Amazing how much you read into what I said. You tell me what I believe? All who question are evil SPs? Asking for objective evidence from subjective perception? You're so worked up you're revealing yourself. All of this falls way outside the category of intelligent, and so insults are completely appropriate. And it might be instructive for you to analyze your own statements and see how they measure up to your own criteria, eh?
Bill Franks Interviews for UTR folks and new Exes
- Thread starter ILove2Lurk
- Start date
Bill
Gold Meritorious Patron
YOU told me what YOU believed. I didn't claim anything, I said NOTHING about what you believe, you told me what you believe and I accepted it as what you believe. What's your problem?
YOU said you would insult me if I asked for proof. I didn't claim that, YOU SAID IT. Why insult me? BECAUSE I WOULD ASK FOR PROOF. By Hubbard's definition, that is an SP. You would attack me because I was your enemy, whatever you want to call it.
I agreed with you. You said you cannot tolerate criticism (request for proof) and you would ATTACK me for doing so.
You said all that. So, what's your problem? I agreed with you.
Last edited:
You seem incapable of differentiating between therapy and life. All your examples reflect that. Why is that? Did the Sea Org tell you slavery is a process to set you free? Well you were conned. Now get over it.You BELIEVE it brings up things in the subconscious. You BELIEVE they then disappear by repetition. The 35 people killed in 11 post office shootings by postal workers who went nuts doing their repetitive jobs may disagree. They thought shooting everyone up would make it disappear, but that didn't work, either.
Seriously, though - repetition is harmful and there are hundreds, maybe even thousands, of research articles over the last 50 years all over the world to find ways for businesses to eliminate repetition because it makes people zombie-like, unhappy and they make mistakes. Your beliefs are not supported by any research.
The Catholic church used to sell that line of bull, too. It also relieved the congregation - of money. Hundreds of years of exorcisms and still no medically or scientifically documented cases of possessions and successfull exorcisms (cures) ought to be a clue (you'd think).
I'm not surprised you're saying that. They say a sucker is born every day. "Psychic" con-artists have taken money from the grieving and mentally unstable for centuries by claiming to contact their lost loved ones, rid their homes of evil spirits, etc. Some people will always believe they are controlled by unseen spirits and be gullible enough to pay someone to get rid of the bad ones or contact the good. As I said above, it's a very old con.
That's really dark. The Marquis de Sade would completely agree with you:
"the Marquis de Sade offered a wholly different view - which is that pain itself has an ethics, and that pursuit of pain, or imposing it, may be as useful and just as pleasurable, and that this indeed is the purpose of the state - to indulge the desire to inflict pain in revenge, for instance, via the law (in his time most punishment was in fact the dealing out of pain)."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pain_(philosophy)
You do know who the Marquis de Sade was, don't you TomKat? He was a very famous sadist who imprisoned and tortured women. You might want to reconsider your philosophy about inflicting pain on others being "good" and "beneficial."
I never said that you're an evil SP for disagreeing with me. That was just your belief, stated as a fact. And why shouldn't I insult you if you think subjective perception can be proven? That's beyond stupid, bordering on senility. Remember a time you felt really good and then prove it to me! You're either so emotional that you can't think clearly, or you're not intelligent enough to discuss this particular subject. Either way, the effect is that you're not acting in good faith. You high-jacked a conversation in order to convince everyone their perceptions are not valid, the same old materialist vs. spiritualist cliches that have been trotted out in science class from time immemorial. You bring nothing new to the table, so why are you still typing?
Bill
Gold Meritorious Patron
Why would you attack me for asking for proof? Huh? You make strange claims, I would like to have some verification. That's normal. Your response isn't normal.
Now you may be different than normal people but one normally attacks those who are considered the enemy. Maybe you don't call your enemies "SP" but it's the same thing. You consider me an enemy just because I dared question your beliefs. That's straight Scientology.
Why shouldn't you attack me? Because such an attack would be stupid, childish and useless. You are proving that, aren't you? It doesn't help your case and makes you look very silly and petty.
I accept that you believe these things. Never had a problem with that. I don't accept that that means anything at all in the real world. WHICH MEANS if you try to push your beliefs here as true (rather than belief), I will challenge you. If you can't tolerate that and just have to attack me with your petty, childish tantrums, maybe you should not state your claims in that way.
HINT: That means that if you preface your claims with "I have found" or "I believe that" or "I've experienced" it is clearly your belief and not something you claim is true in the real world.
Last edited:
I told you I was trouble
Suspended animation
If I discovered that I'd been conned by the guy that services my car, I would no longer give him my business (or my respect). If I then found out he was a well known, WW con artist deliberately going after (usually young) people and causing devastation to their families along the way I would add my voice to the inevitable outcry and would have no interest in hearing any 'success stories' reminding me of his wonderful oil changes, even if I agreed that they had been excellent.
I suspect it really is that simple regarding all things hubbard related for those who are no longer going through life determined to be right or still living with a head full of scientology.
I've never understood what ex-scientologists are trying to achieve or solve in your own lives that keeps them interested and defensive regarding the tech, is there any chance of you explaining that please?
Gib
Crusader
I've never done black and white processing or creative processing.
Why didn't you like creative processing?
What about the rest of questions I asked of you, what are your thoughts?
Last edited:
Gib
Crusader
thanks, I have more things to say on what you post, but I'd like to hear TomKat reply.
programmer_guy
True Ex-Scientologist
Part of this (auditing) is they don't seem to know about the topic of "false memory".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_memory_syndrome
IMO, the e-meter can "read" on things that are true AND things that are false.
The e-meter is not a reliable indicator of truth (including "correction lists").
But can a PC get feel-good feelings from auditing? Yes.
Last edited:
How's this: "I, Bill, do solemnly assert my right to be a run-of-the-mill Skeptic Society troll, but will howl in indignation if caught doing it."
I agree with what Jung said about people being basically religious. It doesn't mean I have to like it. A religious person does not ask "what is true?" they ask "which side are you on?" The dominant religion here is the "Anti LRH" religion. Which means any discussion of anything positive about LRH ends up like this discussion did. If LRH gave great lube jobs, credit is due. His behavior in other areas is a separate discussion -- except for the religious, who paint with one broad brush and insist everyone respect their policy.If I discovered that I'd been conned by the guy that services my car, I would no longer give him my business (or my respect). If I then found out he was a well known, WW con artist deliberately going after (usually young) people and causing devastation to their families along the way I would add my voice to the inevitable outcry and would have no interest in hearing any 'success stories' reminding me of his wonderful oil changes, even if I agreed that they had been excellent.
I suspect it really is that simple regarding all things hubbard related for those who are no longer going through life determined to be right or still living with a head full of scientology.
I've never understood what ex-scientologists are trying to achieve or solve in your own lives that keeps them interested and defensive regarding the tech, is there any chance of you explaining that please?
I agree. A reaction is just a reaction. And I was able to force reads for e-meter drills by going to a place in my mind that created them.
But false memory system was a term created after the McMartin Preschool scandal to defend alleged child sexual abuse. But it is true that if people tell a lie long enough they start to believe it and conjure images to support it in their mind.
I never liked making stuff up. That's how I felt about OT 3 also, even though the targeting of individual thoughtforms was effective. I think that after targeting a thoughtform, you could have it sing Yankee Doodle Dandy and it would be just as effective in getting rid of it. It's about intent.
I told you I was trouble
Suspended animation
But why would anyone even want to credit someone with something if it was used to entrap, even if it did work?
Also, are you willing to answer my original question (re-posted below). I have asked a few others this question over the years but none seemed able to articulate an answer or were perhaps unwilling to try?
JustSheila
Crusader
You nailed him, Bill.I often wonder if he keeps a running list of random insults that he cuts and pastes, or if it's just some sort of automatic reaction to anyone who disagrees with him. His last insult to me was completely random and had nothing at all to do with the post. Deflect, insult, deflect, insult. Anything to avoid actual rational thought.
Bill
Gold Meritorious Patron
George Layton
Silver Meritorious Patron
He's too enamored with his intelligence to be wrong. In his mind someone as intelligent as himself could not have been duped and remained duped for decades so it has to be anyone that see things differently. Unfortunately what is true for him is true.
I often wonder if he keeps a running list of random insults that he cuts and pastes, or if it's just some sort of automatic reaction to anyone who disagrees with him. His last insult to me was completely random and had nothing at all to do with the post. Deflect, insult, deflect, insult. Anything to avoid actual rational thought.
Enthetan
Master of Disaster
She looks like she needs a good tickling. Or some such...this????
Jeez sis,
It takes years of professional training to stare and hold a clipboard like this auditor, a scientist in spiritual, ghosts and mental matters
Bill
Gold Meritorious Patron
I often wonder if he keeps a running list of random insults that he cuts and pastes, or if it's just some sort of automatic reaction to anyone who disagrees with him. His last insult to me was completely random and had nothing at all to do with the post. Deflect, insult, deflect, insult. Anything to avoid actual rational thought.
I love the logical, rational evolution of a discussion with TomKat:
TomKat: These parts of Hubbard's tech are good and wonderful!
Bill: I don't think that's true.
TomKat: <insult><insult><insult><insult>
Bill: Yeah, that really isn't proving your point.
TomKat: <INSULT!><INSULT!><INSULT!><INSULT!>
Some believers around here actually try to make a case for their beliefs but not TomKat. He knows Hubbard's insult tech is far more effective.
ETA: Consider TomKat's logic: These things are true although they are unproven and unprovable. If you don't completely agree with my delusion, you are the stupid one.
Last edited:
Similar threads
