Is Scientology a science?

[Free Being Me]

Well Tom, you're in for a lot of surprises at the entrance to a $cientology cult life. The fair game and disconnections, the suicides and murders that OSA covers up, being a cash cow drone, regging people to utter financial destitution, TR-L-ing to the public not to mention yourself, indoctrinated into believing you have "super powers" while being a front for a criminal syndicate, the spurious litigious lawsuits designed to ruin critics and concerned citizens, yeap, some good times ahead. Those elcon policies are there for a reason such as KSW through OSA: destroy anyone not compliant into accepting elcon and $cientology. Who in their right mind would want to be a party to a cult when it's been exposed as a fanatical heinous criminal hoax? Try leaving and wait and see ... the very policies that $cientology uses will be aimed at you ... you might as well leave now before they get their claws in you even deeper.

L Ron Hubbard's Destructive Fair Game Policy

Stacy Brooks - Fair Game, Abuse Of The Legal System
[video=youtube;9DcRL6L4srU]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9DcRL6L4srU[/video]

Graham Berry - Scientology Abuses The US Legal System
[video=youtube;qvMoSsuRVW8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qvMoSsuRVW8[/video]

 

[Tom_Booth]

I hate this thread. Tom is trying his darndest to give some credibility to $cn. Purple is not happy with him. It gnaws at me when I read the exchanges. This is not the place for Tom. Purple is at home here. As someone said earlier, Tom is in the love-bomb phase of $cn and hopefully, as he spends his time here while basking in the glow of his early times in $cn, he will learn from the mistakes of others and get out before he makes the same mistakes himself.

I'm not trying to give credibility to scientology or take credibility away either. I'm not concerned with the credibility of scientology one way or the other.

A very large percentage of the staff are new recruits. I doubt very much anybody there is going out of their way to "Love Bomb" me in particular.

I like purple. I like a good debate with anyone with strong opinions that differ from my own. I like getting other people's point of view. I'm not intentionally trying to be deceitful, just speaking my mind as I see it. God knows, I really have no idea what I've gotten myself into and I very much appreciate the effort anyone might make here to open my eyes or failing that, at least try to explain so I can understand the point of view. Where they are coming from, what their experiences were, really, this is all new to me so try to understand; I'm just being honest if I say I haven't seen it myself.

If anything I'm just trying, since it has been brought up, to give my own research and experiments some credibility. The theory and methodology to one degree or another, dovetails somewhat with Scientology more or less incidentally, but with a lot of other things as well. I can't really do anything about that, but in reality, I started these experiments before I ever even got on a Scientology mail list. The first book that got me into "Visualization" or "Manifesting" was "The Law of the Higher Potential" by Robert Collier.

Anybody who knows Crowley knows his system was referred to as "Scientific Illuminism" with the mato: "Our method is science our aim is religion." On the Rathbun site I posted these couple of references:

------------------------

“…a certain Frater X appeared on the scene, and while such was his fascination that Parsons – who had gained admission to the highest grades of the O.T.O. – was persuaded to break his Oath of Secrecy and X came into possession of the secrets of the Order although he was not at any time properly initiated.”


“Parsons…. died disastrously when he dropped a phile of fulminate of mercury. His scribe, however, is still at large, having grown wealthy and famous by a misuse of the secret knowledge which he wormed out of Parsons.”


From “The MagicalRevival” by Kenneth Grant (1972) pgs 107 & 162
-------------------------
There is no question whatsoever that the “Frater X” , Parsons Scribe referred to by Grant was non other than L Ron Hubbard.


Here we have an OTO insider, head of a secret society publishing, in no uncertain terms that Scientology is essentially secret OTO material intended for high initiates of the order which Hubbard appropriated.

Robert Anton Wilson probably researched Crowley and his teachings better than anybody. He wrote:

-------------------------------------


“Hubbard’s system is derived largely from Aleister Crowley…. Hubbard was a member of Crowley’s Ordo Templi Orientis in the 1940s; and Hubbard later… invented a system which seems, to those of us who know both, very similar to the system taught by Crowley in the O.T.O.”


From: Robert Anton Wilson, letter, Conspiracy Digest 3.1 (1978)

To me this explains quite a bit. There seems to have been quite a number of Physicists who were members of the OTO. presumably deep, coordinated, scientific studies were being conducted within this esoteric society for many years prior to Hubbard's becoming associated with it. Scientific Methodology was being used as a means of delving into "spiritual" experiences and practices.

So the question becomes, was there anything really "scientific" about the OTO material Hubbard appropriated ?

I'm not sure we will ever really know as possibly all that there is to be had of it is what was appropriated and incorporated into Scientology by Hubbard.

My personal conclusion then is that "Scientology" may very well have been the product of scientific research. Not necessarily research conducted by Hubbard himself however. This is, of course, rather far fetched speculation on my part. It does explain, however, the apparent discrepancy between Hubbard's personality and the "Tech". How else did a science fiction writer come up with all this stuff immediately after his brief association with the OTO ?

So the question of; Is Scientology really scientific ? becomes a bit more muddled.

 

[DeeAnna]

Tom Booth,

You say you have been in Scientology for six months? And you are on staff at the Harlem Org?

Care to share with us how you came to get involved in the first place? By that I mean were you a walk-in or taken in by a friend or read a book or what? What courses have you done so far? Are you having wins? What hat are you wearing?

Is the org busy? Do they get most of their new members from walk-ins or not so much? Are the classrooms crowded? We are always curious about the current state of things.

Is Harlem going to be an Ideal Org? You said the renovations on the new building are complete? Any idea when it will open?

You are one of only a few active members to come to this board. But you said you've been lurking here, right? So you know there are a lot of intelligent and experienced ex-scientologists who hang out here. I'm assuming you are asking your questions of this group because you think they may know some answers to your questions. Is that correct, or no?


I know, I ask a lot of questions. Thanks in advance for your replies.

 

[degraded being]

Let's compare Tom with the poster who joined ESMB very recently. She got into the cult a little bit. She goes on the internet and reads about scientology. And it's like
WOW!
KABOOM!
5 minutes later, she's out! How fucking scientific is that? It certainly wasn't rocket science to her.

 

[Purple Rain]

I'm not trying to give credibility to scientology or take credibility away either. I'm not concerned with the credibility of scientology one way or the other.

A very large percentage of the staff are new recruits. I doubt very much anybody there is going out of their way to "Love Bomb" me in particular.

I like purple. I like a good debate with anyone with strong opinions that differ from my own. I like getting other people's point of view. I'm not intentionally trying to be deceitful, just speaking my mind as I see it. God knows, I really have no idea what I've gotten myself into and I very much appreciate the effort anyone might make here to open my eyes or failing that, at least try to explain so I can understand the point of view. Where they are coming from, what their experiences were, really, this is all new to me so try to understand; I'm just being honest if I say I haven't seen it myself.

If anything I'm just trying, since it has been brought up, to give my own research and experiments some credibility. The theory and methodology to one degree or another, dovetails somewhat with Scientology more or less incidentally, but with a lot of other things as well. I can't really do anything about that, but in reality, I started these experiments before I ever even got on a Scientology mail list. The first book that got me into "Visualization" or "Manifesting" was "The Law of the Higher Potential" by Robert Collier.

Anybody who knows Crowley knows his system was referred to as "Scientific Illuminism" with the mato: "Our method is science our aim is religion." On the Rathbun site I posted these couple of references:

------------------------

“…a certain Frater X appeared on the scene, and while such was his fascination that Parsons – who had gained admission to the highest grades of the O.T.O. – was persuaded to break his Oath of Secrecy and X came into possession of the secrets of the Order although he was not at any time properly initiated.”


“Parsons…. died disastrously when he dropped a phile of fulminate of mercury. His scribe, however, is still at large, having grown wealthy and famous by a misuse of the secret knowledge which he wormed out of Parsons.”


From “The MagicalRevival” by Kenneth Grant (1972) pgs 107 & 162
-------------------------
There is no question whatsoever that the “Frater X” , Parsons Scribe referred to by Grant was non other than L Ron Hubbard.


Here we have an OTO insider, head of a secret society publishing, in no uncertain terms that Scientology is essentially secret OTO material intended for high initiates of the order which Hubbard appropriated.

Robert Anton Wilson probably researched Crowley and his teachings better than anybody. He wrote:

-------------------------------------


“Hubbard’s system is derived largely from Aleister Crowley…. Hubbard was a member of Crowley’s Ordo Templi Orientis in the 1940s; and Hubbard later… invented a system which seems, to those of us who know both, very similar to the system taught by Crowley in the O.T.O.”


From: Robert Anton Wilson, letter, Conspiracy Digest 3.1 (1978)

To me this explains quite a bit. There seems to have been quite a number of Physicists who were members of the OTO. presumably deep, coordinated, scientific studies were being conducted within this esoteric society for many years prior to Hubbard's becoming associated with it. Scientific Methodology was being used as a means of delving into "spiritual" experiences and practices.

So the question becomes, was there anything really "scientific" about the OTO material Hubbard appropriated ?

I'm not sure we will ever really know as possibly all that there is to be had of it is what was appropriated and incorporated into Scientology by Hubbard.

My personal conclusion then is that "Scientology" may very well have been the product of scientific research. Not necessarily research conducted by Hubbard himself however. This is, of course, rather far fetched speculation on my part. It does explain, however, the apparent discrepancy between Hubbard's personality and the "Tech". How else did a science fiction writer come up with all this stuff immediately after his brief association with the OTO ?

So the question of; Is Scientology really scientific ? becomes a bit more muddled.

Now this is more of an interesting post.

You strike me, as with many ex-Scientologists, as being really smart and really dumb at the same time. That's not meant to be an insult - I wish I could explain it better. It does mean, I think, that people like us who are attracted to Scientology have to be really, really careful. Because we can be dumb about some things in life that are obvious to others - even when and if we are highly educated and score well on IQ tests etc. We can have a tendency to do dumb things - to be taken in. And for me, also, Scientology is not my only cult.

[Edit: That's not a comment on your Parson's stuff, BTW, which is really interesting but not the subject of my post to you here and now.]

One thing I have to tell you - if you take nothing else away from anything anybody here says to you - for God's sake - well, for everyone's sake actually - if you have kids - now or ever - do not EVER let them near Scientology. Reason: you WILL lose them and you can never get them back unless they eventually leave of their own volition. And by then their childhood is gone.

If you fall in love - don't do it with a Scientologist - unless you are certain that you would choose each other - unless that's an unshakable pact - that your first loyalty is to each other. Otherwise, they might choose you if push came to shove, but you will probably be looking at a divorce. The cult can and does order people to divorce. My ex-husband was ordered to divorce me. He chose not to, and left Scientology for my sake, but that is fairly rare. You can't count on it.

There will be something, at some stage in your Scientology career, that gets you in the bad books of somebody who has the power to end your family. And they will. With relish. You will have to rebuild your whole life.

Also, make sure you have an alternate money source. If you have to rebuild your life after a long stint on staff or in the Sea Org - having no money makes it somewhere between very difficult and nearly impossible to do so.

Never put your eggs in one basket.

Never say anything in an auditing session that you would not post here under your own name. Seriously.

[Edit: They will tell you that you cannot get well without total honesty and auditing will not work if you withhold things. But just like the Miranda warning, anything you say can and will be used against you if they deem it necessary. They will not read you your rights before they take your statement. Be particularly wary if they say, "I am not auditing you". They don't even need to pretend that stuff is priest/penitent privileged. That's pretty much any sec check. So be ready for the whole world to know about your tastes in porn or how many times you cheated or what income you didn't report, what debts are unpaid, whether you've ever hit anyone in anger, gone joyriding in a car, been caught shoplifting, had any venereal disease etc. etc. if things go south between you and Scientology.]

But, really, there is no safe way to be in Scientology. It can seem to be safe to swim with sharks and wrestle alligators, then a stingray spears you through the heart. If you play Russian roulette for long enough, eventually the bullet will find you.

I say this because I do care about people and I really don't want to see you get hurt. But only you can choose your own path.

 

[Jump]

Let's compare Tom with the poster who joined ESMB very recently. She got into the cult a little bit. She goes on the internet and reads about scientology. And it's like
WOW!
KABOOM!
5 minutes later, she's out! How fucking scientific is that? It certainly wasn't rocket science to her.

To be fair to Tom, he has been on this journey of discovery since way before he joined the cult. And he joined because he thought there would be something there to give him a hand with his research.

It's a pity the hand he found was in his pocket, and the person there that was interested in helping with the research was whisked away to *cough* special projects because both could become too distracted from the brainwashing and control.

Tom, you can do better than hanging your hat with these people.

 

[Churchill]

Now this is more of an interesting post.

You strike me, as with many ex-Scientologists, as being really smart and really dumb at the same time. That's not meant to be an insult - I wish I could explain it better. It does mean, I think, that people like us who are attracted to Scientology have to be really, really careful. Because we can be dumb about some things in life that are obvious to others - even when and if we are highly educated and score well on IQ tests etc. We can have a tendency to do dumb things - to be taken in. And for me, also, Scientology is not my only cult.

[Edit: That's not a comment on your Parson's stuff, BTW, which is really interesting but not the subject of my post to you here and now.]

One thing I have to tell you - if you take nothing else away from anything anybody here says to you - for God's sake - well, for everyone's sake actually - if you have kids - now or ever - do not EVER let them near Scientology. Reason: you WILL lose them and you can never get them back unless they eventually leave of their own volition. And by then their childhood is gone.

If you fall in love - don't do it with a Scientologist - unless you are certain that you would choose each other - unless that's an unshakable pact - that your first loyalty is to each other. Otherwise, they might choose you if push came to shove, but you will probably be looking at a divorce. The cult can and does order people to divorce. My ex-husband was ordered to divorce me. He chose not to, and left Scientology for my sake, but that is fairly rare. You can't count on it.

There will be something, at some stage in your Scientology career, that gets you in the bad books of somebody who has the power to end your family. And they will. With relish. You will have to rebuild your whole life.

Also, make sure you have an alternate money source. If you have to rebuild your life after a long stint on staff or in the Sea Org - having no money makes it somewhere between very difficult and nearly impossible to do so.

Never put your eggs in one basket.

Never say anything in an auditing session that you would not post here under your own name. Seriously.

[Edit: They will tell you that you cannot get well without total honesty and auditing will not work if you withhold things. But just like the Miranda warning, anything you say can and will be used against you if they deem it necessary. They will not read you your rights before they take your statement. Be particularly wary if they say, "I am not auditing you". They don't even need to pretend that stuff is priest/penitent privileged. That's pretty much any sec check. So be ready for the whole world to know about your tastes in porn or how many times you cheated or what income you didn't report, what debts are unpaid, whether you've ever hit anyone in anger, gone joyriding in a car, been caught shoplifting, had any venereal disease etc. etc. if things go south between you and Scientology.]

But, really, there is no safe way to be in Scientology. It can seem to be safe to swim with sharks and wrestle alligators, then a stingray spears you through the heart. If you play Russian roulette for long enough, eventually the bullet will find you.

I say this because I do care about people and I really don't want to see you get hurt. But only you can choose your own path.

Purple,
This is so beautifully and movingly written; so heartfelt and honest. I'm sure that it will reach someone out there and have it's desired effect.

You might consider giving it it's own thread, perhaps calling it An Open Letter To A Scientologist.

Thank you.

Churchill

 

[strativarius]

Dear Tom_Booth.

There was a woman in the British media who used to speak on behalf of the Bankers in the City of London. While the banks were collapsing and having to be bailed out by the British taxpayer, she would come on TV and tell us why these 'fat cats' deserved the massive bonuses they were paying themselves.

Eventually the heat went off of the banking sector and moved over to the Utilities, the providers of gas and electricity who, while wholesale prices were falling, continued to hike the prices the general public were paying for their fuel.

Lo and behold, this loathsome woman switched jobs and appeared as a mouthpiece for the energy sector and attempted to explain away the fact that the British public were being conned.

She seemed unfazed by, and totally impervious to the flak that was thrown at her, which I am sure is one of the reasons these businesses employed her, and this is a quality that you seem to possess in abundance. It is a commendable quality IMHO, and one that I am sorely lacking, so I have to admit that I admire your tenacity.

Despite the efforts of several posters who have attempted to advise you of the downside of being a member of this cult, and despite the insults that have been thrown at you, you're still standing up for what you believe.

I just think it is a great pity that these qualities of yours are wasted trying to defend the indefensible.

Why don't you get a proper job? Instead of using your own money to purchase materials for the CofS, you could be earning a good salary, not helping to perpetrate a massive hoax.

 

[Commander Birdsong]

dianetics basically qualified as a science from square one with independent replication of result. people bought the book, followed the instructions on the side of the package and got some good results

still it is a soft science rather than a hard science like physics or metallurgy and auditing is ultimately not a technology but an art based on a technology

scientology is "an applied religious philosophy" and is highly parascientific

nonetheless one can and should apply critical thinking and scientific methodology to it's study and application...

for example...

in may 1980 kathie and i visited our friend in new york. coming back monday she wanted me to get back to philly by 12:30 so i got out on the jersey pike with it's 55 mph limit and stoked the old plymouth up to 70-75. i was zoned in on it; moving through traffic like some andretti. we'd toked a doobie and kath was half napping beside me. suddenly i knew just beyond my field of vision was a trooper with a radar gun. i backed off down to 55 went over one rise and then another and HA!!! there's the the statie with his radar gun...

i nudged kath and grinned said "see that? i knew two miles back he'd be there and slowed down." she said "i noticed that!" it was so cool. "OT" stuff can't be proven and it's not easy to do something close to a demonstration...

but...

was it a spiritual perception?

maybe...

one must ask how else it can be accounted...

hmmmm...

subliminal perception of radar wave perhaps. this would be physical perception though still highly refined perception and thought...

or...

maybe a driver coming from the other direction had their headlights on to signal us of the speed trap and though i had not taken conscious notice i had cognited off the peripheral perception


this is how i have studied and thought over many decades

i'm personally fairly well convinced of both the reality of what might be termed "OT" and the genius of SOME NOT ALL of hubbard's work...

 

[F.Bullbait]

we'd toked a doobie.

Is that the 'higher consciousness' I've been hearing so much about?

 

[Mystic]

Is a "science" a science?

 

[Veda]

"A rather stupid kind of mischief."

-snip-

Anybody who knows Crowley knows his system was referred to as "Scientific Illuminism" with the mato: "Our method is science our aim is religion."

-snip-

Your quote is slightly off.

That's "The method of science. The aim of religion."

The aim of religion, according to Crowley, was "the attainment of knowledge and power in spiritual matters."

Towards the end of his life, when asked, by a benefactor who was eager to make his system a religion, if it could become one, Crowley rambled on a bit, and then added that doing so "might easily cause a great deal of misunderstanding, and work a rather stupid kind of mischief."


"Of," not "is."


Big difference.

 

[Commander Birdsong]

Is that the 'higher consciousness' I've been hearing so much about?

sometimes, quite surely

it's easy to love the music of louis armstrong entirely sober and to even be transported into higher states by it. but for my own part it is only when i indulge what satchmo always called "gage" that i... hmmm... i do believe the word duplicate is apropos... where the man was coming from. for me the difference between an armstrong side on the victrola sober versus a fresh buzz is as different as a picture of an apple and a real apple...

o momma!

do you know what it means to miss new orleans?

satchmo does

so do i...

now and again

 

[Commander Birdsong]

Is a "science" a science?

tch tch...

science is a cult mystie, you know that

jazz flute!

is a science...

 

[Tom_Booth]

Re: "A rather stupid kind of mischief."

Your quote is slightly off.

That's "The method of science. The aim of religion."

The aim of religion, according to Crowley, was "the attainment of knowledge and power in spiritual matters."

Towards the end of his life, when asked, by a benefactor who was eager to make his system a religion, if it could become one, Crowley rambled on a bit, and then added that doing so "might easily cause a great deal of misunderstanding, and work a rather stupid kind of mischief."


"Of," not "is."


Big difference.

Not to be a smart ass but:

'We place no reliance
On Virgin or Pigeon;
Our method is science,
Our aim is religion.'

http://pauldefraia.tumblr.com/post/37901028903

http://hermetic.com/crowley/eight-lectures-on-yoga/8yoga4.html

It doesn't seem Crowley took note of whatever fine distinction you are trying to make between "of" and "is". Either way the basic idea is to apply scientific methodology to "religious" practices and experiences generally.

For example:

...Allan taught me the principles of Yoga; fundamentally, there is only one. The problem is how to stop thinking; for the theory is that the mind is a mechanism for dealing symbolically with impressions; its construction is such that one is tempted to take these symbols for reality. Conscious thought, therefore, is fundamentally false and prevents one from perceiving reality. The numerous practices of yoga are simply dodges to help one to acquire the knack of slowing down the current of thought and ultimately stopping at altogether. This fact has not been realized by the yogis themselves. Religious doctrines and sentimental or ethical considerations have obscured the truth. I believe I am entitled to the credit of being the first man to understand the true bearings of the question.

I was led to this discovery chiefly through studying comparative mysticism. For instance; a Catholic repeats Ave Maria rapidly and continuously; they rhythm inhibits the intellectual process. The result is an ecstatic vision of Mary. The Hindu repeats Aum Hari Aum in the same way and gets a vision of Vishnu. But I noticed that the characteristics of both visions were identical save for the sectarian terminology in which the memory recorded them. I argued that process and result were identical. It was a physiological phenomenon and the apparent divergence was due to the inability of the mind to express the event except by using the language of worship which was familiar.

Extended study and repeated experiment have confirmed this conviction. I have thus been able to simplify the process of spiritual development by eliminating all dogmatic accretions. To get into a trance is of the same order of phenomena as to get drunk. It does not depend on creed. Virtue is only necessary in so far as it favors success; just as certain diets, neither right nor wrong in themselves, are indicated for the athlete or the diabetic. I am proud of having made it possible for my pupils to achieve in months what previously required as many years. Also, of having saved the successful from the devastating delusion that the intellectual image of their experience is an universal truth.

This error has wrought more mischief in the past than any other. Mohammed's conviction that his visions were of imperative importance to "salvation" made him a fanatic. Almost all religious tyranny springs from intellectual narrowness. The spiritual energy derived from the high trances makes the seer a formidable force; and unless he be aware that his interpretation is due only to the exaggeration of his own tendencies of thought, he will seek to impose it on others, and so delude his disciples, pervert their minds and prevent their development. He can do good only in one way, that is by publishing the methods by which he attained illumination: in other words, by adding his experience to the sum of scientific knowledge. I have myself striven strenuously to do this, always endeavoring to make it clear that my results are of value only to myself, and that even my methods may need modification in every case, just as each poet, golfer and barrister must acquire a style peculiar to his idiosyncrasies.

http://hermetic.com/crowley/confessions/chapter28.html

 

[Veda]

Re: "A rather stupid kind of mischief."

Yes, I'm familiar with the poetic ditty. The aim of Magic(k) is not religion, and Crowley never tried to start a religion, although others thought it would be a good idea for him to do so.

 

[Tom_Booth]

dianetics basically qualified as a science from square one with independent replication of result. people bought the book, followed the instructions on the side of the package and got some good results

still it is a soft science rather than a hard science like physics or metallurgy and auditing is ultimately not a technology but an art based on a technology

scientology is "an applied religious philosophy" and is highly parascientific

nonetheless one can and should apply critical thinking and scientific methodology to it's study and application...

for example...

in may 1980 kathie and i visited our friend in new york. coming back monday she wanted me to get back to philly by 12:30 so i got out on the jersey pike with it's 55 mph limit and stoked the old plymouth up to 70-75. i was zoned in on it; moving through traffic like some andretti. we'd toked a doobie and kath was half napping beside me. suddenly i knew just beyond my field of vision was a trooper with a radar gun. i backed off down to 55 went over one rise and then another and HA!!! there's the the statie with his radar gun...

i nudged kath and grinned said "see that? i knew two miles back he'd be there and slowed down." she said "i noticed that!" it was so cool. "OT" stuff can't be proven and it's not easy to do something close to a demonstration...

but...

was it a spiritual perception?

maybe...

one must ask how else it can be accounted...

hmmmm...

subliminal perception of radar wave perhaps. this would be physical perception though still highly refined perception and thought...

or...

maybe a driver coming from the other direction had their headlights on to signal us of the speed trap and though i had not taken conscious notice i had cognited off the peripheral perception


this is how i have studied and thought over many decades

i'm personally fairly well convinced of both the reality of what might be termed "OT" and the genius of SOME NOT ALL of hubbard's work...

The problem with investigating these kind of experiences scientifically is their relative rarity. A scientific study requires repeated experiment. The first order of business then is to develop said faculty to the utmost to the point where it can be called upon at will. At that point it becomes possible to set up experiments under controlled conditions so as to isolate the variables involved. Rule out irrelevancies. Test various hypotheses etc. Perhaps it was only your guardian angel whispering in your ear. Without repeatability there can only be endless speculation.

 

[Tom_Booth]

Re: "A rather stupid kind of mischief."

Yes, I'm familiar with the poetic ditty. The aim of Magic(k) is not religion, and Crowley never tried to start a religion, although others thought it would be a good idea for him to do so.

It's a walk on a wire.

 

[F.Bullbait]

This would be the best discovery of all time. I would love to see it. In fact, if you could record this phenomena happening, there are several very prominent companies that would fund your research rather quickly.

Short of that, you can contact the James Randi Educational Foundation and show them the video. They will set you up with a very simple, scientific experiment in which you reproduce your results. If matter is being spontaneously created out of nothing using your techniques, not only will you win $1 million dollars, you will go down in history as the first person to prove the existence of mental powers unknown in the natural world.

Go for it.

Much easier just to mockup the $1 million, something to carry it and take a nice vacation.

 

[Commander Birdsong]

The problem with investigating these kind of experiences scientifically is their relative rarity. A scientific study requires repeated experiment. The first order of business then is to develop said faculty to the utmost to the point where it can be called upon at will. At that point it becomes possible to set up experiments under controlled conditions so as to isolate the variables involved. Rule out irrelevancies. Test various hypotheses etc. Perhaps it was only your guardian angel whispering in your ear. Without repeatability there can only be endless speculation.

coooooool...

yeah it might have been my GA...

but...

what you say about repeatability is pertinent. that gives you good scientific data. this takes things out of the parascientific sphere

but...

we needn't be left with pure speculation. i'm not. i've done long arduous studies and have enhanced my abilities in the spiritual realm to the point where although i cannot PROVE!!! my connection with them i can give honest account of what i did to produce specific results...

and then point to the documented results...

boston is the first town to win crowns in all 4 major pro sports in one decade...

it is my considered belief i made a significant and critical contribution to that result

and...

that's all business as usual...

six live nukes coming off the rack at minot aft 29 August '07 was not business as usual

i commandeered them...

watch for my next post on the crazy claims thread...