MS2: People attack Scientology because they "couldn’t apply the tech of Scientology"

Re: MS2: People attack Scientology because they "couldn’t apply the tech of Scientolo

Oh dear. What garbage, especially the part about the South Korean pilot crashing being traced to poor education. Um, actually South Korea is ranked as number 1 or 2 in the world as far as education standards.

Pre university they rank high.
But on study effectiveness they are very low.


http://wenr.wes.org/2013/06/wenr-june-2013-an-overview-of-education-in-south-korea/
"According to a PISA criterion known as “study effectiveness,” South Korea ranks only 24th out of 30 developed nations. Children in Finland, the top ranked country in study effectiveness (and third ranked overall), spend significantly less time in school and in studying in general than is the case in Korea."

They spend more time in school than kids in other countries - as much as 13 hours a day.

"Korean children spend 220 days a year in school versus 190 in Finland and 180 in the United States. By some measures, the average Korean child spends 13 hours a day studying after supplemental class time is factored in. "

At the university level their education level is low compared with other countries.

"At the university level, there is also much work to be done if the government is to raise standards at its best institutions to a world-class level, as it wishes to do. According to the 2012 ranking produced by Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Korea’s highest-ranked university, Seoul National University, sits among the 100-150th best universities in the world, while just 10 institutions total are in the top 500. The Times Higher Education’s Ranking puts just six institutions in its top 400, although ranking individual universities a little higher than the Shanghai ranking,
with Pohang University of Science and Technology 50th, Seoul National University 59th and Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology 68th."


They have a very high number of the overall population who get university education, but their standards for entry are low. Their standards for graduation are a joke.

Their education for kids pre-university is RPF style. Study study study all day and late into the night, but with bad methods. Just try to get there by read and remember. It works to a degree. Critical thinking skills are not even given a nod. Similar to China, except in China they do know that intellectual skills are important, even if they want to do prevent people from using them
 

GreyLensman

Silver Meritorious Patron
Re: MS2: People attack Scientology because they "couldn’t apply the tech of Scientolo

Tom Martiniano speaking for Milestone Two: People attack Scientology because they "couldn’t apply the tech of Scientology while they were in."

I wonder who this could possibly be aimed at?

It won’t work if not used
http://milestonetwo.wordpress.com/2014/08/24/it-wont-work-if-not-used/

Excerpt:

Part of conning a mark is blaming him for failing to understand.
It's BS.
I understood very very well, and I had tons of "wins".

What finally got me to look at why the hell I was bothering to be a Scientologist was the lack of integrity it took for me to fail to see the obvious flaws I had developed in my thinking as a direct result of the influences, planned and intended, of the cult of Scientology. I ignored obvious things, obvious dissonance.

Like the RPF, and the black boiler-suited denizens living under the Manor Hotel.

Like the policy saying have credit, improve it, don't ever use it, and the registrars basically assessing which credit card you can extend the limit on for your next service.

Having wins and then being caved in by the registar on purpose, being told, well, you aren't really doing that well.

The constant Hill 10 and creation of PTPs and danger in the environment while saying that creating danger in the environment is a wog thing.
Hell, wogs VS Scientologists. That term alone was a problem for me.

And ultimately understanding a piece of tech and watching it applied to me by a very good auditor and having it fail miserably. In fact it did harm, and I realized L. Ron Hubbard had pulled it out of his ass. It was unworkable, filled with assumptions that don't work and are clearly untrue.

I understand completely what Scientology is, was, and is intended to achieve and it is not clear and OT or trained auditors. It is caved in and damaged beings who are not able to look beyond the chains they have fastened in their own mind.
 
Last edited:

George Layton

Silver Meritorious Patron

BunnySkull

Silver Meritorious Patron
Re: MS2: People attack Scientology because they "couldn’t apply the tech of Scientolo

I still shake my head at Tom Martiniano giving these "tech speeches".

Like Lana, this guy was not an auditor. He was never an auditor. Both of them had admin jobs.

Just seems kind of weird to me that it's these two who are so front and center in this Standard Tech parade.

This is a strange phenomenon. I wonder why they have become such hardcore "auditor" promoters outside of the cult - maybe because they really just have this fantasy about it because they've never actually had much practice with it. It's easy to entertain delusions if you've never dealt with the reality.
 

10oriocookies

Patron with Honors
Re: MS2: People attack Scientology because they "couldn’t apply the tech of Scientolo

I have to give it to these MS2 guys, they are really creating an effect on this planet. Out of the 7 billion or so of us meat popsicles, they have been able to influence a whole two dozen or so people with their rhetoric. Yawn....

Just so I have this straight: squirrel group lecturing people on tech not working, speaking in generalities, being critical of people who exercised their own free will to not practice a religious philosophy. Sound about right?
 

anonomog

Gold Meritorious Patron
Re: MS2: People attack Scientology because they "couldn’t apply the tech of Scientolo

They haven't got a hope in hell of attracting never ins with their hype. The site feels like an advert, plastic and unreal. The words are arrogant and condescending, often mean spirited and at odds with the idea of spiritual betterment.

The biggest fail though, is that they fail to see that by pointing out how easy it is for the tech not to work, they are damning their own product.
 
Re: MS2: People attack Scientology because they "couldn’t apply the tech of Scientolo

In the years when I was in I noticed there were a very large amount of people who did not seem to have had much previous involvement with other self improvement or spiritual groups. I found this very odd as previously I knew a lot of people who had personal experience with a number of self improvement courses or faiths, and found it intriguing to learn bits and pieces about different beliefs.

I guess many people did not have a lot to compare Scientology with.

I felt basic tech such as study tech, comm course, touch assists and ARC triangle were very easy to apply and understand, and I think most people would feel the same way. Especially as there were supervisors and other support staff to help. I personally feel that all these practices were ultra basic and had a few mild positives, at best.

To be honest I received many touch assists over the years and I did not find them helpful but felt sorry for the auditor and made up a Win so I could get out of it. I also gave many touch assists and I did not see any real improvements with PC but think they also lied to me ... just to get away. I lied on many, many, many occasions after completing auditing or training and falsely attested. Although on a high and only partially aware of this at the time, but not really confronting my dishonesty until months after leaving. Also aware of the long drawn out drama of going to qual and ethics if I did not say the right thing. The bulk of Scientology technology has minimal results, perhaps just a few to keep the person inspired. A web of deception is a closer description, and tech written by someone insane.
 

ThetanExterior

Gold Meritorious Patron
Re: MS2: People attack Scientology because they "couldn’t apply the tech of Scientolo

If two people have a disagreement they will usually discuss it sensibly until they reach an outcome.

Most people call this common sense.

But if one of these people is a Scientologist he/she will say that they used "the tech" and LRH is a genius.:duh:
 

Student of Trinity

Silver Meritorious Patron
Re: MS2: People attack Scientology because they "couldn’t apply the tech of Scientolo

They haven't got a hope in hell of attracting never ins with their hype. The site feels like an advert, plastic and unreal. The words are arrogant and condescending, often mean spirited and at odds with the idea of spiritual betterment.

The biggest fail though, is that they fail to see that by pointing out how easy it is for the tech not to work, they are damning their own product.

That's a really good point. The website is slick, but it really doesn't seem calculated to appeal to non-Scientologists. Maybe that's their deliberate purpose; maybe they're only trying to be a forum for the committed. Yet a lot of their posts seem to be cheerleading or even defending. There doesn't seem to be much discussion going on about practical problems in dealing with swarms of enthusiastic clients, or anything like that. It's mostly beating the drum for how great Scientology is, but I think anonomog is right about this: the appeals being made just do not seem appropriate to attract new 'public' — or even make sense, to anyone not yet 'in'.
 

TrevAnon

Big List researcher
Re: MS2: People attack Scientology because they "couldn’t apply the tech of Scientolo

I have to give it to these MS2 guys, they are really creating an effect on this planet. Out of the 7 billion or so of us meat popsicles, they have been able to influence a whole two dozen or so people with their rhetoric. Yawn....

Just so I have this straight: squirrel group lecturing people on tech not working, speaking in generalities, being critical of people who exercised their own free will to not practice a religious philosophy. Sound about right?

Yup :yes:
 

phenomanon

Canyon
Re: MS2: People attack Scientology because they "couldn’t apply the tech of Scientolo

o crap. I guess I'll have to go back to square 1 and find out what these people are saying. I only read a little of what Tom Mariano( whatever0 said and I know he's whack.
 

Lulu Belle

Moonbat
Re: MS2: People attack Scientology because they "couldn’t apply the tech of Scientolo

From Martiniani's post:

Picture a student who is in an org, studying Dianetics. He has a lot of Mis-Us on DMSMH and rolls off of the course. Then he gets onto staff and learns how to route comm and stuff from the Staff Statuses and then gravitates up the org board becomes an exec and then leaves when things get tough. He hates Scientology and hates it so much he decides to attack it. And why not? There was so much promise in this subject that the ARCX he has with it is monstrous. He will tell you the tech doesn’t work and you know what? From his viewpoint it doesn’t.



You know, this is only the second thing that he's wrote that I've read.

And in both this and the other M2 post that I've read, his "target" appears to be the same thing:

People who used to be executives on staff who are now exes.


Here's some of the other post I was thinking of:


http://milestonetwo.wordpress.com/2014/07/02/idee-fixe/

So it seems like ex-Scientologists are cutting new ground here by acting in this nutty behavior. Never in history have I seen a religion so attacked and so maligned as Scientology and mainly by it’s own ex-members and especially by it’s ex-executives. Look at all the people writing – for years and years about how bad Scientology is. Well, They aren’t nuts per definition, they just have overts and especially missed withholds. The difference is that the Hare Krishna’s and the Church of Christ cannot miss withholds like Scientology can, that’s for sure. If someone is spending that much time trying to make their Church look bad, then they have O/Ws of magnitude. And let me tell you, a lot of these nattering Ex-Sea Org can tell you exactly what is wrong with the Church because they helped make it that way. This is what happens when you put staff who have Responsibility traits below zero into executive positions. They didn’t take responsibility for problems of the organization, they contributed to the problems by nattering about them and doing little or nothing to fix them.



Kind of seems like he has an ax to grind.

A little illumination as to why this might be:

When I was in the Sea Org and Shelton was the Tech Aide WUS, I pointed out to him that there was a lot of out tech going on with the GAT and the products that were coming out of RTC and Gold. What did he do? He wrote a KR on me and had me busted. Good handling Chris. And now he natters about the whole mess. What kind of responsibility is that?



I'm not an expert on the mind or anything (as Tom is of course
:p) but this attack on ex-Sea Org execs sounds kind of ... personal.

Whatever happened with Tom and Chris I'm almost positive happened after I left. But I remember Tom had some pretty bad busts when I was in.

Sounds like he may not have gotten over them.
 

Leland

Crusader
Re: MS2: People attack Scientology because they "couldn’t apply the tech of Scientolo

From Martiniani's post:




You know, this is only the second thing that he's wrote that I've read.

And in both this and the other M2 post that I've read, his "target" appears to be the same thing:

People who used to be executives on staff who are now exes.


Here's some of the other post I was thinking of:


http://milestonetwo.wordpress.com/2014/07/02/idee-fixe/




Kind of seems like he has an ax to grind.

A little illumination as to why this might be:




I'm not an expert on the mind or anything (as Tom is of course
:p) but this attack on ex-Sea Org execs sounds kind of ... personal.

Whatever happened with Tom and Chris I'm almost positive happened after I left. But I remember Tom had some pretty bad busts when I was in.

Sounds like he may not have gotten over them.

I have an axe to grind with SO personnel .......too....and LRH...and C of $....and RTC....and Scien technology...and GAT I.....and the voices in my space.....and and and.....:p
 

Intentionally Blank

Scientology Widow
Re: MS2: People attack Scientology because they "couldn’t apply the tech of Scientolo

Excerpt:
He will tell you the tech doesn’t work and you know what? From his viewpoint it doesn’t.

Absurdity:
What's true is what's true for you.

Therefore it follows that the tech does not work. For a vast number of people. And if we were to apply Management of Statistics to just the number of people for whom tech works/does not work I think we would find a Danger Condition in need of ....... whatever comes next. LOL My scn store of knowledge just ran out.

I detest double standards and incongruent statements. It made me a real joy [insert sarcasm font] in catholic school. Reason #76590 I could never be a scientologist.
 

Dulloldfart

Squirrel Extraordinaire
Re: MS2: People attack Scientology because they "couldn’t apply the tech of Scientolo

Whatever happened with Tom and Chris I'm almost positive happened after I left. But I remember Tom had some pretty bad busts when I was in.

Sounds like he may not have gotten over them.

Maybe he should try some improved tech to take the charge off that R3R or R3RA doesn't get anywhere near.

PaulsRobot's HeavyDuty module has over a dozen options, most of which he won't have tried on his hot incidents with that old Dianetics shit. Let alone the 114 variations in Morph. :biggrin:

Paul
 

Bill

Gold Meritorious Patron
Re: MS2: People attack Scientology because they "couldn’t apply the tech of Scientolo

I have found, after many, many years, that someone will be able to make anything "work" and "get gains". Literally A*N*Y*T*H*I*N*G.

You come up with a "therapy" or a "treatment", no matter how off-the-wall, and you will be able to find someone, somewhere who will swear on a stack of bibles that they "made it work" and they "got tremendous gains" from it.

That's just a fact of human nature.

The criteria for a truly workable system could be said to be: Are the results predictable, consistent and reliable.

Predictable: The results are exactly as promised. Scientology fails on this - what is promised is not what you get.
Consistent: The results from a specific process always happens. Scientology fails on this - no one knows that a specific process will do and the common result is "nothing".
Reliable: No matter who applies it and no matter who it is applied to, the results are as expected. Scientology fails on this - apparently no one can figure out how to apply Scientology processes "correctly" and even those who claim they can, have nothing to show for it.

The fact that someone may swear on a stack of DMSMH that they "made it work" and they "got gains" from it is completely meaningless. That kind of "result" can be claimed for just about any off-the-wall "therapy" and quack solution.

And yet this unverified "made it work" and unproven "got gains" is the only thing Scientologists have.
 

Elronius of Marcabia

Silver Meritorious Patron
Re: MS2: People attack Scientology because they "couldn’t apply the tech of Scientolo

nope its attacked because Hubbards aligator mouth overloaded his hummingbird ass
and he failed to deliver on huge claims:melodramatic::ohmy::coolwink:
 

Lulu Belle

Moonbat
Re: MS2: People attack Scientology because they "couldn’t apply the tech of Scientolo

I have found, after many, many years, that someone will be able to make anything "work" and "get gains". Literally A*N*Y*T*H*I*N*G.

You come up with a "therapy" or a "treatment", no matter how off-the-wall, and you will be able to find someone, somewhere who will swear on a stack of bibles that they "made it work" and they "got tremendous gains" from it.

That's just a fact of human nature.

The criteria for a truly workable system could be said to be: Are the results predictable, consistent and reliable.

Predictable: The results are exactly as promised. Scientology fails on this - what is promised is not what you get.
Consistent: The results from a specific process always happens. Scientology fails on this - no one knows that a specific process will do and the common result is "nothing".
Reliable: No matter who applies it and no matter who it is applied to, the results are as expected. Scientology fails on this - apparently no one can figure out how to apply Scientology processes "correctly" and even those who claim they can, have nothing to show for it.

The fact that someone may swear on a stack of DMSMH that they "made it work" and they "got gains" from it is completely meaningless. That kind of "result" can be claimed for just about any off-the-wall "therapy" and quack solution.

And yet this unverified "made it work" and unproven "got gains" is the only thing Scientologists have.


:goodposting:

One of my favorite sayings:

Even a broken clock is right twice a day.
 

ILove2Lurk

Lisbeth Salander
Re: MS2: People attack Scientology because they "couldn’t apply the tech of Scientolo

I have found, after many, many years, that someone will be able to make anything "work" and "get gains".

< snip >

To your point . . . I'm currently making google "work" and I'm "getting gains."

Generally speaking, it's:


  • [*=1]Predictable: results as promised
    [*=1]Consistent: results always happen
    [*=1] Reliable: results are as expected

. . . . . . . . . . . . .
working-on-a-computer-smiley-emoticon.gif
 
Top