Scientology abandoned by Hubbard's granddaughter & Miscavige's father

He was actually a decent, though not exemplary, SF writer, sold quite a few books.

His real career was as a con man though, you would even have to say he was a shining star. Many more people were duped into believing his fictional religion than reading his fiction.

An interesting clip from a previous link about someone who left Scientology: http://markrathbun.wordpress.com/2010/04/29/failed-mission-review/ (end of blog post):

All my successes in my Sea Org career came from the application of real Scientology and an unshakable faith in my fellow group members. If you ever worked with me on some of my larger projects you will know what I mean. My decision to leave, when I did and how I did was carefully thought out and calmly decided upon and executed. Was it difficult? Damn right it was. Did I have a “good life” up to the last day? Yes, in a materialistic sense. I wasn’t in trouble, I was in good standing and trusted. But I have 8 dynamics and I could no longer support actions that were diametrically opposite to all I learned in the SO and Scientology over the last 34 years.

Some of the worst critics of the church still hold that Mr. Hubbard's teachings are worthwhile -- a separation of the method from the current church leadership.

This person (as far as I can tell) isn't involved in Freezone. What's interesting to me is that of those who you'd think would be most informed about the "con," ex-higher ups, we sometimes see praise for Scientology the method, if not Scientology the church.

That is an amazing bit of fiction. Arguably some of the most compelling writing ever. Maybe not on par with the Bible, but we don't know what the next thousand years will bring...
 
Some of the worst critics of the church still hold that Mr. Hubbard's teachings are worthwhile -- a separation of the method from the current church leadership.

Ive known a few scientologists over the years. One of them actually ran the local church here, before selling up his successful business and travelling to the USA to work for the church. Apparently he was barely paid enough to cover his smoking habit, but I digress.

The truth of it, in my limited experience anyway, is that the teachings (via the technical sounding terminology, and a set of rules and procedures) gives people who feel that theyve lost control of their lives a mechanism by which they at least *feel* like theyre regaining control. In my opinion it is nothing more than a placebo, but Im sure there may be those who experience a long term increase in their happiness through application of the "tech" simply because it compels pretty fundamental change in your life, which isnt always a bad thing. Sometimes, any plan is better than no plan.

I dont think scientology offers a path to greater success or happiness in life, and it certainly doesnt even remotely live up to the wild claims that it makes. Several elements of it are very obviously (and provably) nonsense, for example, the e-meter and its application.

The unfortunate side of it is that it *is* very cult-like. The techniques they use to get you in and keep you there are very obviously those of a cult. Therefore, there are probably many people who are not happier, and have not gained a placebo feeling of control, but who are compelled to continue. Despite all the pleadings to the contrary, it is obviously very difficult to leave the church for many people.

One guy I know in particular, *still* gets emotion-laden calls from the church many years after breaking off all contact, to the point where he occasionally still spends good money on books and videos that lay unread and unwatched, simply because he does not know how to say no. (on a side note, when his wife told the callers that if they rang again she would call the police, they stopped calling the house and somehow managed to obtain his new and unlisted mobile phone number - freaky).

Can I claim that all of dianetics has no value? Of course not. But the church has tried hard for decades to strangle any amount of usefulness from it. If it werent for all the nonsense that goes with it, I myself might have read dianetics and perhaps even gained some sort of value from it. Given the baggage it now carries though, I wouldnt touch it with a barge pole.
 
...I told you that even a monkey should be able to beat me in that argument. Apparently some of you are reading and can do internet research.

Not monkeys.
Wogs.
Clears call us 'wogs', after all.
And wogs have a lot of information out on the internet to read, Justinian.

Anyway, I see you're still avoiding my questions.
By the way, what do you do when a PC free-wheels, Justinian?


I'm watching you.

I bet you are, Justinian. But can you watch everyone who reads this thread?

I never met Tommy Davis. ...
That's a shame. He sounds like an interesting guy. Did you ever meet Lisa McPherson?

"...How can we account for this 100:1 disparity? The Church's president, Heber Jentzsch, let slip on a radio programme in 1992 that the Church of Scientology claims as a member every single person who has ever taken even an introductory Scientology course since the Church was founded in 1954. Even leaving aside all those "members" who must now be dead, is this really membership? But ten million makes the Church of Scientology sound a great deal more significant than 100,000. ...''



...Some of the worst critics of the church still hold that Mr. Hubbard's teachings are worthwhile -- a separation of the method from the current church leadership. ...

I'm catching up on the many great links that have been posted up here lately.
Could you give me an idea of which of those techniques stood the test?
Thanks!
 
I'm catching up on the many great links that have been posted up here lately.
Could you give me an idea of which of those techniques stood the test?
Thanks!

I can't. I'm relying on hearsay from what I've read. This comes in the form of general approval of Scientology rather than mentioning specific techniques. As far as I can tell, the criticisms also don't breakdown specifics in any useful way.

So, for example, in this thread, auditing has been mentioned as beneficial (and available just by reading Dianetics -- for cheap) but no attempt has been made to figure out in a scientific manner why it might be helpful. Does the shape of the cans matter? Does the material they are made out of matter? What about room lighting and so on?

Usually, methodology is dismissed wholesale without detailing particulars. It is supported the same way.

I'm not claiming that no one has studied this in a detailed manner, just that I haven't and haven't read about it.
 
Last edited:
Justinian, please answer Myriad's questions.

What can you do that "only" sane people can't, thanks to Scientology / Freezone?
 
I can't. I'm relying on hearsay from what I've read. This comes in the form of general approval of Scientology rather than mentioning specific techniques. As far as I can tell, the criticisms also don't breakdown specifics in any useful way.

So, for example, in this thread, auditing has been mentioned as beneficial (and available just by reading Dianetics -- for cheap) but no attempt has been made to figure out in a scientific manner why it might be helpful. Does the shape of the cans matter? Does the material they are made out of matter? What about room lighting and so on?

Usually, methodology is dismissed wholesale without detailing particulars. It is supported the same way.

I'm not claiming that no one has studied this in a detailed manner, just that I haven't and haven't read about it.
What do you expect? A double-blind randomized controlled trial? Considering the secrecy with which Scientology surrounds itself, you understand, hopefully, that any scientific assessment of "auditing" is out of the question.

As to the E-meter, copies have been picked apart by skeptics, and it turns out to be a crude resistance meter, even cruder than a lie detector. Furthermore, the device must be "calibrated" by the auditor, and there are many eyewitness stories of auditors calibrating it in such a away that the device would always give a negative reading.
 

The second link gives a 404 error message.
Anyway, here's the classic clambake site:
http://www.xenu.net/

Their forum has a thread dedicated to squirrel humour.
I include it because I'm sure Justinian will like it, given his squirrel status.
http://ocmb.xenu.net/ocmb/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=50805

Uf.
A disturbing youtube vid "Scientology: Mark Bunker on Ask an Atheist" from 15 July 2012.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=VNQ3Y2EruBI


But since we have a 'squirrel' here with us 'wogs' I have some more questions for him.

Touch assist?
What's your take on touch assist, Justinian?
 
...auditing has been mentioned as beneficial (and available just by reading Dianetics -- for cheap) but no attempt has been made to figure out in a scientific manner why it might be helpful. Does the shape of the cans matter? Does the material they are made out of matter? What about room lighting and so on?

Usually, methodology is dismissed wholesale without detailing particulars. It is supported the same way.

I'm not claiming that no one has studied this in a detailed manner, just that I haven't and haven't read about it.

Mentioned as beneficial or asserted as being beneficial, marplots?
Did you see the link I posted on the Anderson report?

In any case, http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=VNQ3Y2EruBI

talks about the development of auditing from about 22 minutes onward.

More about e-meters

http://askthescientologist.blogspot.com.es/2010/06/more-on-scientology-e-meter.html
http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=e-meter
http://www.holysmoke.org/cos/ebay-emeter.htm


...On numerous occasions, Headley writes about the fabrication of "e-meters," the small devices that are supposed to work something like lie detectors. Scientologist auditors use them in counseling sessions, but they're also used during interrogations -- called "sec checks" -- during which church workers suspected of wrongdoing are pressured to confess their "crimes."

Headley mentions that the devices cost the church about $40 to make, but were then sold for about $3,000 each. What really caught our attention was Headley's assertion that Miscavige demanded that enough of a new line of e-meters be manufactured so that every member in the world could purchase two of them. (Headley says each working Scientologist is supposed to have a backup unit in case the other fails.)...
-http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/2009/11/tom_cruise_was.php?page=2
 
Justinian? Care to respond to anything? I can understand if you've abandoned the thread. All you've done so far is demonstrate what a crock scientology is. Are you still watching me?
 
Last edited:
Last edited:

Back
Top Bottom