L Ron Hubbard, the scientist.

scino

Patron
There aren't many scientists in Scientology. I am not implying that scn is wrong or unscientific ( or the contrary for that matter ) just that it hasn't much followers in the scientific community.

People with a non-scientific education ( including chiropractors and dentists who were trained to do a job ) are -easily- impressed by authorities in the sciences. Numerous bogus scientists, use this to their advantage. Michio Kaku is a bona fide scientist. But when "if professor Michio Kaku ( theoretical physicist in NYC with an impressive number of tv appearances ) says so it must be true", becomes "Kaku said it and thus it is true" something must have gone wrong.

L.Ron Hubbard must have been bigger in the 50s than Kaku is today! For me this explains why Scientology was booming in the early days. LRH genius was that he understood why people followed him. Most people don't like scientists because they are smarter than most people. They love it when a 'scientist' ( LRH ) says that even -you- can understand the universe without much effort and that established science is wrong anyway.

The platform of bogus science today: http://zfirelight.blogspot.com/
 

RandomCat

Patron with Honors
There aren't many scientists in Scientology. I am not implying that scn is wrong or unscientific ( or the contrary for that matter ) just that it hasn't much followers in the scientific community.

People with a non-scientific education ( including chiropractors and dentists who were trained to do a job ) are -easily- impressed by authorities in the sciences. Numerous bogus scientists, use this to their advantage. Michio Kaku is a bona fide scientist. But when "if professor Michio Kaku ( theoretical physicist in NYC with an impressive number of tv appearances ) says so it must be true", becomes "Kaku said it and thus it is true" something must have gone wrong.

L.Ron Hubbard must have been bigger in the 50s than Kaku is today! For me this explains why Scientology was booming in the early days. LRH genius was that he understood why people followed him. Most people don't like scientists because they are smarter than most people. They love it when a 'scientist' ( LRH ) says that even -you- can understand the universe without much effort and that established science is wrong anyway.

The platform of bogus science today: http://zfirelight.blogspot.com/
Of course LRH was not really a 'scientist' (Although at least one of his books falsely claimed that he was a nuclear physicist).

Perhaps you're right about some people getting sucked into cons because they are persuaded into believing someone has a system that makes the 'very complex' easy to understand and manipulate.
A lot of fake medical cures and pseudosciences seem to use this sort of thing.
e.g. Many that I've seen talk about quantum physics as part of their explanation without apparently consulting with any expert in that field.

As far as Kaku, I don't think you have to take what he says as the gospel truth.
But when he does have an opinion within his field of expertise (physics), I think this opinion needs to be taken seriously.
 

Mystic

Crusader
There aren't many scientists in Scientology. I am not implying that scn is wrong or unscientific ( or the contrary for that matter ) just that it hasn't much followers in the scientific community.

People with a non-scientific education ( including chiropractors and dentists who were trained to do a job ) are -easily- impressed by authorities in the sciences. Numerous bogus scientists, use this to their advantage. Michio Kaku is a bona fide scientist. But when "if professor Michio Kaku ( theoretical physicist in NYC with an impressive number of tv appearances ) says so it must be true", becomes "Kaku said it and thus it is true" something must have gone wrong.

L.Ron Hubbard must have been bigger in the 50s than Kaku is today! For me this explains why Scientology was booming in the early days. LRH genius was that he understood why people followed him. Most people don't like scientists because they are smarter than most people. They love it when a 'scientist' ( LRH ) says that even -you- can understand the universe without much effort and that established science is wrong anyway.

The platform of bogus science today: http://zfirelight.blogspot.com/

L. Ron Hubbard was merely a spokeshole, a channel, a psychic relay for a collection of satannic beings hanging out in the lower levels of mental darkness.

He wasn't even a human being.


 

Feral

Rogue male
L. Ron Hubbard was merely a spokeshole, a channel, a psychic relay for a collection of satannic beings hanging out in the lower levels of mental darkness.

He wasn't even a human being.



Wow, and here we have both ends of the wildest spectrum that I think could ever exist.
 

Captain Koolaid

Patron Meritorious
Hubbard exploited the New Age/Spirituality boom at the time, people did not follow him because of his "scientific accomplishments". Calling Hubbard a scientist is possibly the worst insult for real scientists.
 

scino

Patron
Hubbard exploited the New Age/Spirituality boom at the time, people did not follow him because of his "scientific accomplishments". Calling Hubbard a scientist is possibly the worst insult for real scientists.

Scientology started long before the New Age boom, Hubbard bought Saint Hill in 1959!

You are not very precise in choosing words. Calling Hubbard a scientist would at best create a tiny movement of a scientists' eyebrow, if he at all knows who Hubbard is, accusing a scientist of plagiarism however, would be considered an insult, I am sure.
 

scino

Patron
Of course LRH was not really a 'scientist' (Although at least one of his books falsely claimed that he was a nuclear physicist).

Perhaps you're right about some people getting sucked into cons because they are persuaded into believing someone has a system that makes the 'very complex' easy to understand and manipulate.
A lot of fake medical cures and pseudosciences seem to use this sort of thing.
e.g. Many that I've seen talk about quantum physics as part of their explanation without apparently consulting with any expert in that field.

As far as Kaku, I don't think you have to take what he says as the gospel truth.
But when he does have an opinion within his field of expertise (physics), I think this opinion needs to be taken seriously.

Exactly, he merely acted as a scientist so that he could speak as an 'authority'.

"... Many that I've seen talk about quantum physics as part of their explanation without apparently consulting with any expert in that field. ..." - They don't seem to understand that quantum mechanics is a model for physics at the level of sub-atomic particles. They confuse it with consciousness and whatever they want to prove their point.
 

koki

Silver Meritorious Patron
Scientology started long before the New Age boom, Hubbard bought Saint Hill in 1959!

You are not very precise in choosing words. Calling Hubbard a scientist would at best create a tiny movement of a scientists' eyebrow, if he at all knows who Hubbard is, accusing a scientist of plagiarism however, would be considered an insult, I am sure.
:screwy::banghead::naughty:.....is this a joke or what.....?

P.S.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r_al2u8_9wU&feature=player_embedded

Big hello from LRHs Bulgraviya.
 

ClamSource

Patron with Honors
There aren't many scientists in Scientology. I am not implying that scn is wrong or unscientific ( or the contrary for that matter ) just that it hasn't much followers in the scientific community.
http://zfirelight.blogspot.com/

I'll say it if you won't. Scientology is not scientific. It has no scientific basis or justification. Hubbard made up a whole bunch of shit and said it's true because Source said it and Source can't be wrong.
 

koki

Silver Meritorious Patron
Science is this - you make hypothesis -and constantly doing experiments to prove it WRONG. and after 1000 experiments,if you cant prove it wrong-you can prove that hypothesis is fact.
but if LRH let someone try to prove him wrong.....ooooooo boooooyyyy- there will be 100 000 facts that IT IS WRONG.
Big hello from LRHs Bulgraviya.
 
There aren't many scientists in Scientology. I am not implying that scn is wrong or unscientific ( or the contrary for that matter ) just that it hasn't much followers in the scientific community.

People with a non-scientific education ( including chiropractors and dentists who were trained to do a job ) are -easily- impressed by authorities in the sciences. Numerous bogus scientists, use this to their advantage. Michio Kaku is a bona fide scientist. But when "if professor Michio Kaku ( theoretical physicist in NYC with an impressive number of tv appearances ) says so it must be true", becomes "Kaku said it and thus it is true" something must have gone wrong.

L.Ron Hubbard must have been bigger in the 50s than Kaku is today! For me this explains why Scientology was booming in the early days. LRH genius was that he understood why people followed him. Most people don't like scientists because they are smarter than most people. They love it when a 'scientist' ( LRH ) says that even -you- can understand the universe without much effort and that established science is wrong anyway.

The platform of bogus science today: http://zfirelight.blogspot.com/

Hubbard was a con man, Hubbard became whatever he needed to become. If he were alive today he'd be spamming the internet with ads for penis enlargement pills and rapid weight loss snake oil, instead of selling his batshit crazy UFO Cult Tech.
 

pollywog

Patron with Honors
Hubbard took what little he learned from everything that he failed at (physics, military, magick, mental health), added some of what he had some success at (science fiction writing), threw in everything of what he WAS and what he WANTED (a psychotic tyrant who demanded blind adherence from his sycophantic followers), and VOILA: you have Scientology. The scam of the last 60 years.
 

scino

Patron
I'll say it if you won't. Scientology is not scientific. It has no scientific basis or justification. Hubbard made up a whole bunch of shit and said it's true because Source said it and Source can't be wrong.

You missed my point. I am trying to analyze why, 60 years ago, in a time completely different than ours, LRH could have an appeal to so many people. I ( merely ) suggested that one of the reasons could be that LRH presented himself as a scientist. - Real scientists would see through this ( hence no scientists in scn ) but the less educated could be fooled. Just as they are today by the bunch of con artists daily appearing on C2C.
 

scino

Patron
Hubbard was a con man, Hubbard became whatever he needed to become. If he were alive today he'd be spamming the internet with ads for penis enlargement pills and rapid weight loss snake oil, instead of selling his batshit crazy UFO Cult Tech.

Isn't there a special rant section on this forum? What does this add to the discussion?
 

pollywog

Patron with Honors
Okay, you want to know what scientists think of scientology? Try this for starters: http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/

Science requires an analytical mind. By that alone, scientology fails.

As for why people follow/ed him, who knows? Why did people buy pet rocks? or Sony Betamax? Or get coffee enemas? The human condition, I suppose. And many people feel they can't - or they are just plain too lazy - to search on their own.

PS: If you're looking for the 1950s/60s zeitgeist to explain why people followed him, that is a wholly different subject.
 
Top