The Little Thread Which Grew - the Apollo '73 to Everything But

[lkwdblds]

A link up between Benjamin Franklin, Franz Mesmer and Wolfgang Mozart

Ben Franklin invented a musical instrument called the "Glass Harmonica" in the American Colonies shortly before we became a country. Franz Anton Mesmer, of Mesmerism fame, was a metaphysical type (non orthodox) medical doctor living in Vienna and W.A. Mozart traveled with his father to Vienna in 1773 when he was 17. While in Vienna, they went to Mesmer's home to check out his Glass Harmonica.

Late in his life, shortly before he died, Mozart wrote a Rondo for the Glass Harmonica, catalog listing K 617. Mozart's very last piece was his Requiem Mass, K 626 so the K 617 was only 9 compositions earlier.

The Glass Harmonica is made up of glasses, filled with liquid to various levels. which are skillfully rubbed by the performer to produce music. They affect they produce is quite ethereal, simulating spiritualism, the deity and death. While starting on his Requiem Mass, though he was only 35. Mozart became convinced that he was writing it for his own death. Probably in this frame of mind, he was drawn back to his teenage days when he encountered Mesmer's instrument. In his state of mind, believing he was dying, it is easy to see why he chose the Glass Harmonica to be the instrument used to play this melody.

Even so, though the Adagio portion, written years earlier, is very serious and brings visions of death, the Rondo portion on which the piece ends is quite lively and cheerful, almost childlike. Mozart, who was infused with a "spirit of play" his entire life, does not give this up, even when he believed he was dying. The Adagop is somber and was written about 10 years earlier but the new Rondo is childlike and high spirited. He combines the two pieces into one new piece.

The linked to video plays a little of the Adagio and then skips to the light hearted Rondo. In the Rondo, the video plays only short snippets of the Rondo:

Here is the link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zcZdqAF-hM8

To illustrate the versatility of the Glass Harmonic, here is a link to the same players playing the famous Latin piece, "Tico, Tico"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2jxsYKiJYsY
Lakey

 

[lkwdblds]

My take on Dianetics

Someone just wrote me a PM last night asking me what I thought about Dianetics. I sent him an answer and thought it also post it here and see if it gets any kind of reaction.
What I wrote is not scientific and is based on only my own experiences both receiving Dianetics and auditing it on others. These are just my opinions and my opinions are not fixed in concrete and are open to change. Here is what I wrote this guy about Dianetics:

Dianetics worked well for me and I received hundreds of hours of it and also audited it quite a bit on others, always with a good result. Put it this way, it was a big improvement on Freudian therapy.

I got some "Idenics" from Mike Goldstein and Idenics, developed by an old time Dianetic auditor, John Galusha, who was working with Goldstein, features what may be a significant improvement to Dianetics. In Dianetics, a being moves to the beginning of an incident and repeatedly scans through it until either an erasure occurs or, if not that, then one looks "earlier - similar". When one views the incident, he is pretty much viewing it from present time.

Idenics insists that when you view an incident, you view it from the time it occurred (not from present time). You look at what happened from your base of knowledge and awareness when the incident took place. Say you were in high school when the incident occurred and later on as an adult, you became a Class VI Auditor. Well you go back and run out the incident as if you were still that high school student. Think about it and maybe do some demos and see which way you think makes more sense. I did that and saw that the Idenics method makes more sense, at least to me.

The reason it makes more sense to me is that in Dianetics, one is going for making a perfect duplicate of an incident, you know, the exact time,place, form and event. Upon constructing a perfect duplicate, the incident is supposed to vanish, per LRH's Axioms. Now to achieve that perfect duplicate, it makes total sense that you run the incident as you were THEN, not as you are NOW. If you do the latter, as Hubbard did, all sorts of new awarenesses and nuances are added which didn't exist at the time the incident occurred! I ask you, how in the heck could a perfect duplicate occur when so many new variables now exist in the being doing the viewing. John Galusha figured this out and to me it makes a lot of sense. LRH and the thousands of people who studied his Dianetics, including myself, never did spot this outpoint!

Other than that key element which Galusha introduced, I think Dianetics is a workable system. However, that one element is a very major element, not just a minor oversight.

That brings me to the subject of past lives. Having run hundreds of past life incidents, myself, I still can't assert with 100% certainty that past lives exist. Running an incident, no one ever gets their exact name, or the full names of the others in the incident or the exact location or address of where the incident took place. We all seem to get the exact time and perhaps the exact form and event of the incident but to make a perfect duplicate, one needs to have the exact time, place, form and event. All I ever got was a general feeling that something happened but it wasn't clear enough to establish 100% certainty.

If you run a past life incident and erase it, things will definitely change for you in present time. For example, if you were subject to a certain type of headache and ran it out, using a past life incident, the headache would permanently go away. This might be the result of an actual Dianetic erasure of a past life incident or it could just be a placebo effect taking place. A person believes he ran out an incident so strongly that whatever was causing the headache goes away even though the incident he ran was imagined and not real. This type of placebo effect occurs frequently with the body and the taking of pills and it can also occur in working with the mind.

Well, that's my take on Dianetics. It has a lot of workability and is much stronger and more effective than Freudian therapy but even so it was a work in progress while LRH touted it as the "nee plus ultra" of mental tech and ordered it to be left in its 1975 format and calls anyone who would change Dianetics a squirrel. There is definitely room for improvement and change and Idenics has incorporated one major improvement and probably more than that. Perhaps others have made improvements as well.
Lakey

 

[lkwdblds]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Johnny the Magic Thetan is putting on a workshop this Sunday in North Hollywood, He called me and asked me if I would post some info about it on this thread. I am providing the following information for anyone that might be interesting in attending:

Unleashing The Power of Thee & We

Sunday November 9th - 7 to 9 PM

Featuring - - John Rafanello - Disney Imagineer, Rocket Scientist, Quantum Physicist, and Master StoryTeller
With Marvelous Music and Song By Barbara Shane, Kevin Bailey & Robbie Gillman - Hosted by Erin Haskell

There REALLY are ways for us to directly experience Our Unlimited God-Like Ability to Vanish the Life and Reality we do not want and make appear the one we do.

This event is designed to entertain us into a Discovery of how true this is.

THIS SUNDAY AT 7 pm

at the Global Truth Center
11136 Magnolia Blvd., North Hollywood, CA 91601



Call Now To Confirm your place

Call Jay Willick at 818-508-7101 Ext. - 6

$ 20 PER GUEST IN ADVANCE OR AT THE DOOR


(Treat yourself to FUN & VALUABLE Evening & Invite your friends and loved one

You and they Will be Glad You Did)





OPEN THE ATTACHMENT FOR MORE DETAILS AND GREAT IMAGES



Consciousness Is The Ultimate Tool



These are the Voyages of The Star Ship You and

The Star Ship We



Our ongoing mission - to energize and expand our consciousness to the point where we can perceive, explore and communicate with -



The MultiVerse - the infinite number of realities that our imagination can and does orchestrate into existence -



- To permeate our consciousness into every corner of The Micro and Macro Cosmos.



- To perceive with crystal clarity the infinite variety of the worlds, beings and entities that our true unlimited selves have birthed into reality.



- To explore strange and wondrous new worlds and realities.



- To meet and share wonderful things with loved ones throughout every realm of existence.



- To Boldly Go where we have never gone before.


Please Don't Miss This Show & Event!!!



Unleashing the Power of Thee and We

Sunday November 9th from 7 to 9 PM



Call and Reserve Your Place Now!!!



818-508-7101 Extension - 6



Open Up the Attachments for More Info

Lakey

 

[lkwdblds]

More from Mama

I guess that Mama wants to keep the thread going. It seems to me that it was dying out but then Mama sent me two posts to put up. Here's the first:

Tom, one of the two CarTalk brothers (AKA Click and Clack) on NPR on weekends died Monday, Nov. 3, 2014

Here is a link:

http://shar.es/108rtj

Tomorrow, at 10 AM on KQED in San Francisco there will be a memorial show.

What a tragic loss for all of us.
Sent from my iPhone

Posted by Lakey for Mama

 

[lkwdblds]

More from Mama

Here is Mama's second post:

I stumbled across some old blues numbers recently. This link is delicious with women singing sexy blues numbers.

http://flashbak.com/listen-to-the-12-wonderfully-dirty-women-of-early-20th-century-rb-5009/

Posted by Lakey for Mama

 

[cakemaker]

Re: More from Mama

I guess that Mama wants to keep the thread going. It seems to me that it was dying out but then Mama sent me two posts to put up. Here's the first:

Tom, one of the two CarTalk brothers (AKA Click and Clack) on NPR on weekends died Monday, Nov. 3, 2014

Here is a link:

http://shar.es/108rtj

Tomorrow, at 10 AM on KQED in San Francisco there will be a memorial show.

What a tragic loss for all of us.
Sent from my iPhone

Posted by Lakey for Mama

There's a special memorial show at the Car Talk website.

http://www.cartalk.com/content/1445-tommy-riposa-pace

The comments are priceless.

 

[Enthetan]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Japanese industrial robots have a sword fight!

[video=youtube;cR-YlZ9NdIA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cR-YlZ9NdIA[/video]

 

[Gib]

Re: My take on Dianetics

Someone just wrote me a PM last night asking me what I thought about Dianetics. I sent him an answer and thought it also post it here and see if it gets any kind of reaction.
What I wrote is not scientific and is based on only my own experiences both receiving Dianetics and auditing it on others. These are just my opinions and my opinions are not fixed in concrete and are open to change. Here is what I wrote this guy about Dianetics:

Dianetics worked well for me and I received hundreds of hours of it and also audited it quite a bit on others, always with a good result. Put it this way, it was a big improvement on Freudian therapy.

I got some "Idenics" from Mike Goldstein and Idenics, developed by an old time Dianetic auditor, John Galusha, who was working with Goldstein, features what may be a significant improvement to Dianetics. In Dianetics, a being moves to the beginning of an incident and repeatedly scans through it until either an erasure occurs or, if not that, then one looks "earlier - similar". When one views the incident, he is pretty much viewing it from present time.

Idenics insists that when you view an incident, you view it from the time it occurred (not from present time). You look at what happened from your base of knowledge and awareness when the incident took place. Say you were in high school when the incident occurred and later on as an adult, you became a Class VI Auditor. Well you go back and run out the incident as if you were still that high school student. Think about it and maybe do some demos and see which way you think makes more sense. I did that and saw that the Idenics method makes more sense, at least to me.

The reason it makes more sense to me is that in Dianetics, one is going for making a perfect duplicate of an incident, you know, the exact time,place, form and event. Upon constructing a perfect duplicate, the incident is supposed to vanish, per LRH's Axioms. Now to achieve that perfect duplicate, it makes total sense that you run the incident as you were THEN, not as you are NOW. If you do the latter, as Hubbard did, all sorts of new awarenesses and nuances are added which didn't exist at the time the incident occurred! I ask you, how in the heck could a perfect duplicate occur when so many new variables now exist in the being doing the viewing. John Galusha figured this out and to me it makes a lot of sense. LRH and the thousands of people who studied his Dianetics, including myself, never did spot this outpoint!

Other than that key element which Galusha introduced, I think Dianetics is a workable system. However, that one element is a very major element, not just a minor oversight.

That brings me to the subject of past lives. Having run hundreds of past life incidents, myself, I still can't assert with 100% certainty that past lives exist. Running an incident, no one ever gets their exact name, or the full names of the others in the incident or the exact location or address of where the incident took place. We all seem to get the exact time and perhaps the exact form and event of the incident but to make a perfect duplicate, one needs to have the exact time, place, form and event. All I ever got was a general feeling that something happened but it wasn't clear enough to establish 100% certainty.

If you run a past life incident and erase it, things will definitely change for you in present time. For example, if you were subject to a certain type of headache and ran it out, using a past life incident, the headache would permanently go away. This might be the result of an actual Dianetic erasure of a past life incident or it could just be a placebo effect taking place. A person believes he ran out an incident so strongly that whatever was causing the headache goes away even though the incident he ran was imagined and not real. This type of placebo effect occurs frequently with the body and the taking of pills and it can also occur in working with the mind.

Well, that's my take on Dianetics. It has a lot of workability and is much stronger and more effective than Freudian therapy but even so it was a work in progress while LRH touted it as the "nee plus ultra" of mental tech and ordered it to be left in its 1975 format and calls anyone who would change Dianetics a squirrel. There is definitely room for improvement and change and Idenics has incorporated one major improvement and probably more than that. Perhaps others have made improvements as well.
Lakey

you sort of got it right, but not really. You are missing many things.

Dianetics evaluates and tells you, tells you that you are aberrated because you have engrams, secondaries & locks, and thus not "clear" and thus insane until you are clear.

Idenics does not do this or evaluate such things as clear or OT or insane or a scale like in SOS chart of human evualation. There is no evaluation in Idenics. There are no engrams, secondaries or locks in idenics, to address. There is no "clear" in idenics.

And Idenics does not "insist" anything.

Have you read the book?

----------

Freud was talking about Hysteria

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hysteria

 

[Gib]

Re: My take on Dianetics

you sort of got it right, but not really. You are missing many things.

Dianetics evaluates and tells you, tells you that you are aberrated because you have engrams, secondaries & locks, and thus not "clear" and thus insane until you are clear.

Idenics does not do this or evaluate such things as clear or OT or insane or a scale like in SOS chart of human evualation. There is no evaluation in Idenics. There are no engrams, secondaries or locks in idenics, to address. There is no "clear" in idenics.

And Idenics does not "insist" anything.

Have you read the book?

----------

Freud was talking about Hysteria

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hysteria

consider this:

http://www.richardwebster.net/freudandcharcot.html

"Charcot specialised in treating patients who were suffering from a variety of unexplained physical symptoms including paralysis, contractures (muscles which contract and cannot be relaxed) and seizures. Some of these patients sporadically and compulsively adopted a bizarre posture (christened arc-de-cercle) in which they arched their body backwards until they were supported only by their head and their heels. Charcot eventually came to the conclusion that many of his patients were suffering from a form of hysteria which had been induced by their emotional response to a traumatic accident in their past – such as a fall from a scaffold or a railway crash. They suffered, in his view, not from the physical effects of the accident, but from the idea they had formed of it."

"Once again it is Freud himself who dispels any doubts there may be about his habit of presenting as cures or partial cures, courses of treatment which had in fact been unsuccessful. For it is clear from his own subsequent statements (and above all from his private admissions to Fliess) that, when he claimed publicly that he had tested his seduction theory successfully on eighteen patients and implied that some of these had been cured, he was not telling the truth. The real situation, as he would eventually confide in Fliess, was that he had not succeeded in curing a single patient, and there was no clinical evidence that his theory had any merit whatsoever."

Hubbard sold us on a false idea. How did he do it?

Rhetoric.

 

[lkwdblds]

Re: My take on Dianetics

you sort of got it right, but not really. You are missing many things.

Thanks for your comments. Since I made it clear that I was only giving my opinion on Dianetics, I got it 100% right, stating my opinion accurately.

Dianetics evaluates and tells you, tells you that you are aberrated because you have engrams, secondaries & locks, and thus not "clear" and thus insane until you are clear.

Dianetics presents its theories in the first part of Book 1 and then in the second part of the book it presents techniques which it claims will get rid of various aberration discussed in Part 1. The initial presentation is a form of evaluation but Hubbard encourages people to apply the techniques presented in the second part of the book so as to prove to one's self that his techniques do work. Thus. a means iis given for a person to test for themselves whether or not his evaluations are true. If the techniques he provides do not work, it is assumed that people will toss out the subject as invalid but if the techniques do work, people prove to themselves that his evaluations were valid. To me, this is not simple evaluation but is an excellent way to present theories to the public. It follows Buddha's principle, "If its not true for you, its not true."

Idenics does not do this or evaluate such things as clear or OT or insane or a scale like in SOS chart of human evualation. There is no evaluation in Idenics. There are no engrams, secondaries or locks in idenics, to address. There is no "clear" in idenics.

Hubbard put a lot of work into developing his various gradient scales. I found these scales to be both helpful and very interesting. To this day, I consider many of them quite brilliant and quite valid tools with which to examine aberration and help relieve it. Hubbard's definition of the word Clear, was probably a good marketing technique at first to create interest in Dianetics but over the long haul, coining that term turned out being a huge mistake. The reason for this is that Hubbard could never produce a Book 1 Clear because the claims made for the state were tremendously overstated! Hubbard countered by redefining Clear every few years, lightening up the claims made for it each time. Even so, no clear matching any of his definitions was ever truly produced. Ultimately his use of the term Clear ended up severely hurting him.

As regards the term 'insanity", he began by using the legal definition of the term, "the ability to be able to tell right from wrong". As society went forward from the 1950's, this definition also began to be a liability. In various new age philosophies and religions, right and wrong stopped being absolutes and thus became unsuitable terms to use when defining insanity. Hubbard changed definitions continually. In 1962 he gives insanity as simply "must reach - can't reach, must withdraw - can't withdraw" and in 1970 he defines it as "the overt or covert but always complex and continuous determination to harm or destroy." I tend to give Hubbard credit for his definitions. He seemed to be always fine tuning and upgrading various definitions and many of them are well thought out and present interesting points of view from which to examine somewhat complex terms and concepts!

And Idenics does not "insist" anything.

To me, Idenics is similar, first it presents its premises and then it offers techniques to rid one's self of aberrations. In my case, Mike Goldstein applied its techniques to me to show me that they worked. Had the application failed, I would have dropped the subject but if the application worked I would continue with it. I really don't see any major difference here in the approach of the two subjects. I don't recall reading the book.

Have you read the book?

----------

Freud was talking about Hysteria

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hysteria

Thanks for your comments. I did not attempt to evaluate Idenics but rather, I named Idenics only to illustrate that it was possible for improvements to be made to Hubbard's Standard Dianetics. I took one example from my limited exposure to Idenics (only 3 sessions and never reading any book about it) only to illustrate one particular point and I backed up my opinion by giving a detailed explanation of why I considered Idenics to be superior on this one particular point.

Thank you for listing further differences between Dianetics and Idenics. You infer that each element which you state is an improvement which Idenics has achieved over Dianetics. That data is interesting to know but your inferences that each element in Idenics is an improvement on DIanetics is just your opinion since you present no facts to back up any of your inferences.

I tend to agree with you that they seem to be improvements but again, I have no facts to give to back this up. Probably the book on Idenics which you mention does provide some tangible evidence.
Lakey

 

[lkwdblds]

Re: My take on Dianetics

consider this:

http://www.richardwebster.net/freudandcharcot.html

"Charcot specialised in treating patients who were suffering from a variety of unexplained physical symptoms including paralysis, contractures (muscles which contract and cannot be relaxed) and seizures. Some of these patients sporadically and compulsively adopted a bizarre posture (christened arc-de-cercle) in which they arched their body backwards until they were supported only by their head and their heels. Charcot eventually came to the conclusion that many of his patients were suffering from a form of hysteria which had been induced by their emotional response to a traumatic accident in their past – such as a fall from a scaffold or a railway crash. They suffered, in his view, not from the physical effects of the accident, but from the idea they had formed of it."

"Once again it is Freud himself who dispels any doubts there may be about his habit of presenting as cures or partial cures, courses of treatment which had in fact been unsuccessful. For it is clear from his own subsequent statements (and above all from his private admissions to Fliess) that, when he claimed publicly that he had tested his seduction theory successfully on eighteen patients and implied that some of these had been cured, he was not telling the truth. The real situation, as he would eventually confide in Fliess, was that he had not succeeded in curing a single patient, and there was no clinical evidence that his theory had any merit whatsoever."

Hubbard sold us on a false idea. How did he do it?

Rhetoric.

You just reinforced my earlier post. I speculated that Hubbard improved on Freud and now you are pointing out that in a sample size of 18 people, Freud got no cures. Hubbard's results were far better than that and that was the only point I made when comparing Hubbard's work to Freud's earlier work.

I also stated that in my opinion, Hubbard's Dianetics was a workable system. I stressed that it was not a perfect system and not a completed system but it was a workable system because it achieved a high success rate on a large sample of people who were run on Diantetics and/or ran it on others. There is no secret on how Hubbard sold Dianetics - he sold it by achieving a high percentage of positive results in a sample size probably numbering tens of thousands of people or more likely several hundred thousands of people over all these years, starting in the very late 1940's until the present day.

As I see it, just my opinion with no scientific back up, Hubbard can be challenged in only two areas as follows:

#1 - People can assert that all his positive results were obtained by a placebo effect, where people felt they had achieved gains when they really had not.

#2. Hubbard forbid further extension of his work by anyone other than himself. By doing this he forever pigeonholed Dianetics as a 1950's through 1960's technology. As time has now moved forward over 50 years, technology, including healing technologies have exploded in a positive way. More is known about the body and the mind and even the spirit, Meanwhile, Hubbard's technology is parked back in the 50's, hoplessly passe and out of date. What is sad is that Hubbard decreed that no one but himself can update his original work. If someone were to attempt to update Dianetics and employ some of the new scientific breakthroughs which have taken place since Hubbard departed the scene, that person would be declared a suppressive squirrel and would be destroyed by COS.

I think that is a shame. Dianetics was a workable system, certainly capable of being researched further and being updated continually over the decades but Hubbard was presumptuous enough to leave behind a legacy which prevents this from occurring. Moreover, he took out copyrights to protect his work and saw to it that his successors would keep updating those copyrights so that none of his technologies would become part of the public domain.
Lakey

 

[lkwdblds]

Things May be Simpler than they Appear

Check out this moving points on the circle in this video which a friend sent me:

For all you "Theory of how the Universe Started" fans, this demonstration may shed some like on how something like a moving circle, whose pattern seems quite complex can be a much simpler pattern of straight lines merely being extended forward and backward, over and over. Check it out, it is quite amazing!!

http://showyou.com/v/y-pNe6fsaCVtI/crazy-circle-illusion?u=multimotion
Lakey

 

[Enthetan]

Re: My take on Dianetics

#2. Hubbard forbid further extension of his work by anyone other than himself. By doing this he forever pigeonholed Dianetics as a 1950's through 1960's technology. As time has now moved forward over 50 years, technology, including healing technologies have exploded in a positive way. More is known about the body and the mind and even the spirit, Meanwhile, Hubbard's technology is parked back in the 50's, hoplessly passe and out of date. What is sad is that Hubbard decreed that no one but himself can update his original work. If someone were to attempt to update Dianetics and employ some of the new scientific breakthroughs which have taken place since Hubbard departed the scene, that person would be declared a suppressive squirrel and would be destroyed by COS.

I think that is a shame. Dianetics was a workable system, certainly capable of being researched further and being updated continually over the decades but Hubbard was presumptuous enough to leave behind a legacy which prevents this from occurring. Moreover, he took out copyrights to protect his work and saw to it that his successors would keep updating those copyrights so that none of his technologies would become part of the public domain.
Lakey

I think the point where Scn sank, was in the prime Briefing Course days. The days when auditors from all over the world converged at the first BC, and started thinking about the subject, playing with the subject, and observing effects on PCs.

This was a time when LRH saw that other people were getting effects, and that there were people smarter than him working on the subject. LRH stole the findings and issued them under his name (like Study Tech). He issued "KSW" to put a stop to any and all innovation that was being done. The only innovation allowed was by LRH. And so the subject died in the 1960's, although it took some years to fall down.

 

[lkwdblds]

Re: My take on Dianetics

I think the point where Scn sank, was in the prime Briefing Course days. The days when auditors from all over the world converged at the first BC, and started thinking about the subject, playing with the subject, and observing effects on PCs.

This was a time when LRH saw that other people were getting effects, and that there were people smarter than him working on the subject. LRH stole the findings and issued them under his name (like Study Tech). He issued "KSW" to put a stop to any and all innovation that was being done. The only innovation allowed was by LRH. And so the subject died in the 1960's, although it took some years to fall down.

IMO your analysis is EXCELLENT. Those few lines really sum up the subject in a nutshell. Not much more, if anything needs to be said.
Lakey

 

[Gib]

Re: My take on Dianetics

I think the point where Scn sank, was in the prime Briefing Course days. The days when auditors from all over the world converged at the first BC, and started thinking about the subject, playing with the subject, and observing effects on PCs.

This was a time when LRH saw that other people were getting effects, and that there were people smarter than him working on the subject. LRH stole the findings and issued them under his name (like Study Tech). He issued "KSW" to put a stop to any and all innovation that was being done. The only innovation allowed was by LRH. And so the subject died in the 1960's, although it took some years to fall down.

But did it sink? (one has to remove from ones mind Hubbards BS of scientology expanding)


but the supposition is that Clear and OT are possible, and in fact stated by Hubbard that he cleared people and made OT's, by the folks at St Hill, such is the supposition forwarded by Hubbard.

Freud never had a supposition of Clear or OT.

Idenics has no supposition of Clear or OT.

If Freud theories are false, then Hubbards Clear and OT are false, which we now know. No clears, no OT's.

So now you my be asking yourself, and saying, yes, because of KSW.

Well I ask this question, surely some government agency or a group of of the old ex St Hillers would get together and actually make a Clear or OT. So why hasn't it been done?

All the material is available for free on the internet.

 

[Gib]

Will Durant did not want to be Associated with Dianetics

This is interesting:

http://a.disquscdn.com/uploads/mediaembed/images/1434/6496/original.jpg

 

[lkwdblds]

Re: My take on Dianetics

But did it sink? (one has to remove from ones mind Hubbards BS of scientology expanding)

Yes, with a huge assist from the creation of the internet, it has sunk. If you look at what is going on these days, COS is basically a for profit real estate business masquerading as a church. You look at their stats as regards creating clears and OTs and you find zero students on the Saint Hill Briefing Course at ASHO, a course with hundreds of people on it 15 years ago. You see Clears being made at AOLA at a rate of one or two a month and at Flag at a handful a month when in the early 80's about 3 clears were being created every 2 days.

You see the majority of all the selling and "regging" in COS being concentrated on obtaining money for Ideal Orgs and various elite levels of IAS membership as well as the newest versions of the various books and CD's. Almost no new auditors are being trained where that was the biggest push made under Hubbard for many decades. World Wide membership of active and participating members has shrunk in the last 20 years from around 125,000 to only about 25,000. Everything has sunk except for the Gross Income Stat. COS is able to maintain this stat by concentrating on servicing a few extremely rich parishioners instead of servicing the general public as they once did and also by concentrating on Real Estate acquisitions instead of the delivery of training and processing.

As Mike Rinder and Jeffrey Augustine said on a recent video interview, COS is like the Titanic AFTER it crashed into the iceberg. The band is still playing on deck and assurances are being made that the ship is more secure than ever before but the truth is that the ship is sinking.

but the supposition is that Clear and OT are possible, and in fact stated by Hubbard that he cleared people and made OT's, by the folks at St Hill, such is the supposition forwarded by Hubbard.

IMO, Hubbard's talk of scientology expanding was far from BS. He had a subject which was in demand by the public and he provided some workable techniques. Also he was extremely good at packaging and promoting his products. His organization grew from zero to perhaps a maximum of 125,000 hard core members between 1950 and 1990 and this was despite the fact that he was being fought with ferocious force by the rich and well funded Medical and Psychiatric fields as well as the mass media, which always was painting a portrait of COS being a scam.

Had he run a more ethical movement, and had he not focused so much on obtaining money and power, IMO Hubbard had a chance to achieve enormous worldwide expansion.

Freud never had a supposition of Clear or OT.

Idenics has no supposition of Clear or OT.

What Freud did or Idenics has done as regards a supposition of Clear of OT is completely irrelevant and has no part in our discussion. Since you seem so focused on that one point, I would like to call to your attention the fact that several Eastern Religions and perhaps some New Age Religions, append some very fancy titles to their top people. For Example, in Southern California, you see advertisements that some particular Swami or Guru of the 8th order will be flying in from India to speak at such and such Ashram next Saturday night. Donations of $45 are requested at the door or $35 if you pay in advance. These types of groups do promote advanced states of beingness but what difference does that make in our discussion? I just don't see a connection.

If Freud's theories are false, then Hubbards Clear and OT are false, which we now know. No clears, no OT's.

Gib, your above sentence makes no sense to me. If Freud's theories are false, how does that prove anything about Hubbard's Clear and OT. You are making a quantum leap of logic and arriving at a conclusion which is complete non-sequitor. If you disagree, please elaborate a little on the logic you are using to make the connection you are making.

Actually I believe that Freud has at least two major theories which have been proven over the years to be true. First is the theory that by looking back into childhood, a person with an illness can achieve a measure of relief. Second would be the introduction of a practitioner which guides his patient in the process of regressing back in time. The theory is that it takes two people to achieve a gain, a solo person will generally not be able to obtain relief on his own.

So now you my be asking yourself, and saying, yes, because of KSW.

Well I ask this question, surely some government agency or a group of of the old ex St Hillers would get together and actually make a Clear or OT. So why hasn't it been done?

All the material is available for free on the internet.

On this Clear or OT thing, which you keep bringing up, I believe that a general consensus was reached years ago on ESMB that Hubbard set too lofty of a goal for both Clear and OT. Those terms were coined and their attributes delineated as a Promotional Tool to get more people to purchase these services. In the short term, it worked but in the long term, Hubbard could not deliver on his promotional claims, even though he continually reduced the claims for Clear and OT. Even the watered down claims could not be achieved. In the long run, this fact, plus it being exposed to so many people on the internet, has led to the sinking of Hubbard's movement. I haven't heard anyone debate this claim for at least 4 years here on ESMB.
Lakey

 

[Enthetan]

Re: My take on Dianetics

But did it sink? (one has to remove from ones mind Hubbards BS of scientology expanding)

but the supposition is that Clear and OT are possible, and in fact stated by Hubbard that he cleared people and made OT's, by the folks at St Hill, such is the supposition forwarded by Hubbard.

I didn't say "people were producing Clears and OTs". I said "This was a time when LRH saw that other people were getting effects, and that there were people smarter than him working on the subject".

From what I was reading of the early BC days, the days of experimentation, there were effects being generated. Perhaps if LRH had tolerated what was happening for a while longer, they might have figured out how to get stable, positive effects. Again, not Clear or OT, but perhaps people feeling better and happier.

 

[Terril park]

Re: My take on Dianetics

I didn't say "people were producing Clears and OTs". I said "This was a time when LRH saw that other people were getting effects, and that there were people smarter than him working on the subject".

From what I was reading of the early BC days, the days of experimentation, there were effects being generated. Perhaps if LRH had tolerated what was happening for a while longer, they might have figured out how to get stable, positive effects. Again, not Clear or OT, but perhaps people feeling better and happier.

I'm friends with at least 2 people who were on the first experimental BC.
Pretty sure Paul has compiled Alan and Dart's write ups on this time. Seems like the negative effects of GPM experiments were quite severe. Alan I believe mentions that auditors were taken to their auditing rooms in wheelbarrows.

One friend says she has not handled all that was stirred up
as yet, but she also gained OT abilities. Others concurred.

Stable positive effects have occurred. Nowdays the speciality seems to be making parishioners wrong.

 

[lkwdblds]

Re: Clear and OT

Certainly some Clear and OT effects have occurred during the course of taking COS services. There is no doubt about it, these isolated incidents may number in the thousands or even tens of thousands.

The problem is that the Clear and OT like phenomena are not predictable and controllable. Things just happen unexpectedly, usually when a person has some kind of win or epiphany. It doesn't happen on a one for one basis, connected to certain processes and the OT like ability is not stable and fully under a person's control.

These type of things also happen in other practices as well. They occur frequently but they too are not stable and under a person's control. A typical example might be a guy going up to the altar and accepting Jesus as his savior during a Billy Graham oration. His is told by Billy and others that all his sins have been forgiven and he blows out. Once in a while you see a crippled person throw away their crutches and walk. True, many instances of this are fake but once in a while the real thing happens.

Lot's of us on this board have vestiges of Clear and OT powers. Some powers are even fairly stable but whatever powers people have, they are nowhere near what Hubbard promised!

Towards the end of his life, I believe that Hubbard realized that he was not able to deliver what he had promised. Of course, he never admitted that to his public and kept up the push for more and more money and more power over people's lives. Thus, per his own tech, he was committing continuous overt acts and withholding them from everyone. His tech states that doing so causes a person to reach less and to withdraw and lessen his own power. Thus we have Hubbard suffering from strokes and going into hiding. It is ironic and poetic justice that Hubbard suffered just as his tech predicted for one behaving as he was behaving.

The old adage, "He who lives by the sword shall die by the sword" Proved to be true for LRH.
Lakey