Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973
This is correct. LRH talks about it too somewhere. Every aberration is a normal ability that is either being asserted too strongly or being repressed or being used inappropriately.
Viewed from a different angle - each of the various ilogics from the Data Series is being introduced into the ability without the awareness of the aberree.
Wow, its really nice to hear from you Leon. You are one of those posters, who did the most for me personally, especially concerning my experience on OT III. I was doing well on the level for almost 3 weeks and then went into a persistent rock slam on the meter. I double checked my two meters and tried several times over 2 days to restart my sessions but it was always a persistent rock slam. I went into AOLA and did a D of P interview on a meter, where they say to you, "I am not auditing you." After the interview, I was told to wait on the couch in reception.
About an hour later, I was called up to the D of P and was told that I had completed the level and would immediately start on OTIV the next day. This was an extreme example of atrocious tech. From that point forward, for about 34 years, I believed that a persistent rock slam was the End Phenomena of OT III. What a crock of bullshit.
It was Leon who revealed to me that if an OT level did not bite, the thing to do was to just go on to the next level and hope that level bites and if it does, as in my case, the guy just continues up the bridge with major misconceptions about OT III and its End Phenomena.
Thanks Leon for giving a cogent reply to the statement made by Gib that every aberration is an ability that has gone awry. With your fine example, referring back to the data series and the logics and illogics, I can see how it could be that way but I still am not 100% sold on the statement being true.
I no longer hold LRH in awe as an infallible source of information. To me, he was bright and had some good ideas but his major talent was in sorting out data as to order of importance and then packaging it attractively so that it would sell to the Western public. As it turned out, most of the data was developed by others and would then be plagerized by LRH.
The friggin Data Series has some merit but overall I believe the system is deeply flawed. IMO, it needs more work to be done on it to be a worthwhile tool for running things.
Case in point is the Data Evaluation I was ordered to write an up to find the "Why" behind the fact that the 1973 Celebrity Center was becoming an upstate Class IV Org with only a few genuine celebrities on lines. I had already thought about this topic several months earlier when I was a Sea Org member in CCLA Treasury. The "Why" came to me during a Thursday night staff meeting where all stats for the week were revealed to all staff at a large weekly staff meeting. It caught my attention immediately that an out point existed in a Division 6 (Public Division) stat called "New Bodies in the Shop". All Class IV orgs as well as AOLA and ASHO had this same stat. Instantly, I decided that for a celebrity center, if more genuine celebrities were desired, the stat should be called, "New Celebrities in the Shop".
I'm not certain if I reported this new insight to Yvonne Jentzsch in my weekly report to her. Maybe not, because no one at CCLA, including Yvonne seemed to be very concerned in getting more big name celebrities on lines. Her Org was growing by leaps and bounds, From a couple of staff members to 150 or so staff members in only 1 1/2 years and her public did have perhaps 8 or so big name celebrities and perhaps 10-12 others who were not household names but could be considered celebrities. The idea was that Yvonne knew what she was doing and had grown a large and flourishing Org almost overnight so the idea was not to rock the boat.
However, back at Flag, somebody - it almost had to be LRH or perhaps Diana Hubbard, who decided that CC was more of just an upstat Class IV Org than a genuine Celebrity Centre. Word went up in October of 1973 to find that "Why" and as luck would have it, finding that "Why" was assigned as my first duty, even though I had never done the Data Series Evaluator Course.
Fortunately, I already knew the "why" so I just blurted it out to my Senior, Sandy. She looked at me with the glee of insanity both at my "Why" and also at my handling, which was to just rename the Stat by changing the word 'Body' to the word 'Celebrity'. Sandy ordered me not to go any further with my "Why" which was the correct "Why". I tried 3 Evals, but always arrived at my correct Why. She ripped my papers into shreds and threw them in my face or stomped on them in the waste basket. Finally, she assigned me the condition of Danger and did my Eval herself. I read the monstrosity which she created. It was many pages long and was a very bureaucratic and stilted piece of work. It was so boring that after a few pages of reading it, I began doping off. One thing I knew for certain was that CC staff would not be capable of implementing such a program and even if they did , doing those dozens and dozens of steps would have absolutely no effect whatsoever on CCLA bringing in more genuine Celebrities.
True to my prediction, Sandy's Eval was implemented but no perceivable change in stats took place. Here on ESMB, I found out 3 or 4 years ago that around 1998 or 1999, someone figured out that the stat should be changed and it was changed to exactly what I had recommended 36 years earlier. Not only that but people on CC lines who were not actual celebrities were ordered to transfer out of CCLA and into the L.A. Org, AOLA or ASHO.
So there it was, I had a Bachelor's degree in Math with a minor in physics and had worked as a professional scientific computer programmer in the Apollo Space Program for 9 years. I worked with people who knew how to solve problems and knew what they were doing. Many of the Engineers and Scientists whom I worked with were Cal Tech and MIT caliber people who really knew conceptually engineering, physics and math. When it came to living life with gusto, most of them weren't that smart, though there were a few exceptions. These guys were book smart and when I say smart, I mean super smart but most were not street smart!! I knew enough to understand what they wanted and in those pre home computer days, I had to transfer their calculations and equations into computer code and design intricate programs to solve their equations. Also, I had to command the computer to print our their instructions in graph form so that their figures could be readily analyzed. Finally there was tech writing, and I had to write up detailed user manuals for all my programs.
In closing, I will say, just to tell the truth as I see it, that with my education and background, I was able to spot an outpoint just by paying attention to what was being said at a staff meeting and then come up with a spot on "Why" and a simple "Fix", which was to simply change one word in the name of one particular stat.
We were sold the lie that WOG education was virtually worthless while studying LRH data, such as the Data Evaluators Course, was of infinite value. I bought into this horseshit and went along with the lie. 40 years later, I saw the actual truth. Sandy S. should have been shining my shoes but on the Apollo, the situation was reversed. Not only that, but at every turn, Sandy and many. but not all, of the trolls and robots who were present there in the Flag Bureaux not only had me shining their shoes but they were rubbing my face in the shoe polish at every opportunity which they could find.
In summary, just because LRH said something doesn't mean all that much to me. Some of his stuff works and some of it not only doesn't work but it also makes things worse, often much worse. Everything he said or wrote has to be evaluated before putting any of it into use.
