mental substitutes for scientology

Discussion in 'Life After Scientology' started by TomKat, Sep 24, 2017.

View Users: View Users
  1. I told you I was trouble

    I told you I was trouble Suspended animation

    I'm a lot of things @Roger, but I am neither a liar nor a spreader of falsehoods ... and this board isn't about you freely promoting your version of scientology twaddle either, you already have your own board for that.


    :hemademe:
     
  2. Mimsey Borogrove

    Mimsey Borogrove Crusader

    Did you even take the time to think whether it solved the problems of the extreme weight of the dinosaurs? I'll bet you rejected it out of hand.

    If it were true - if that mechanism were discovered - think of all the benefits of being able to manipulate gravity. Yeah - it is a popular meme of sci fi, it could be very beneficial. But if no one is willing to look....

    Mimsey


    http://www.dinosaurtheory.com/big_dinosaur.html

    There are four problem areas illustrating why the largest dinosaurs and pterosaurs present a paradox to science:
    Inadequate bone strength to support the largest dinosaurs
    Inadequate muscle strength to lift and move the largest dinosaurs
    Unacceptable high blood pressure and stress on the heart of the tallest dinosaurs
    Aerodynamics principles showing that the pterosaurs should not have flown
    Before starting on the first issue listed above, there needs to be a discussion of what is the mass of various dinosaurs. It would be most helpful to have accurate mass estimates of the largest dinosaurs, the sauropods.

    How Big is Your Dinosaur?
    The most obvious observation about dinosaurs is that these were incredible large animals. Kids want to know how the dinosaurs grew so large. Yet oddly enough many paleontologists would rather avoid this subject. In fact, an argument can be made that the paleontology community is attempting to hide away their largest dinosaur displays.

    In 1993 the once prominent 72 foot long Brachiosaurus display was taken down from its pedestal at the Field Museum in Chicago as officials made way for their new T-Rex display. It now looks far less impressive at its current cramp location at Chicago’s O’Hare Airport. Furthermore, because the Brachiosaurus display is on the other side of security it is not even possible to see this exhibit unless you are just passing by on your way to fly somewhere.
    Inside the modest yet outstanding Wyoming Dinosaur Center is one of the largest sauropods ever found: the 106 foot long Supersaurus Jimbo. It is a gigantic display that towers over the other dinosaur displays. Yet if you want to see this Supersaurus get ready to do some driving, because the small town of Thermopolis, Wyoming where Jimbo is displayed is nowhere close to any large city.
    When a large dinosaur dies the relatively quick burial of the animal is nearly impossible. Consequently finding complete or nearly complete skeletons of a large sauropod is rare. It is more common to find just a few extremely large bones. Nevertheless by comparing the size of similar bones there is more than enough evidence to state that there were many supersauruses even larger than Jimbo. Surely the public would be interested in seeing these huge bones, and yet these too are rarely seen in metropolitan museums. In fact, not only are many of these extremely large bones not being displayed, but curiously on at least two occasions these gigantic priceless sauropod bones have been somehow lost.
    In a display of split personality, paleontologists try to tell us that the largest dinosaurs were really big, but then again not really so big. To be more specific, paleontologists benefit from the publics’ fascination with the immense size of these large dinosaurs, yet the same paleontologists find it extremely problematic to give a scientifically feasible explanation of how these monsters could have supported their own weight.
    Decades ago paleontologists imagined that the large sauropods were like hippos in that they spent their time standing in the water so as to support their weight. Back then it was fairly common for mass estimates to be around 100 tons or more. But ever since the paleontologists brought the large dinosaurs out of the water, the mass estimates for large dinosaurs have steadily dropped until now some paleontologists are proposing that the mass of a Brachiosaurus was only 23 tons.
     
  3. George Layton

    George Layton Silver Meritorious Patron

    You know? I'll bet Xenu brought them here while he was depopulating those 67 planets. Surley there must have been at least one of those planets with a lesser gravitation. I'll bet he froze them, transported them here, and dropped them in deep muddy swamps. That would explain how the got completely buried so quickly too.
     
  4. strativarius

    strativarius Comfortably Numb

    Having a discussion about how big the biggest dinosaurs really were and how they supported their immense weight is one thing. To go from that to proposing that the strength of the force of gravity has radically altered since dinosaurs roamed the Earth is another. The former is worth thinking about, the latter is just too ridiculous for words.
     
    Last edited: Sep 28, 2017
    • Like Like x 1
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
    • List
  5. Bill

    Bill Silver Meritorious Patron

    "...extreme weight of the dinosaurs...". You should be aware that the "extreme weight" is a guess. We have bones. Often only partial skeletons. No flesh, no muscles, no organs, just bones. We actually don't know the "extreme weight" at all. Scientists guess.

    So, Occam's Razor -- which is the simplest answer? Some scientists overestimated the weight of some of the largest dinosaurs and/or miscalculated what was possible ... or gravity was less "back then"?

    If you decide that it must be that gravity was less, please explain why the earth didn't just fly off from the sun because, you know, gravity was less back then.
     
    Last edited: Sep 28, 2017
  6. Mimsey Borogrove

    Mimsey Borogrove Crusader

    Good questions.

    How hard can it be to weigh meat and calculate the apx. weight of an animal? Or, more importantly, the weight of blood? How big of a heart, how strong of a neck to get the blood up to the head? How much volume of blood would fill the veins of these animals from the heart to head? These are simple enough to answer. And the answers are vexing.

    You kidder :) Ok, I'll bite: I fail to see why earth would fly away from the sun as you posit. How would a change in earth's gravity affect it's orbit around the sun anyway? 'Splains it fo po me if you can.

    Are you familiar with the different anomalies in the gravity around the planet? There are places that is stronger and places that is less. Hell, Hubbard tried to blow one of them up with his f****** ship when he was in the Navy. Also when you go deep in mines it gets different, it gets less. This is a phenomenon that's well-known, that's a sort of fly in the ointment of the constancy of gravity isn't it?

    This complete rejection of contradictory ideas is precisely the trait that Hubbard engendered and desired in scientologists and which kept them believing in whatever he said. That's a trait you should consider rising above.

    Mimsey
     
    Last edited: Sep 28, 2017
  7. Bill

    Bill Silver Meritorious Patron

    It is impossible to weigh flesh, muscles and organs if you don't have them. The point isn't what "muscles" weigh but how much flesh, how much muscle, how much organs? We don't know. You seem to think we can just weigh this imaginary stuff and get accurate answers. No, we only have guesses and that's an important point.

    Gravity is what keeps planets, moons and satellites in orbit. If gravity was less "back then" then the earth would move away from the sun, the moon would move away from the earth.

    Earth's gravity anomalies are too minor to detect without instruments and certainly too minor to noticeably affect how plants and animals grow. It doesn't indicate that gravity itself is changing, it merely indicates how close or far away the center of gravity is. Mountains, large metal deposits alter the local center of gravity. This is a local, and extremely minor, effect.

    The earth's gravity could never have been much different unless earth's mass was significantly different. If earth's mass was significantly different, then you have that whole orbit problem again.
     
    Last edited: Sep 28, 2017
  8. anonomog

    anonomog Gold Meritorious Patron

    Actually Mims, your post was interesting over my morning coffee. A sudden change in gravity, I'm not even an armchair scientist, but life would be pretty screwed. First thought atmosphere gets thinner as it expands into space. The moon would retreat away from us upsetting day cycles, probably the obliquity of the earth. The sun would puff up. God knows how much, but don't think it would do our atmosphere much good if erratic solar winds blow more of it off into space. Breathing would be difficult, jumping would be fun if you had enough oxygen to get up the energy. The life forms that survived might grow bigger but they wouldn't need dense robust bones, no need in low gravity. There would have weather extremes, always a good time, not.
    Then what would cause the sudden gravitational change only on earth instead of universally. The planet would need to lose a significant portion of itself. How would a quarter, for example, disappear? A side blow from a mars size planet maybe.? But there would be pretty noticeable signs even after 100 million years. Such a giant impact probably melting the earth for millenia. I needed to go back to bed after thinking that through.


    Dinos are fascinating. Fluctuations in the gravitation causing large animals, does not seem plausible waaaay too many down sides. Things that could be observed today. Abundant safe food sources, slow evolution, large territories, persistant survival of the biggest and fittest seem more likely. They were around for many millions of years plenty of time to adapt to size.
     
  9. Free Being Me

    Free Being Me Crusader

    I agree, knowledgism is a relabeled $cientology cult mindfuckery marketing ploy. Same shit, different terminology at some points aimed at a person's gullibility and wallet. Roger preaching his brand here should be challenged as there are no sacred cows when it comes to gurus and cults and cult knock-offs.

    @I told you I was trouble, did you know Roger is marketing his rubbish aimed at children claiming his "study tech" is a "very precise science" (bottom of the linked page). It's reworded $cientology of course, at the rotten core it stinks of Elcon.
     
    Last edited: Sep 29, 2017
    • Like Like x 1
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • List
  10. Mimsey Borogrove

    Mimsey Borogrove Crusader

    Oh, I guess I am wrong once again. But never? How many times has that word when used in science been disproved?

    I was reading about weighing dinos, such as Sauropods, after reading your response, and per the most recent estimates, they can weigh as much as 40-70 tons, taking in to account weight saving air sacs. I think your argument, while well reasoned, is inaccurate. They delve into it with a lot of diligence to get an accurate estimate.
    Mimsey
     
  11. Wilbur

    Wilbur Patron with Honors

    76 planets. Get your scientific facts straight George!
     
  12. Bill

    Bill Silver Meritorious Patron

    I said "never" because gravity and mass are not separate things. This isn't some scientific theory, this is basic physics. Gravity is an attribute of mass. Mass determines the gravity.

    People are estimating the weight of dinosaurs based on a whole lot of assumptions -- any of which could be wrong. If the estimated weight of a dinosaur is simply impossible then one can assume (Occam's Razor) that the estimate is wrong. Very simple.
     
    Last edited: Sep 29, 2017
  13. Terril park

    Terril park Sponsor

    Don't think Roger is aiming for children. In my time
    doing this was helping people with study difficulties.
    None were children. One shoudn't black PR this because
    of its connection to Scn. Black PR if it dosn't work
    or is harmful. Aso note this was stolen by Hubbard.
    It is useful.
     
    • LOL LOL x 1
    • Poop Poop x 1
    • Tinfoil Tinfoil x 1
    • List
  14. Free Being Me

    Free Being Me Crusader

    You didn't read the linked info so I'll spell it out for you: Helping Kids Learn (link). It's right there in the introduction header. Targeting kids (children) is clearly stated. Read before you go into $cientology apology/defender mode. No one, especially children should be mindfucked with Elcon's cultist crap or knock-offs. It's just wrong.
     
    Last edited: Sep 29, 2017
    • Like Like x 2
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
    • List
  15. I told you I was trouble

    I told you I was trouble Suspended animation

    @Free Being Me ... yes, I do know about that and it looks as if Roger must have forgotten about the agreement made between the cult and Alan Walter wherein he agreed to call his knock off version of scientology something else (and chose to call it "knowledgism" instead).




    :wellduh:
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
    • List
  16. George Layton

    George Layton Silver Meritorious Patron

    OMG! I just realized dyslexia is caused by gravity shifts!
     
  17. Emma

    Emma Mother of Dragons Administrator

    I think anyone who has read anything about Knowledgism processing can see a very direct link between Scientology & Knowledgism. In fact most of Alan's customers were ex Scientologists.

    I find it interesting that on the Knowledgism sites where a bio of Alan is found, there is NEVER ANY mention of him being a Scientologist, working with Hubbard, Clear no.8 etc. However in the body of work, the influence of Hubbard & Scientology is soaked throughout Knowledgism.

    Example: (sorry about the web page background - not my fault!)

    http://www.freezoneearth.org/littlepurplenotebook/ch54.html

    You think Knowledgism isn't like Scientology? Have a read of this post from Alan:

    http://www.lightlink.com/archive/acw/acw91.memo

    This from the IVy magazine:

    [​IMG]

    Knowledgism has zones, whereas Hubbard has a Bridge. Knowledgism has ascension experiences, whereas Scientology has Grades, Clear & OT. Both have a zillion processes, very similar in nature.

    I loved Alan because I thought he was a good guy, and because I don't believe he created Knowledgism to be a controlling cult like Hubbard did. I believe he tried to grab what he thought was workable from Scientology, rework it, repackage it etc.

    I believe Alan was a well-intentioned man, but please stop pretending that Knowledgism is not a form of repacked Scientology (minus some very damaging aspects). Any close inspection of it by someone with a Scientology background can find the similarities broadly & easily.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
    • Love Love x 1
    • List
  18. Mimsey Borogrove

    Mimsey Borogrove Crusader

    Based on that - nothing is right. The point is, they can come close enough to see there is a problem. And weight is but one issue - another is the blood system - there's a lot of water in blood. And water ain't light.

    Well, I guess the basic problem is - how does gravity work? I was reading the other day an interesting concept. I was taught in school that in a vacuum, all things fall at equal speeds. However, this article was discussing that different things fall at different rates. He based this on research done by Charles Brush. What he did was rather simple - he put different metals on a long pendulum. He swung the pendulums and counted the swings over a long period of time. What he found was that different metals swung for different lengths of time. Thus the rate of fall could be determined. Platinum, gold coin, lead, tungsten (forged), Bismuth, tin, zinc, water,carbon, aluminum, magnesium, boron, silicon were fast, and selenium and sulfur were slow. His accuracy was 2.5-6sec.

    On a paper I found on line - his published results were, using 100 k on zinc as a standard:
    aluminum - 130
    zinc - 100
    tin - 100
    lead - 93
    silver -80
    bismuth - 72
    Humm. How is it that different metals are affected by gravity differently? When he tried iron it had very inconsistent results, unlike the others.

    Mimsey
     
  19. Bill

    Bill Silver Meritorious Patron

    I think the time has long past for me to extricate myself gracefully from this dino/gravity divergence -- so I'll just duck out the back way. Continue without me.
     
  20. Mimsey Borogrove

    Mimsey Borogrove Crusader

    snip - Bill, please see my next post. My snipped response turned out to be irrelevant. Despite, appearances to the contrary I am willing to change my mind - see? Grades 3 & 4 worked on me.:hide:

    Anyway, thanks for taking the time to post your responses - they were thought provoking as always.

    Mimsey
     
    Last edited: Sep 29, 2017

Share This Page