject. (But the OCA? Virtually worthless , a reg gambit, that’s all really)
I am not beating a drum for this. “Worthless” is rather an exaggeration however. But on the other hand, as I say above, is it really so important?
A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools.
Douglas Adams
Good mind-reading act, do you do balloon animals as well?
As usual, the usual attempted ridiculing and ad hominem remarks. Are people supposed to now chortle and giggle with glee at them?
Oh Mike, thank you for allowing these types of posts on your blog. It is very helpful, especially when a poster adds information that substantially supports the essayist (like the above by Foolproof).
I do not offer a philosopher but a scientist –
“The Brain that Changes Itself” by Norman Doidge, M.D. is a fascinating read about the power of the body, especially the brain, to heal itself. Doidge, a member of the scientology-eschewed group, psychiatrists, has researched and written about neuroplasticity, a fascinating scientifically-evidenced case for just how amazing our bodies and brains are.
In SCN I was taught that my brain had nothing to do with my memories, that my mind was not associated with my brain. Of course this is patently false. The knowledge that my brain is this miraculous tool at my disposal changed how I learned, what I learned and empowered me to achieve what I have, which is far beyond that which I was “enabled” in Scientology.
As for me, ARC Straightwire Release Age 8, Level 0 Age 13, Natural Clear Age 20…back to reality Age 25. Free from Scientology for 32 years.
I am unencumbered by HCOBullsh!t, Hubbard’s hallucinations or Miscavidge’s malevolence. My “bee in the bonnet” is the abuses I endured at the direction of Hubbard through my CMO seniors on Flag long before Miscavidge ever showed up. No jumping off due to some fake personality test, not hardly. Smart 14-year-old kid who figured out how to get off the Apollo and back to my family and away from the lunatic Hubbard.
Hi Foolproof,
I got lots of gains in my years of training and solo auditing, but NOT close to Hubbard’s claims. Would you please describe in detail , say, your last 20 lifetimes sufficiently that we can verify your memory recall? Thank you.
Oh Foolproof,
Just to be honest on my part. I went Clear running the CC implants in 1968. Numerous Dianetic co-auditing found lots of whole track fun stuff, but I was unable to find recent past lives. In 1969, I got the most recent past life death moment as a German seaman drowning in the north Sea in mid-1938. Also in 1969, I saw myself giving birth as a Arapaho girl round 1280 AD. That’s it. Did I take a break the rest of the time? Did I just live un-noteworthy lives? do I give shit?
Four years ago I exteriorized while power hiking at 7,500 feet altitude. With low blood sugar the brain was shorting out. “I” could see the environment but things did not have names (ie An aspen tree was just an ‘it’.) When I looked at the brain of the body I saw it held the circuits/programs for running the body, and for storing my this-life-time memories. I pondered on this and concluded that there was nothing worth holding onto into any future lives.
NOW, Foolproof.. .. It’s your turn.
ps: In college in 1962-6, I had a VERY hard time with German classes.
pps: An earlier version of OT-1 simply instructed the student to date and locate the last consecutive 3000 lives.
Er, “your turn”? What do you want me to do here? Discuss my past lives? Could do I suppose but… But again you, like many others here, are dubbing in Hubbard as saying “when you have had a bit of processing you can recall the whole track”. The only point (on the Bridge) I know where such could be claimed would be if the original OTVIII was delivered by Miscavige’s church but it’s not delivering that. If you refer to the original OTVIII as I recall from the “old” Grade Chart this was the first of the actual OT levels from which one can then deduce, from HCOB Time Track and Engram Running By Chains Bulletin 2 that an OT has “no track, no charge”.
As to your point about OT1, so what? Are you saying Hubbard should have produced perfect processes at their instigation or is he not allowed to modify or drop them when he finds better process workability? Well, sorry that Dianetics and Scientology wasn’t “perfect” in 1950 and 1954.
But I don’t get what your point is here? You seem to have proved the fact that past lives exist as you talk about yours and the fact that you can remember them. (That’s quite something then that Mr. Hubbard achieved then eh?)
p.s. I can speak fluent German – haha!
Ah Foolproof,
QED
Did I make such claims? Did Hubbard ever make such claims (before original OTVIII)? You are “dubbing in” stuff here to suit your theory. But when I finally get around to doing the full version of the original OTVIII then I presume I can answer your attempted belittling questions. Actually if I sat down on my meter and did what you ask – I probably could, even now. Then of course you would only come up with the usual drivel of “how can you prove that”.
Now, let us look at this from another angle – someone (Hubbard that is) not only inspects this area of memory and provides massive amounts of data and theory but also comes up with myriad processes that improve it and yet all you can say is “why isn’t it perfect” (in effect). As I said, it wasn’t Hubbard that made you lose your memory and abilities. But it was Hubbard that examined the subject in depth for the first time in history and provide hope that it could be handled. Hubbard actually gives the reasons why people cannot recall as well, I believe in HCO PL “Responsibilty Again”. So when you or anyone else has any better theories or methods then feel free to let us know about them. In the meantime why are you criticizing what has been done in this field?
OT 8 that Hubbard talked about (ridding one of amnesia on the track) was delivered to RTRC and that is what was used on the ship Foolproof. IT DIDN’T WORK.
Yes, as I said it is a watered down version so that may be true. But have you asked each OT8 this question or are you just generalizing, as usual.
Proof (primary docs REQUIRED) that is was “watered down” or admit you are lying.
Since you are poorly trained in the pre-ot levels (as proven by your other posts on this thread) I don’t expect a reply that will take you out of the category of pathological liar.
As usual the Ronbot Fooled again flies in with complete bullshit that has no validity except in his own messed up mind.
True to form, No-Wynski, true to form. I wouldn’t expect anything else from you.
Right Foolproof. I deliver truth.
FP, the study of how memory is formed, encoded, recalled and subject to degradation through injury, disease, etc. shifted from philosophy to science a very long time ago.
Here’s a review link to a very readable, non-technical memoir of the pre-eminent Nobel prize-winning neuroscientist in the field of memory, which describes his own pioneering research, as well as the historical development of the whole field http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMbkrev56892#t=article
Elron’s fundamental and easily disproved hypothesis concerning memory is that it is immaterial in nature. It’s NOT! This has been a well known and repeatedly demonstrated fact for over 50 years…so, time to come into PT and PUT THE KOOL-aid DOWN!
Er, what does the e-meter register then? Mass. Is mass immaterial? No. Does the weight of a preclear increase and decrease in session (yes it does). Obviously your theory about Hubbard’s theory is – flawed.
Great question! It measures the fluctuations in resistance to a small current passing through a meat body which can occur as a result of a lot of different factors, none of which the e-meter can separate out for you.
Where in Xenu’s name did you get the bizarre and completely unfounded idea that auditing is some sort of weight loss program!?
Please expand your knowledge of how memory works by doing just a little bit of non-$cn reading. Our neuroscientific understanding of how memory works as a biological phenomena is very well understood, especially at the molecular and neuronal levels.
It measures the resistance between two terminals which fluctuates when mass keys in and out. Or put it this way – if you have a flow between two things then why would the flow decrease and increase – when SOME THING is hindering the flow. Now is a thing immaterial? It can’t be explained simpler than that. Sorry if it burst the bubble of your new pet theory.
I am afraid it is you who are dubbing in that auditing is a “weight loss program” in some sort of daft effort to try and belittle what I have said. I always find it amazing the twisting of my remarks when a (your) theory has been shot to pieces and people lash out with false statements about what I have supposedly said and hope that no one notices.
You carry on with improving your memory with your neuro-scientific stuff and I’ll carry on auditing. Deal?
Yo! Foolproof!
Put the meth pipe down, now, thank you!
ML,
El Con Flubbard, Target Two
Stygian Star System 666, Quadrant 47, Planet Dingleberry in the Sphincter Solar System
Sensible reply here eh?
Honestly, I mean it: I appreciate you posting here as you undoubtedly knew that your opinion may cause some controversy. Rather than attacking your statements, I would like to encourage you to think them through a bit.
You say: “the only person in history (Hubbard) who has presented any useful information on what memory is and how it can be recovered and improved, is ridiculed for doing so. Shame on you! So, let’s hear then of any other philosopher’s useful data on what memory is?”
First off, “the only person in history” to have done ANYTHING is an awfully tall tale. Now I get it: You did not invent this grand claim; Hubbard did. And he kept repeating it so many times that people (at least those inclined to put credence in him, a fairly small percentage of the general population) bought it. But how did he (and how could you) back it up? To quote you: “The silence will be deafening I fear.”
Aside from the issue of credulity, consider this: Why did you find it necessary to refer to Hubbard as a “philosopher?” Hubbard offered his “work” as “science” and promoted himself variously as a “doctor,” “psychologist,” “nuclear physicist” and “civil engineer.” All of these skills–none of which he ever attained outside his own fantasy life–require presenting evidence. “Show your work, or no credit.,” as the saying goes on a math quiz. So where is the empirical back-up of his claims required by any form of science or engineering? If a man was this prolific, this productive and this profound, this would leave evidence all over the place! And yet the corroboration is nowhere to be found: It’s NOT in his books; nor is it available in any other form through his estate or corroborated by any collaborators. Aside from this, Hubbard’s claims that CAN be tested have been crumbling for decades.
So again, why Hubbard the “philosopher?” We are talking science here! Something as complex as the science of the mind. You expect philosophy–and one single self-proclaimed “philosopher”–to provide the ONE AND ONLY answer? Frankly, we are talking process of elimination here. Hubbard tried selling himself as a man of science, medicine and engineering. When caught out on the fact that these were all qualifications he lacked and had lied about, “philosophy” was next in his full flight from reality. And the final refuge was “religion” something that even an old con man like Hubbard found hard to claim with a straight face! But the beauty of the “religious angle” (or philosophy) was that no longer would there be any evidence required.
One final question: If Hubbard was such a bright light (“the only one…”), how did he manage to escape the attention of the entire scientific and philosophical community? How has such genius remained so obscure? You would expect at least some contingent of the scientific/philosophical academic and professional community to flock to his ideas, eat it up and make it the cornerstone of their own ideology. If he were even 10% of the genius he/you claimed him to be, we would be naming libraries and universities after him. Academics would be writing monographs devoted to the great man’s ideas and amazing discoveries. Yet, to quote you again: “The silence will be deafening I fear,” as we are looking for even trace elements of Hubbard’s ideas having any traction outside of a few folks in his “religion.”
How does any con gain its power, from a three-card Monty hustler to a Nigerian internet prince? By the determined desire of the mark to WANT to believe. Sure, it’s tempting to want to believe that life is not bewildering and complex and that one man–even one as unlikely as a convicted con man– had ALL of the answers. Even if such belief requires full flight from reality (by any definition of “reality” including Hubbard’s own). But if you REALLY want to become and remain “foolproof,” take a look at the evidence for Hubbard, his person and his “science!”
To allude to Hubbard himself, when the “discovery of fire” and the “invention of the wheel” happened, the effect was not limited to a small group of “believers.” The discoverer/inventor of these things did not have to promote themselves with false credentials and hard sale. They did not have to proclaim that the only measurable effect of these phenomena was “religious.” Others happily adopted these breakthroughs and built on them to tremendous effect. Therefore, they did they have to conjure up imaginary enemies to show why no one cared about fire and the wheel. And yet Hubbard claims to have tied and even topped these! Really?
Exactly so. Perhaps the closest Hubbard ever got to having a famous person noticing him was when Aleistar Crowley wrote Jack Parsons and told him to avoid Hubbard as a con.
Again, you are engaging in ad hominem remarks about Hubbard, who, may I remind you, started off in this life as a human being like we all do. I am surprised you haven’t stated “but Hubbard had 4 wives so his 2D can’t have been that good!” or “Hubbard picked his nose when he was a kid” or other such trite and banal comments. Yet on the subject matter being discussed, which you have actually avoided and just ended up attempting to belittle Hubbard the person rather than discussing the subject, the silence is still deafening.
Is it “trite and banal” to talk about how Hubbard was a bigamist who abused at least one of his wives and threatened to cut up his daughter? How about putting innocent children into a chain locker for days as punishment? How about ordering people to physically abuse other people? How about creating Fair Game and disconnection? How about infiltrating the US govt? Is all of that “trite and banal”, too?
But you have digressed on to another subject now. May I jog your memory and mention this article was about memory. There was an article recently on here ridiculously comparing Hitler with Hubbard and perhaps you should steer on to that and vent your spleen there.
Is there some kind of rule that states we’re only allowed to discuss the exact subject matter of the day’s post? Or is that just your way of avoiding a difficult question?
Yes Fool memory. As in how the clear/OT Hubbard forgot about his 1st wife when being interviewed by a reporter.
You keep using scamology like El Con Tubbotard did to improve your memory and soon you will forget how to breathe.
“Hubbard, who, may I remind you, started off in this life as a human being like we all do”
He ended off in life as a human being too. Dead in a trailer hiding from the world.
Well, we can both agree that an ad-hominem argument is worthless. However, when you have someone selling–for huge bucks–a program to obtain riches, that same person claims to have followed their own program for decades and yet they are destitute and have produced numerous fraud complaints by former adherents along the way, is it REALLY “ad hominem” to point that out? Hubbard’s life should have been exhibit #1 of how to become a big being. And yet it was, if anything, just the obvious. Even the prolific lies he promoted about himself did not manage to cover that up!
Aside from that, I DID engage with your claim that “the only person in history (Hubbard) who has presented any useful information on what memory is and how it can be recovered and improved, is ridiculed for doing so. Shame on you! So, let’s hear then of any other philosopher’s useful data on what memory is?” And I found your evidence for such a grand claim not just wanting but simply non-existent. Did you conveniently forget that part?
With all this amazing recall why can’t people appearing on Leah’s show—many of whom have attained “Clear” or even various “OT” levels—be trusted when they’re recalling relatively recent events particularly events that repeated themselves ad nauseam in their lives?
If we agree with the cult’s propaganda web site that it’s irresponsible to present “unvetted” recall why would those same folks persistently refuse to vet the statements of a convicted con man who claims to present “science” and pronounced himself “source?” After all, all of our “eternity” hangs in the balance. Surely, at least a bit of due diligence is in order!
And when a scientologist in good standing such as TC offers such vetting why is it a high crime to even read his vetting let alone ponder it?
Why does the tech not work? Why do OT 8’s get cancer. Why dont many have access to old knowledge?
Because there are serious errors in the NOTS tech as discovered by Bill Robertson. And because many have not done Bill Robertson OT levels up to 16. And most never found the OT levels beyond that.
I can give you a few hints:
1) Do Bill Robertsons Excalibur and his OT levels up to 16
2) You have to access the divine areas
3) You have to do your primes as first discovered by Alan Walter
4) Run the Crystal Skull implant
5) Explore the between life areas
6) Find where you came to exist
7) Connect up to former experience and knowledge
8) Continue the good work
Olegerstrom – I’ve never heard of much of this (beyond Bill Robertson). Is there a group that explores these concepts?
Spike, sorry, I am on my own here, no group to refer to. But to boil it down:
1) Clear yourself of case using Bill Robertsons tech.
2) Contact your higher self for advice. (The file clerk as mentioned in Dianetics is a function of the higher self.)
Thanks, olegerstrom.
Spike if you want more on Capt. Bill’s bridge it’s available at the Dror Org. in Israel, Ron’s Org in Switzerland and Mary Freeman in Idaho.
I think Olegerstrom is correct that CBR has gotten a real foothold in Russia and is expanding.
Thank you, KFrancis.
RONS ORG IN RUSSIA
At this link
https://ronsorg.com/register-of-members/
you can see, that there are 17 Rons Orgs in Russia, and 6 in the other former Sovjet territories. Even KAZAKHSTAN has a Rons Org.
Hm, olegerstrom, interesting. Also thanks for the details of your progress through the various levels.
You are welcome Spike. And yes, we did it. But far too few did so. So there is no doubt in my mind, that we will have to do it all over again. But not as a roll back. We will need this lesson as an example of how not to do it. I am sure, that the old man is well aware of this.
And I repeat: RONS ORG IN RUSSIA,
At this link https://ronsorg.com/register-of-members/
you can see, that there are 17 Rons Orgs in Russia, and 6 in the other former Sovjet territories. Even KAZAKHSTAN has a Rons Org.
The big thetan who got all this moving is Max Hauri of Switzerland. His home base is:
https://ronsorg.ch/en/
Russia is that country in the world, where people by the thousands blow all case and go OT.
They have no fancy buildings, and no command structure. They study the materials and grab the meter. When the case is blown, you can forget the meter, and go spiritual. Yesterday I discovered, that I have amazing clairvoyant abilities.
Hello olegerstrom – thanks for the info. Would like to hook up via email. If you are ok with this, perhaps Mike Rinder can put us together.
Yes Spike, let us connect. I hereby authorize Mike to give you my mail address-
olegerstrom, what I see are a few SMTP servers and a couple websites. I see no actual orgs. Pics of all the buildings where the orgs are including addresses. No private residences pls.
p.s. since you claim THOUSANDS of active members in Russia going up the bridge. A pic of a few hundred together should be a piece of cake. Unless you are a liar that is.
Olegerstrom, document (scientifically) one single “OT” ability or check back into the spin bin you escaped from.
Olegerstrom – your gang (the Ron’s Orgers) have seriously squirreled NOTs and probably done more to damage its reputation in the so-called Independent Field than many other practices. I don’t want to get in an argument about it either (Mike doesn’t like it – ha!)
Foolproof wrote: “Olegerstrom – your gang (the Ron’s Orgers) have seriously squirreled NOTs and probably done more to damage its reputation in the so-called Independent Field than many other practices. I don’t want to get in an argument about it either (Mike doesn’t like it – ha!)”
Well, no need to be rude. I think I know your situation. You believed in LRH promises, and was given the works. However you can only go OT in a safe environment. And since the RTC started terrorizing the CoS, the path was closed.
Now we have The Rons Orgs, which is a brilliant network. Thousands and thousands of happy people are opening the gates. Especially in Russia the number of people going spiritual is astounding. But you can also go to Europe and get moving. The old spirit is back.
You see, I started in 1968, when it was all fun and games. A joyfull experience every day in the courseroom and in auditing. And now, the happy days are here again.
“Thousands and thousands of happy people are opening the gates. Especially in Russia the number of people going spiritual is astounding. ”
Proof oleg or you are a pathological liar.
I wrote: “Thousands and thousands of happy people are opening the gates. Especially in Russia the number of people going spiritual is astounding. ”
Wynski commented: “Proof oleg or you are a pathological liar.”
I ask, are there any grown ups here?
olegerstrom, thanks for confirming to those never in scamology that its adherents are trained liars.
Hey Wynski – if I may interject ..
“Be kind whenever possible. It is always possible.”
Dalai Lama
Spike when someone is promoting a dangerous, family destroying, killing cult it isn’t time to be nice. Being nice in the face of something like that is a good way to get people hurt. THAT isn’t “nice”.
Hello Wynski – I understand what you’re saying, however, I don’t think anyone posting here is trying to promote people joining the church or remaining in it. I find it interesting to hear the many different viewpoints that are found on this blog, including people who have remained in the field (either for a time or still doing it).
Per Mike, “It is my intention to do everything I can to:
– Expose the abuses ongoing in the church, through this blog, other media, law enforcement and elected officials to bring the abuses to an end.
– Help provide information to anyone looking for the truth about the church.
– Provide a forum for the exchange of information.”
The forum for the exchange of information runs better without the sarcasm, labelling and attack mode that you often assume. You don’t want to parallel the behaviour of the church, right? That is what they would do.
Hence my comment from the Dalai Lama about treating people with kindness (allowing them to speak, essentially.)
Spike, the cult is not just the church. It is the cult of Hubbard. Sorry, but you are wrong and too Pollyanna like.
LOL Wynski
Ok. Can’t disagree with some of the things you say. There are however other groups in the field.
Anybody thinking Scientologists are just ISIS in suits? If you don’t join us we will destroy you. Sound familiar?
That’s a mighty retarded comparison. Next time you get a thought like that, let it go please.
/No, I do not
Yes Chris …..$cintology is like ISIS
Instead of flying you into buildings
$cientology destroys your family; financially ruins you utterly
And as Jamie Dewolf states “flatlines your mind”
Ok here is the 64 thousand dollar question. Every NOTs auditor and solo auditor frees 10s of thousands of BTs. If so than thousands and thousands of humans since 1967 have come back as OTs with no case, no BTs of their own. Clean as a whistle clear OTs.
If so the percent of sane humans should have sky rocketed and they all would be back in Scientology and/or helping the planet and everyone should be doing so munch better.
Look around, is that the case?
Or does each BT have its own BTs and those BTs have their own BTs, and those BTs have their own BTs ad infinitum? It can’t work both ways. It’s an Escher painting. Absolutely batshit crazy.
This is absolutely the argument that kept me doing OT levels when I was having exactly no personal wins from it. I at least thought I was doing some good societally. When I finally realised that all these millions of BTs should be returning to scn (as they were trained scientologists, thanks to me and all the other OTs auditing) were not doing so, I packed my bags.
Do Bill Robertsons levels.
Er, it is your assumption (only) that “it can’t work both ways”. Or are you hoping that such is the case to support your theory? But from the materials you (sort of) refer to, these actually state “he is in fact a sort of cleared being”. The materials do not state he is a “clean as a whistle cleared OT”. Nor does it state cleared with a capital “C” (denoting a Clear if so). From the same materials we also have the statement “When you get rid of one he goes off and possibly squares around, picks up a body or admires daisies.” Doesn’t say “he joins the Sea Org and becomes Miscavige’s right hand!”, does it? Not saying he couldn’t, and Hubbard (again indirectly) mentions this in the NOTs HCOBs, but “all back in Scientology” – “all” was never stated by anyone. Except you.
And as for your theory about BTs having BTs, this is admittedly excellent speculation from someone who seems to want to throw (fortunately non-existent) spanners in the works, but if true would then invalidate your first (altered as to exact wording) theory and Hubbard’s (non-altered as to wording) theory. Regardless, there is no mention by Hubbard such is the case in any of the materials he wrote on this subject and of course if you wish to prove him wrong then simply don’t receive any Advanced Course auditing as it is “all hopeless anyway”. But then don’t worry about others doing so – I am sure they can make up their own minds as to your excellent speculation on this.
Interesting. What is your theory about this? Do you think that BTs who have been blown off are “BT free”? And is a being without BTs in better shape than one who has them? You are allowed to have your own thoughts, you don’t just have to quote a few words from Ron. This is not the CoS.
Also curious about where the new thetans that DO have BTs come from? Is there a sort of reserve of thetans with BTs sitting somewhere that occupies new bodies as they are added to earths population? Because there are twice s mNy of them now as there were 100 years ago…
These are NOT sarcastic questions. I am curious what you think?
So if Body Thetans are “BODY” thetans, how then is it that they are attaching to thetans without bodies?
And, indeed, if the world population has increased exponentially since Elron first invented scientology, then the Bee Tees should be exponentially diluted – and – if there are so many millions of scientologists (per IAS claims) then the Bee Tees should be vastly dwindling in number. Problems supposedly caused by them should be so few that one might have an annoying twitch and choose to ignore it as it has so little influence on one’s life.
But then…one could argue that the whole thing is complete and utter bullish!t so, of course, applying logic to it is a waste of time. Think I’ll just go decorate my house for this week’s trick-or-treaters…much more fun ?
“Cor blimey” as my Brit friends say. The term “body thetan” denotes a being in the vicinity of the body, that is all. It was just a term invented by Hubbard for want of a better definition. And you have totally misunderstood the whole concept of BTs and I am not going to bother explaining it to you even further. Have fun decorating.
I can’t think of anything more absurd than someone trying to “explain BTs”, since there’s no such thing and all.
Goodo! Don’t worry about it then!
A BT is a single being. A cluster is a group of beings. Yes, having done OTIII and hundreds of hours of Solo NOTs then yes, I can say quite categorically that I am better off without them (and their cases). Empirical. And they are better off as well, of course. There are squirrel groups who actually promote one should keep hold of them – well, good luck with that!
As to the original theory on BTs that is partly presented in the 1952 tape “Anatomy of the Theta Body” with: “These incidents are responsible for the preclear being “softened- up” to a point where he can be influenced by having a hypnotized soul thrown at him. You will find the marks of these souls on every preclear. They are the basics on demon circuits.” There was also some other data from Hubbard as part of the OTVI Course on “Psychs and the Whole Track” which gave some more details on the genus of BTs but apart from that I myself am not privy to any other data on this and (the details anyway) are somewhere up in the realm of para-Scientology, for me anyway. I do have an inkling of it though. And yes, from my own personal session experiences, what Hubbard states is more or less correct.
As to where do other or “new” thetans come from (“landing” on planet Earth is what you mean), I haven’t got a clue apart from the obvious answer of “somewhere else in the universe”. Hubbard’s theory that they are dumped here as revolutionaries or criminals (like Wynski – haha!) or whatever seems to be quite a valid explanation and I have never heard of a better one.
OK, it was sort of an effort to respond I guess. The first half is resorting to Hubbard as the only source of information, though I asked for YOUR thoughts on this. The source references you quote don’t actually answer the question.
As for the last paragraph — are you meaning to say that someone else is now “dumping” thetans here now? Are they transported in DC 8’s? Dropped into volcanoes? Are these thetans different than BT’s and Clusters? If they are not frozen in glycol how do they get here? And once here, who unfreezes them? What exactly is “Hubbard’s theory” to which you ascribe? (PS: What is the theory behind being able to freeze a thetan in glycol when a thetan has no part of the physical universe).
Why should I have a different or “my” theory when the one that Hubbard has provided answers all of the questions for me? Is there some sort of compulsion here about having to have one’s own thoughts. I have just bought a new watch and have then read the little manual that goes with it and I don’t have a compulsion to invent my own way of setting up the watch, I just read the manual and hey presto – the watch works!
I have answered your question already about the last paragraph. The OTIII data you are imparting (and trying to belittle are you not?) occurred 74 million years ago – but as to how thetans are being dumped here now I haven’t got a clue – but they are coming from somewhere eh?
Well, I was asking your thoughts about this as Hubbard DOESNT answer these questions. You dont have a view, that’s OK. There is no “compulsion” — the questions I posed do NOT have an answer provided by Hubbard which is why I asked what your understanding and thought was.
Your treat any question as a “belittling” which is sort of sad.
Incident 2 was 75 million years ago. Your response is “I havent got a clue” what the answer to your question is, but you are belittling me by asking it?
Huh?
This is why I asked the questions — they puzzle me as to how they fit into the OT III theory of life on earth.
OK, one last question and it is not intended to belittle you, though it may be taken that way by you.
How do you freeze a thetan in glycol when a thetan has no mass, wavelength etc etc?
The answer to this is of course quite simple and not esoteric or mysterious at all. I simply know that the BTs I audit do not have BTs. The same as when one can “see” and know that it is a cluster. Quite simple. Now, even if they did possess their own BTs per the “theory” above, then I have achieved my goal and secondarily the BT’s by getting him to key out of the valence he is stuck in whereupon he leaves and does whatever he does, so it doesn’t matter anyway. But one can spot a BT or a cluster. If one can’t then one has no business being on III or above. Does that answer your question?
Actually OTIII per the handwritten materials is “75,000,000 (a bit less)” which would make it somewhere in the realm of 74 million as I stated.
Now it is 30 years or so since I did III but again the materials state “He brought people to Teegeeack” I find nothing on glycol or thetans (without bodies) being put in little boxes which as I recall was the picture on the front cover of Dianetics Evolution of a Science as were the DC8s. Looking through all of my materials I find no reference to this or DC8s and the only reference on this I can find on the net seems to be an additive from Jon Atak, which of course if true explains all the confusion. There is 1 other possible source and that is one of the Class VIII tapes on Listing and Nulling which might contain this but nevertheless it is not important to the running of it. Nope it’s not there either! So – “people” are not “thetans frozen in glycol”. So either people have been dubbing in this DC8 and glycol thing or someone has added it in to the III materials outside the Church, or there is another unknown reference. To me it seems that someone has been dubbing in the glycol and DC8s to the OTIII materials, but I stand to be corrected. And as I say, it is an unimportant factor to running it anyway.
Does that answer all your questions now?
Here, let me help you out, as your understanding of Hubbard’s OT materials is apparently pretty limited. I thought you considered yourself an expert on “the tech” which is why I had asked you the questions — believe me when you have to study every OT refrerence and NOTs tape and HCOB in the course of litigation, you get to know them pretty well. Hubbard’s materials do NOT answer all my questions which is why I asked you for your understanding but now I realize that was pointless.
Here are a couple of the references about freezing thetans in glycol and DC8’s. These are from L. Ron Hubbard, not Jon Atack or David Miscavige.
HCOB 12 Aug 1969RB Case Supervisor Actions:
Alcohol produces it’s effect by rapidly burning up the vitamin B1 and foods in the body. This pulls a Thetan into the resulting low area. The delusions of alcohol are almost entirely from R6. Animals, Religion, God, Sex, Perversion. The R6 bank was implanted while the Thetan was caught in a compound of frozen Alcohol and Glycol. Use of Alchohol restimulates the R6 Bank.
This is from the Class VIII tape “Assists”:
The trick was to shoot somebody, disable somebody, very often a needle into a lung, and at the same time to hit him with frozen alcohol and glycol, which preparation is guaranteed to pick up a thetan. All they had to do was pick him up and put him into a refrigerator, and they had him boy. Because if he tried to exteriorize from the body, there he was frozen. And they threw him into collection points. Boxed them up in boxes, threw them into space planes which are the exact copies?… DC8’s, the DC8 aeroplane is the exact copy of the space plane of that day. No difference. Except the DC8 had fans, propellers on it and the space plane didn’t.
Maybe instead of just trying to dismiss things as being “squirrel” or “you don’t understand, but I do” you should stop and THINK.
Now, I ask you the same question again — how do you freeze a thetan in glycol?
Another insane thing Hubtard wrote. Those intergalactic space craft have WINGS. WTF? There would be no point in having wings. There is no air in space and anything with enough thrust to go MUCH faster than light would have no use for them in an atmosphere.
He wasn’t even educated enough to make up pretend spaceships that made sense.
It always amazes me that people can buy that dribble. The logistical numbers and the sheer volume of so many bodies being loaded onto “space aircraft (1960 design earth) with wings,” and then transported across the galaxy. What in squadron formation or a ferrying situation? No mention of landing runways or any ground grew with forklifts and equipment to physically move such a volume of cargo to mountainous terrain… geezers H! It’s all a pipe dream to say the very least. I guess the glycol manufactures were happy though in this dream.
I know military logistics quite well and easily conclude that a such a story is presented in the same context as Noah’s animal saving aspirations with an ark made from hand hewn timber the week before the clouds starting forming – yeah right!
BK – 76 million years of past lives
Bee Tees of infinity
Equals a shit ton of $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ for $cientology
S.C.A.M.
Is it true that L Ron Hubbard was an enema addict?
Warm wine?
Warm wine? WARM WINE??? Blasphemy!
?
An enema addict? No, I don’t think so; he was full of shit all the time.
Ohhhh boy… I’ll join RB on his hiatus on this one. Don’t know what you’re smoking this week Terra, hope it’s fun but I’ll pass tku.
Whoah! Another dissenting comment! I thought dissenters (to the presented theme or article) had been driven away from this blog! After this I might donate to IAS! Just joking on the latter idea of course.
Well somehow you managed to outdo yourself with this one Terra. From the heaviest number crunching I’ve ever seen, and excellent analogy btw, to nearly hysterical. Good one indeed, every Scientologist should have a copy. Damn!
I joined the Sea Org instead of finishing high school. I had the privilege of doing Method One word clearing while on the RPF. A few hours with a dictionary and an old textbook got me no closer to solving quadratic equations and/or recovering my whole track math skills.
A decade after escaping the Sea Org, the local community college fixed the Algebra thing by offering a course in Algebra.
Oh, I just can’t help myself.
Isn’t that what OT8 says, it’s not you, never has been you, or ever will be you and that your whole track is comprised of BTs memories, incidents etc. Per memory (no pun intended) I seem to recall a passage from an early 50s tape where Hubbard stated something like, “thetans are being injected into the MEST universe all the time, they don’t last very long.” (implied – until they become part of it such as BTs, then MEST bits and pieces etc and all by (enforced) consideration) and then the next universe down the line after this one is something like a mud universe. (The MEST universe is just a part of a cycle of universes).
Space cooties are the villains here. They have the past or potential abilities of which we seek out of the ether, and the memory of all that wholetrack stuff, via sharing the same body address we think is exclusively ours. Don’t you just hate freeloaders? Plus, I don’t think BTs like us very much, they blame us for ALL their problems and exist for no other reason than to fuck things up for us. Don’t forget without a BTs influence, a casual view of anything will as-is, havingness is a direct link. There’s Scientology’s explanation of life for you.
Even at a wild drunken guess, if it’s only slightly impossibly true in a made up scenario think tank – OK Hubby boy – WTF now? More bs plus discipline equals more money I suppose. That’s Davy’s job.
Geezers, think about it for a sec, freedom from amnesia on the whole track… of course! There’s very little of it that was yours to remember anyway!
Bit of a disappointment Scientology.
Now this one really takes the attempted jocular technical biscuit, chews it up and spits it out! Let us take “Don’t forget without a BTs influence, a casual view of anything will as-is, havingness is a direct link. There’s Scientology’s explanation of life for you.” Which HCOB, book or tape states that? And by “anything”, do you mean engrams? Now it is only up at (the old) OT8 where a casual view of “anything” (let’s say engrams then) will as-is such. And I’ve never had a BT blame me for any of my problems. And even the OT8 thing is an alter-is as it is not just BTs that may have been responsible for one’s mis-owned memories. And BTs having (one’s) “past or potential abilities”? I don’t recall one Hubbard reference on that either. And BTs “not liking us”? Well, yours may not like you, but Hubbard’s statement on them is completely the opposite wherein he states that most BTs are benign. And no, one’s whole track is not just composed of BT memories, parts of it may be and that is what even the new watered down OTVIII sorts out. Your memories are your memories.
So when you want to ridicule Yawn, please get the technical matters correct firstly, before just spewing out your dubbed-in wildly exaggerated technical drivel and hoping that everyone nods sagely and doesn’t contradict your nonsense.
Hubbard’s stuff to me is your last paragraph exactly. I’ve never, ever agreed with space cootie tek after I realised it didn’t work, was bs and I spent a fortune on it, got ripped off and had my family ripped apart by scientology. Maybe you need to read Dianetics again and build a better Bridge, entities and all.
What are you – a Scientology Thought Policeman?
I’ll bet you’d correct me on Donald Duck sayings too.
I’ll damn well ridicule any thief who stole off me, fucked up my family & friends as I see fit.
Very nice not to like you too. Go play gay with yourself!
Yawn, believe it or not I am sorry you were ripped off and mishandled at Flag or wherever. I can quite believe that the “Bridge” you received didn’t work for you, but then that is my main objection to Miscavige’s Church, which many here seem to think I represent but is far from it. You obviously don’t believe in the BT thing which is fine. So, ok.
I tried really hard to make it work.
Bit late and being on the other side of the planet makes it difficult, but does your “Bridge” work?
This going back and forth using references and is it what Hubbard said? Where’s your MU, have you seen or read this reference etc etc. I’ve known many many smarter people than I who gobbled that stuff up and to cut a long story short will have nothing to do with that bullshit anymore! The cycle of study technology is a trap in itself, it introverts all around a base of you’re wrong if your not VGIs with it, it’s never the source of what you’re studying!
I’m not silly myself and gave Hubbard the benefit of the doubt, studied the NOTs pack many times, both while in Scientology and when out. I know an awful of people who don’t like it, in fact I don’t know any who do. The NOTs pack in particular is the most out of sequence, dropped pudding of a mess I’ve ever tried to put practice to, it’s doesn’t work! “Source” at OT3 on the Bridge is bs imo as well.
You do whatever your training or argumentative tendencies guide you to do – hope you’re spiritually free with it all, otherwise WTF are you doing?
And as far as is it or is it not a BT thing, I was fine with following along with my understanding of Hubbard through GPMs, R6EW, the CC back in the day. Power before that was “fun” but this BT approach is Hubbard’s trip and case. Is it yours as well? Are you two the best of buddies with it all? Free as birds?
I’ve met many of your kind before in the Cof$, none I’ve seen have ever been successful with it, hypnotised with it – yes many are – maybe you are an exception, or maybe you simply have to be.
Yes, I Yawnalot.
I am one of those who had wins of magnitude. At II my EP was, that my time track, which before was bundled, not straightened out in a fine line. At III I had wonderfull reunions with beings I had loved in the past. The air was full of music. I named it “music of the spheres.” Next I had NOTS auditing by Merril Mayo (according to LRH “the finest auditor in the world.)” She also trained me on Solo NOTS. I continued on Capt. Bills Excalibur. This lasted a few years, every session was a joy. The EP was, that I unfolded as a being. Before that, I had been like a paper ball crushed together. But here I unfolded. Hard to describe the wonder. It was accompanied by me running Inc. I, fully as described in the materials. For me this was all true OT, although I did not achieve any Ext. I was fully satisfied nevertheless. My thanks to the old man shall stand through all of time.
Mike is not letting me reply to Wnyski’s vitriolic stuff which is probably fine actually as it is a waste of time but I would like to reply to your questions as they are genuine and not fueled with malice towards me because of my viewpoint.
Yes the NOTs pack was originally a (relative) mish-mash as it was more or less taken directly from dictaphone recordings from Hubbard and the spelling, grammar and sequences were poor, certainly in relation to all other HCOBs. But the Church I believe corrected that in 1991, mostly anyway, and correctly added many more questions in for each rundown. Mithoff did a video presentation at Flag about this in 1991.
What is a little known fact outside the realms of the OTVI courseroom is that Solo NOTs has a slightly different tech than Audited NOTs and many people in the field have been wrongly using Audited NOTs procedures for their Solo NOTs. Pierre Ethier describes this in more detail on his blog for those who want more information on this. If you only use Audited NOTs for your Solo NOTs you will eventually grind to a halt.
As to Study Tech it seems Miscavige has messed this up with his “new” Student Hat but of more concern for me was the trend in the early to mid 80s of training supervisors as martinets who started treating students as their “enemies” to be squashed like a bug, and which as far as I can ascertain, originated at Flag. From my post in Qual I almost had to slap supervisors around the head a la Miscavige when they came back from Flag (or the FOLO) to stop behaving like assholes towards their students, as well as their learned robotism. They had copied this behavior from what they had picked up at Flag, I think from the OEC/FEBC and the Hard TRs courses, which had also filtered down somehow to the FOLO training areas. They also perpetrated other basic errors, like asking students for all definitions of words in a checkout in an effort to make the student wrong and flunk him, even when the student had given an adequate contextual reply. And “pouncing” on a student when he has a cognition about something and forcing them to “find their MisU” when they didn’t have one (as they were looking at the ceiling as they cognited) etc.This sort of crap. The 3 swing F/N thing was another example. In other words these “supervisors” were being deliberately unkind towards people who should be regarded as their friends – students. And mis-applying what they had learned was “supervisor tech”.
You won’t have met many like me after the mid 80s as a huge bulk of the technically trained people were removed, usually after objecting to the ravages of “management” under Miscavige’s tutelage, so please don’t tar me with that brush.
As for OTIII you are aware that “disbelief” as such is embedded in the implant? I ran it and got enormous gains and the relief when they blew was outstanding each time. OTII was also dynamite for me as well.
Yes, the tech works for me. I hope to finish Solo NOTs within a year and I get good gains every session. You are aware that Solo NOTs can be regarded as several (pre) OT levels per a 1981 HCOB? But whether I do the “watered down” OTVIII is another matter – I probably will. Haha!
So I hope that answers your questions and maybe clears up a few things for you.
Oooops, sorry. Guess I should be crediting Terra Incognita. ?. In any case, a GREAT post. ?
Mike – this is one of funniest, cutting and satirical posts you’ve yet written! The section on Total Recall had me choking on my breakfast waffles. ? The paragraph ending with “Something to do with gluten, maybe?” had me laughing so loud my wife thought I was having a stroke. I LOVE IT. You are the Don Rickles of COS critics. Keep up the good work.
This is our regular guest correspondent Terra Cognita — I do not write these.
Hubbard probably copied the idea of the whole track from Theosophy and the 19th Century spiritualist movement. The concept was also covered extensively by Blavatsky. They all wrote well before the discoveries in quantum physics. There are references in Hindu literature to a “theta” like substance capable of storing all of the memories of the known universe. Hubbard took old ideas and used them to his own personal needs.
It was all designed to make himself right and others wrong. Hubbard was weak in math.
There were even greater contradictions in Scientology in 1988 when I did OT8. Hubbard claimed that the level removed amnesia on the “whole track”. History of Man was totally based on Theosophy in the writings of Blavatsky’s followers. It is interesting that there was a journal named “Lucifer” published in Theosophy in the 1900’s. In the OT8 narrative Hubbard claimed to have been in the role of Lucifer when he discovered Scientology. Hubbard also claimed his anti-Christ role and his role as the “Savior Buddha” as well which was copied from Theosophy. Scientology was nothing but re-hashed occult.
Exactly, the shells left on the rocky beach or the Sparrows they call us Sea wreck survivors, we all know the real man behind the Devils mask
Thanks, Diane.
George wow, this made me think of Akashic records for the first time in, oh 30 years. (I know, I’m carbon dating myself). Do you think that’s what Hubbard, umm you know…paraphrased/embellished/claimed?
Difficult to know for certain. I think he was aware of them and used whatever he could for his own ends.
I wake with each of your posts, in those early hours I sit and remember my childhood, (so thanks again for your pages you share). In disclosure I will remind everyone of the name Terror Cotta, it’s the name of one of many Suspended Elevation Crafts designed by the J. P. L. and NASA, first built with the help of my father, a contractor moved from Parsons in the late 50s.
Research who and where the man L. Ron Hubbard was and the projects he was involved with. The Occult Rocket Scientist Who Conjured Spirits with L. Ron Hubbard, Jack Parsons and Hubbard entered OTO, in 1946 But Hubbard helped Parsons on the grandest magical working he had yet attempted. This was known as the Babalon Working, hence the Devils Gate Dam was opened as a port hole.
We moved as children to South Pasadena when I was 4 the house I lived in was 100 feet from the burnt down mansion, although my father worked on disclosed projects, I will not stop telling the truth, when I say I escaped Scientology, the memories will haunt me till I die.
Interesting you mention Parsons and Hubbard. I watched a show last night that claimed they ushered in the UFO era by dabbling in occult (black magic) practices that were inspired by Allister Crowley. It aggravated Crowley because they were using his methods and he said they had no idea what they were doing.
There are those that believe that UFO aliens want to help humanity while others believe they are dark forces intent on humanities doom.
Very interesting, Diane. You are a valuable source of information. There is so little known about Parsons and Hubbard. I read Parsons’ book and he was very much into women’s rights after the war. Do you have any other info to share with us?
Diane, it makes me angry as hell to read and hear about everyone’s personal experiences within $cientology and how they are hell bent on destroying people who leave and speak publicly about it.
I don’t know the details of your story but I’m very sorry for everything you endured and wish you peace and happiness going forward.
Soooo many questions, yet so few answers to be had from any cult source that you might attempt to seek them from!
Indeed, we know beyond any possibility of doubt that $cn is a very high control group (let’s just call it a cult for short) because none of these very pertinent and logical questions can even be voiced within the cult, because to do so is strictly against cult rules and will very quickly get your inquisitive ass sent to review your materials, find your MU’s and, if that doesn’t shut you up, then it’s off to ethics to find out what’s wrong with YOU, not with the infallible Word of Elron.
The meta-level question that every duped and defrauded $ciloon should be asking themselves and their fellow co-cultists is: Why in Xenu’s name can’t we exercise our own free will and self-determinism by having open, honest and in depth discussions concerning whatever aspects of $cn that we choose!!? We’re not little children who lack the mature cognitive processing abilities to do so, we’re adults who’re fully capable of coming to our own conclusions regarding $cn!
Harpoona: I like your question about why we can’t have open honest and in depth discussions concerning whatever aspects of $cn that we choose. You’re so right.
Harpoona — excellent post. That’s one of the main aspects of $cientology that makes me crazy. How can members fail to see that not allowing them to speak freely about the so-called “tech” (or pretty much anything regarding $cientology) — or having open discussions about their own experiences — is a very clever way to control them and keep the lies and empty promises from being acknowledged?? Hubbard was one deceitful son of a bitch.
It is accomplished by hate, torture, physical and mental abuse and most of all fear.
Sickening cult.
The concept I have of the brain is that it’s a sort of switchboard, a physical connection between the body and the spirit or “Thetan” in Scientologese. That is a common belief outside of Scientology. Body, Mind, Spirit, etc. Of course it’s not something that is easy to prove. I don’t believe it’s possible to prove that the brain is everything either though. Life is a mystery.
Any problem can be solved. Any subject of knowledge can be studied to become an expert. Any ability can be gained. All with Scientology… for a nominal fee.
This is the fundamental summary of Scientology, all of which is conveniently invalidated with a sneakily-written legal document every gullible person, I mean Public, has to sign before entering these breathtaking and awesomely-inspiring promotions claim, yet cannot be backed up.
On this line of thinking, the materials cannot even be verified by peer review. There is only one Authority in Scientology, L Ron Hubbard. This is the foundation of a Cult, where the Ego is raised to the Godlike dynamic.
*snort* “for a nominal fee”….. My pink and perky butt!
Just an aside, what did the first courses cost. Did they begin as expensive as they are today? Back in the day when I lost my mind for about two point three seconds, I checked dainetics out from the library. Thought it was the biggest piece of drivel ever written. Still any author can write a bad book, so I checked out the next one was well. For me two strikes was enough. But I wonder when Hubbard began his ponzi scheme? When did he actually begin to steal from people?
Like Mike Rinder has mentioned on Aftermath, the courses start at a low-rate for the Life Improvement courses in the Public classroom. After a few of those, they move you up to the Academy taking regular courses like Dianetics. They try to do it in the exact order that LRH researched the material starting in 1950, so you get the wholesome experience as LRH discovered the materials (aka the tech). Now imagine while you’re doing these courses, there is a drill sergeant standing over you looking for any grimaces, flinches, or inappropriate response. Should any of these occur, you are interrogated to find the reason for your non-optimal behavior while reading LRH’s materials. Should this occur, the answer is usually Word Clearing or some other Method to find a Misunderstood Word. It is designed to keep you engaged in the material via what is called Uptone behavior (optimal behavior), but it feels more like a Draconian teaching method if you’re the student.
After you are well indoctrinated into this, they will begin putting you onto the higher tiered services on the bridge that cost $1,000s of dollars. This gradient you are supposed to be working out your spiritual issues, such as transgressions against other beings, etc. This is called auditing, but most students cannot afford professional auditing that costs 100s per day. So they co-audit with another student to ‘save money’ and only spend the $1,000s that the course itself costs. By the end of it, you are maxing out credit cards and taking out a second mortgage on your house because it is the registrar’s job to see to it that you reach total spiritual freedom and not worry about MEST things, like a roof over your head, a well-balanced meal, or money for your children’s future. These things are supposed to magically fall into place if you reach Clear, the end goal of co-auditing.
After Clear, you’re supposed to go onto OT levels where you are a Master over MEST. You should be a millionaire by now according to the registrars because you ‘Command MEST’. All that debt is supposed to magically vanish when you start operating as a thetan (aka Spiritual being). You are well above the general populace. This is the level where I like to compare it to the Archangel Michael. That would be a good comparison from my viewpoint to a OT being. By this point, you should have ‘donated’ atleast $100,000, and some may be into $1,000,000 figures.
The above is imagination. In reality, you end up penniless or in heavy debt, having to start all over once you realize that the universe operates the same as the first day you took that Life Improvement course. Of course, you are still free to think your ‘eternal spiritual freedom’ has improved whilst you rummage through a dumpster or sleep in your car.
Wonderful Terra. Just Brilliant.
Slappy will answer all your questions when he releases OTX !
“Why do so many non OTs live longer than OTs?” My take on it is stress. They don’t have any super duper powers and at some level, they know it’s a fraud. But, they keep the charade going. It’s what they do…
The winds are calling from a planet far, far away and only OTs can hear it. (sigh)
I must say that’s quite the statement, non OTs live longer than OTs. My mother worked for well over 50 years as a nursing sister with many experiences in many areas concerning life and death, especially war casualties and their (often experimental) treatments. When she first started her training the average lifespan of male patients that ended up in medical facilities was between 50 & 60. Bit different these days hey? This area of analysis of the human condition will always encompass just too many variables, the truth of yesterday becomes tomorrow’s fallacy.
Using death as a measure of human success or failure of a technology, especially of the mind, geezers, look at history, messy isn’t it? And Scientology is a part of that history, along with ECT, LSD and a whole host of, “I sure hope this works…” or ” wow, the money’s good with this approach.”
Life – what a trip!
“The winds are calling from a planet far, far away . . . ” I once read a series of books called “The Star People” or something like that. It suggested that aliens long ago imprinted early humanoids with genetic traces which are now activating in some humans. I fit the profile but I didn’t take it too seriously.
Stress will kill ya, plus all that introversion. Crap! I can’t imagine slogging away at NOTS for decades!?
Oh, c’mon Spike! Do you have something better to do for the next few decades?
Totally, OSD … playing bass in my band comes to mind. Can’t wait to retire and do it full-time. You?
Hey, Spike, join the club. I’m retired, playing music more or less full time, doing what I always wanted to do. I wish you the best with it.
Xcellent, Bixntram, live life! What is your instrument?
You ask the most enchanting and probing questions. The midget should be presented with these and challenged to give us the answers! LOL
I keep seeing TC’s character in A Few Good Men. I want the TRUTH. Jack Nicholson snapping back *You can’t handle the truth*. Corner your diminutive running buddy and see how he feels about telling the truth.
The way I see it, all true believers and card carrying cult members live on Hubbard’s ‘fantasy island’ which includes a vast farm of slaves and caters to rich patrons. It’s located in a bubble universe that’s parallel to the universe most mortals (Wogs) live in but is much superior in all ways so the promotion says.
NOTE: Fantasy Island was an American television series that originally aired on the ABC network from 1977 to 1984. It starred Ricardo Montalbán as the mysterious Mr. Roarke who grants the fantasies of visitors to the titular island for a price$$$. BTW the island was managed by a midget.
To continue, Upon arrival and thereafter each inhabitant of fantasy island is under heavy indoctrination and slyly hypnotized into believing Scientology is the long awaited UBER operating system, which if flawlessly followed without a single doubt or the slightest deviation –it will eventually transform them into an Übermensch (German for “Beyond-Man”, “Superman”, “Overman”, “Superhuman”, “Hyperman”, “Hyperhuman” (borrowed from Friedrich Nietzsche) who WILL be able to effortlessly fulfill any fantasy desired including the certainty that they will never be the effect of anything or anyone ever again.
Oh yeah this operating system will also boot the entire culture into a mega renaissance where OT Scientologists rule and the only ‘tek’ allowed is Scientology.
Hubbard’s occult guru, Aleister Crowley summed it up succinctly in these two quotes:
“Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law.”
“I have never grown out of the infantile belief that the universe was made for me to suck.”
Some people believe do what though wilt just means not allowing oneself to be subjugated. Crowley still has followers and they might not necessarily be bad actors.
Deliciously snarky column today, TC! Went very nicely with my coffee.
Keep in mind, if I understand it correctly, that all those googals of sand are other beings (BTs) memories (OT8). I haven’t run the math, but I suspect, that once we remember our own past lives (OTs 9-15?) that will translate into gilligoogals.
Mind boggling..
https://youtu.be/rSfebOXSBOE
Well, when he comes back someone needs to look him square in the face and say “You gotta lot of esplainin to do Lucy. May the answer can be found in that Mason jar on Funk and Wagnell’s porch.
Anymore, when I see that picture of big blue I am reminded of an earlier bunch of buffoons who visited the Cedars of Lebanon Hospital (as it was called back then) in 1934. I am referring to the movie “Men in Black” starring Moe Howard, Larry Fine, and Curly Howard. Some of us are old enough to remember them as “The Three Stooges”.
Oh, and TC: So many questions !!! What do your materials say? Please clear up your MUs ! /S
“Men in Black?” Gotta look that one up. Woop, woop, woop woop, woop!
Would you please stop making sense!!!
OK then. Speaking of numbers- if we all just keep coming back over and over, i.e. you may have been my son in the last life, now you are my daughter, or spouse (um…ew) yada, yada, yada. Then all the same number of people just keep returning. The population would not grow, if Uncle Jed died but came back as Aunt Susie, then that is still ONE. So all the same souls just keep returning over and over. I am unclear (pardon the pun) as to where/how either the population or the Enrollment of Scientology could grow.
Signed-
Confuse and Unclear
The increase in population is due to BT’s picking up their own bodies once released through auditing …. Don’t change know!
That’s “don’t cha know” !
See, even with the ability to edit, I still screwed up…. Lol ?
There are legitimate religions that answer that question in a logical way. Borrowing the concept of reincarnation, in which people incarnate over and over again (not necessarily a finite number of souls in the universe) to work out universal lessons or karma is not the weird part of Scientology (and it is borrowed from much older theologies). That would be using a belief system to abuse people, rip them off fraudulently, treat minors like meat and run the entire operation like a banana republic dictatorship. We need to be respectful of different ideologies that may share similarities and concentrate our criticism on what makes CoS toxic. Otherwise we could slam Christian beliefs for what some so-called Christian cults believe (I’ve heard communion called cannibalism by those who misinterpret it). It’s not the dogma per se, but the application.
Excellent, TC! Have you ever thought about the so called statistics “management”, with never ever stat analysis whatsoever?
Well Terra, I suppose you will need to make an appearance on ‘The Aftermath’ if you ever expect to get on the Ess Pee Honor Roll. Dave just doesn’t have the balls to announce that yet another long time $cientologist is awake and has given Him the proverbial finger!
Yo Dave,
Question good buddy ………… How is it that with millions of worldwide members that You can only manage to get 6000 or so to sign the petition to try and stop the A&E show? People are not listening to You Dave. You are showing Your ‘loser’ attributes. Time for more scotch! Call Julian and have him handle it.
Yo Julian,
How are those stats lookin? Are your declares up from last week? Get on it!
BTW, I have yet to see my written declare. My kids and ex wife said you were going to have someone contact me with your findings but that was nearly five years ago. Too busy? Other fish to fry? Derilict? Don’t care? Said something that was not true? These are all traits of a long time cult member so I understand.
Take the rest of the day off Julian, you deserve it.
Newcomerr what happened with your exwife? Did the cos tell here to leave you. If so that is just fucked up.
Hay, you forgot one; Why’s the sky blue LRH? ( Ya kinda have to be a baby boomer to understand that question…grumble grumble grumble)
Because they’re allowed to go to the doctor? Maybe? They don’t have to wait for a magical round of “auditing” *rolls eyes* to heal them?
Gluten?!? LMAO Lets hand out crackers at protests
I’m so sorry Mike that you had to be in SCIENTOLOGY so long but now that wealth of knowledge sure is coming in handy for the path you are on now helping others, I used to watch shows like panorama mesmerized by watching you, you were so harsh so cold so brainwashed sorry! When I saw you again especially now all I see is an amazing man with a huge heart,kind great husband great father , you are like night and day and even better looking because your insides reflect your out,it all matches! I’m just saying I like the Mike Rinder I see now!
The length of life is entirely subjective, right? I know of no studies.
David Attenborough would disagree with your comment I would image.