scooter
Gold Meritorious Patron
What she said - if you've been driving one for a long time, you won't get fooled by body movement or anything else.
As for faking FNs during a sec check :confused2:
Faking a F/N
- Thread starter Tom of Helatrobus
- Start date
What she said - if you've been driving one for a long time, you won't get fooled by body movement or anything else.
As for faking FNs during a sec check :confused2:
Dulloldfart
Squirrel Extraordinaire
One way to avoid the fact that as soon as you put more than a glance on your own F/N you're going to influence it one way or another is to video it and later look at the video.
If you have someone who can help while you are videoing, just have them keep the needle on the dial by occasionally moving the TA knob as the needle goes off either side. If they have to move the TA knob too often, turn down the sensitivity a bit. With another person, you don't have to see the needle yourself at all in real time. If the needle motion is so small that you can't see anything, turn the sensitivity up until you can.
When I was around the CofS last, sec checks were mostly done at the pc's measured (by that silly can squeeze drill) sensitivity, maybe 5. Then when questions were re-checked the sensitivity was jacked up to 16 (an arbitrary from when that was the highest sensitivity available). You could also use a higher sens if you wanted. This could get into the silly situation where with the sens at 8 you might get a tick and so couldn't take up the question directly as it hadn't read with a small fall, but if instead you had asked the question with the sens 16 (assume it's twice the sensitivity - it isn't exactly, but for the sake of this point it doesn't matter) it would have read with a small fall and you could.
Crazy arbitraries.
As for faking an F/N, I've never seen a hand-squeezed F/N that looked even close. Although it might be possible to fool an inexperienced auditor.
Paul
If you have someone who can help while you are videoing, just have them keep the needle on the dial by occasionally moving the TA knob as the needle goes off either side. If they have to move the TA knob too often, turn down the sensitivity a bit. With another person, you don't have to see the needle yourself at all in real time. If the needle motion is so small that you can't see anything, turn the sensitivity up until you can.
When I was around the CofS last, sec checks were mostly done at the pc's measured (by that silly can squeeze drill) sensitivity, maybe 5. Then when questions were re-checked the sensitivity was jacked up to 16 (an arbitrary from when that was the highest sensitivity available). You could also use a higher sens if you wanted. This could get into the silly situation where with the sens at 8 you might get a tick and so couldn't take up the question directly as it hadn't read with a small fall, but if instead you had asked the question with the sens 16 (assume it's twice the sensitivity - it isn't exactly, but for the sake of this point it doesn't matter) it would have read with a small fall and you could.
Crazy arbitraries.
As for faking an F/N, I've never seen a hand-squeezed F/N that looked even close. Although it might be possible to fool an inexperienced auditor.
Paul
Last edited:
alex
Gold Meritorious Patron
Meditate frequently so that you are able to control your focus, and to be able to hold your focus on one thing while still interacting with others.
When on the meter, focus on an incident of someones outflow of love for you.....and you recieving it.
You will not be able to do this solo, though if thats what you are trying....
Amadeus Einstein
Patron with Honors
Of course you can mock up F/N's. See E-meter drill 16.
You can blow down your own TA by thinking about pushing mass away from yourself. Visualize your space getting bigger. If for whatever reason you want a climbing TA, drift off in your thoughts and daydream.
To produce a read on something, just as the auditor is about to read the question, imagine being found out or caught in the act of something. This makes tedious meter drills go much faster, as the reads actually do turn out instant, regardless of what you might have been taught. If you don't want something to read, think about other stuff. It requires quite a bit of impingement to make the meter read when the pc is off somewhere else in his head. At least, it does on me.
You can blow down your own TA by thinking about pushing mass away from yourself. Visualize your space getting bigger. If for whatever reason you want a climbing TA, drift off in your thoughts and daydream.
To produce a read on something, just as the auditor is about to read the question, imagine being found out or caught in the act of something. This makes tedious meter drills go much faster, as the reads actually do turn out instant, regardless of what you might have been taught. If you don't want something to read, think about other stuff. It requires quite a bit of impingement to make the meter read when the pc is off somewhere else in his head. At least, it does on me.
Tom of Helatrobus
Patron Meritorious
Well, someone (perhaps me) might (or might not) be in the position where they need to infiltrate, evade, allude and or confuse a Scientology organization or some company using Scientology tech. In the unlikely event of such an event... well, being able to fake an F/N would be quite useful wouldn't it?
I worked on getting the F/N today and didn't quite make it. I should try it with a partner or holding the cans solo style. As a last resort I'll have to do some actually auditing.
G
Gottabrain
Guest
Oooh! I'm happy to help! First, here is what IS NOT true:
It states in The Book of Emeter Drills that a person can tell all meter reads apart. Of course, that's completely illogical and not true. That's like saying the dial is capable of showing as much of a variety of reads as snowflakes that have every fallen.
Its much too simplistic for that. No, you can't tell many similar reads apart. Maybe 60 or 100 at best, with terrific eyesight and alertness. It also states that everyone reads at the exact end of a question, but that's not true, either. Most don't. Most are just prior (they understand what you're asking before you say it) and people have needle reactions that are a little slow. Everyone's different.
It states that "the same read" comes up again. No, it usually doesn't. "Almost the same read" comes up. It's usually shorter and shorter each time one tries to get the same read back.
So to fool the emeter and do a great job of it, when an auditor asks for something, tell the auditor something similar. "As a brainwashed zombie, have you ever used L Ron Hubbard's name in vain?"
(real answer: "YES! Yesterday I called him Tubby!")
Answer you give: (if it reads) No, but I knew a kid named Hubbard I used to hate and called him a jerk.
Auditor checks read. You think of or imagine a kid you called a jerk. Auditor says that's the same read. You blah de blah Auditor says all clear now. Think a happy thought (last time you had sex) Auditor says your needle is floating.
If you want to fool it PERFECTLY, then think about calling him Tubby at the same time you are telling a different story. But usually a similar thing that really happened or you can imagine very well works just as well.
Hey, I got through the last six weeks or so of the RPF that way. Wish I'd learned sooner, though. Would have saved me a lot of mindfucking.
G
Gottabrain
Guest
If you have good concentration, you can ignore the auditor's questions altogether and ask yourself something of your own in your head instead. That also works great.
F/Ns are very easy. Just remember a happy joy joy moment.
F/Ns are very easy. Just remember a happy joy joy moment.
LongTimeGone
Silver Meritorious Patron
A Mark V?? The little wooden devil? Jeez, where did you find that?
If you are not getting the pinch test to work, your meter could be stuffed, your sensitivity is not set properly, or you don't know how to do it.
LTG
If you are not getting the pinch test to work, your meter could be stuffed, your sensitivity is not set properly, or you don't know how to do it.
LTG
G
Gottabrain
Guest
The Book of Emeter drills tells you how to do everything on the emeter.
The Mark V has more dramatic reads. I've found the Mark VI is much easier to fool because the reads appear so much smoother and it reacts to just about everything.
The Mark V has more dramatic reads. I've found the Mark VI is much easier to fool because the reads appear so much smoother and it reacts to just about everything.
Royal Prince Xenu
Trust the Psi Corps.
I'll have what Bullwinkle's having, thanks...
Me too! But with less pepper...
Me too! But with less pepper...
AnonyMary
Formerly Fooled - Finally Free
Oooh! I'm happy to help! First, here is what IS NOT true:
It states in The Book of Emeter Drills that a person can tell all meter reads apart. Of course, that's completely illogical and not true. That's like saying the dial is capable of showing as much of a variety of reads as snowflakes that have every fallen.
It also states that everyone reads at the exact end of a question, but that's not true, either. Most don't. Most are just prior (they understand what you're asking before you say it) and people have needle reactions that are a little slow. Everyone's different.
It states that "the same read" comes up again. No, it usually doesn't. "Almost the same read" comes up. It's usually shorter and shorter each time one tries to get the same read back.
So to fool the emeter and do a great job of it, when an auditor asks for something, tell the auditor something similar. [..] Auditor checks read. You think of or imagine a kid you called a jerk. Auditor says that's the same read. You blah de blah Auditor says all clear now. Think a happy thought (last time you had sex) Auditor says your needle is floating.
If you want to fool it PERFECTLY, then think about calling him Tubby at the same time you are telling a different story. But usually a similar thing that really happened or you can imagine very well works just as well.
During a sec check I too found that it works like you said, after getting tired of the harassment of endless non-reading questions. It was the only way to put an end to the insanity and preserve what was left of my mind and heart .
Thanks for posting this, Gotta
Important thread, Tom!
La La Lou Lou
Crusader
It might be best to just experiment. What floats your needle might not float someone else's.
I do remember thinking how fed up I was with the thing I was running, then thinking about a really nicely stuffed pair of jeans I had walked past that day and the auditor said, ''your needle is floating!''
I did think, ''well if running something to basic has the same value as a looking at a well formed lower body section, I'll go OT the easy way''.
I do remember thinking how fed up I was with the thing I was running, then thinking about a really nicely stuffed pair of jeans I had walked past that day and the auditor said, ''your needle is floating!''
I did think, ''well if running something to basic has the same value as a looking at a well formed lower body section, I'll go OT the easy way''.
Winston Smith
Flunked Scientology
I saw the title of this thread and thought "Faking an effen orgasm." Great minds think alike. Well, at least everyone here knows mine is in the gutter. I don't want to look it up, but remember that great scene where they are in a restaurant and Billy Chrystal says he can tell if "it" is real and (feeble mind forgets the actress) does the most incredible faked orgasm right there. Gawd was that one of the great scenes in movies.
anondelmundial
Patron with Honors
smartone
My Own Boss
Auditor's Toad
Clear as Mud
True. True. true.
Forget body motion and can squeezes - those are obvious to even a newbie green pea.
Get the sensitivity set "correctly" and think of something very pleasing to you - like the best sex you ever had. You can produce an FN at will.
And once you learn a thought that produces a SF ( when you stumped your toe ) and what produced a LF ( when you broke your leg ) and what produced a LFBD - you can fool the meter all day long.
It ain't infalliable.
And.... some believe it "works" ....some say not.....but, hey, look at what is being done with it, what "processes" are being run.
