The Phoenix Lectures

[Terril park]

That's a reasonable question. Why do people make fun of what you post?

Well, I can only answer for myself. I do it because what you post is illogical and silly. It's not your fault, you were never taught scientific method or logic.

Your comment about "people having unusual abilities" makes my point. You actually think the fact that there are unsubstantiated and unproven reports of odd occurrences means that your unsubstantiated and unproven story must be accepted seriously.

Not only that, but you believe that your unsubstantiated and unproven story proves that Hubbard's "tech" must be valid -- and we have to accept that as fact as well.

It does not appear that you can understand what is wrong with your logic -- so some of us make fun of it.

I experienced what I wrote about. To discount this
would be illogical. Experiencing this doesn't need scientific method or logic. Further I know people who've had comparable experiences. I linked to a website that
has further examples. Despite that they are primarily
psychiatrists.

Note you don't know what I've been taught.

 

[Bill]

I experienced what I wrote about. To discount this
would be illogical. Experiencing this doesn't need scientific method or logic. Further I know people who've had comparable experiences. I linked to a website that
has further examples. Despite that they are primarily
psychiatrists.

Note you don't know what I've been taught.

I do apologize for assuming what you haven't been taught. That was unfair. I assumed that you had never been taught science and logic because you struggle so much with those subjects.

I fully support your right to say what you think you experienced. However, for you to claim that any part of Scientology is proven to "work" based on random, unproven and disparate anecdotal stories is both unscientific and illogical. I can't see how you could have had any instruction on either logic or science and still make such stupid claims.

There is a vast difference between "I had these specific and temporary experiences which I, personally, attribute to this specific processing" and "Scientology works because of these unproven and unrelated stories". The fact that you don't understand this is amazing to me.

 

[Little David]

I do apologize for assuming what you haven't been taught. That was unfair. I assumed that you had never been taught science and logic because you struggle so much with those subjects.

I fully support your right to say what you think you experienced. However, for you to claim that any part of Scientology is proven to "work" based on random, unproven and disparate anecdotal stories is both unscientific and illogical. I can't see how you could have had any instruction on either logic or science and still make such stupid claims.

There is a vast difference between "I had these specific and temporary experiences which I, personally, attribute to this specific processing" and "Scientology works because of these unproven and unrelated stories". The fact that you don't understand this is amazing to me.

Some people have difficulty separating fantasy from reality. For them reality is whatever they think is in their best interests, they seem to have been born that way. A good snake oil salesman actually believes their snake oil works.

 

[Bill]

I experienced what I wrote about. To discount this would be illogical.

To clarify something: As your own, personal story; it should not be discounted, nor was it. You believe it and who can argue with that? However, as proof that "Scientology works", of course it should be discounted -- that cannot be nor should it be considered "proof" of anything.

 

[Clay Pigeon]

Why make fun of what I post?

This was a personal experience I had for a couple of days.

There is a long history of people having intermittent
or even permanent unusual abilities, especially in the area
of bodily control.
Google |"abilities of yogis".
"This sounds like the stuff of science fiction, yet a number of yogis have demonstrated their extraordinary abilities under rigorous laboratory protocols. For example, the Menninger Foundation researchers observed Swami Rama demonstrating telekinesis—the ability to move objects without touching them.23 Sep 2014

Yogis: Real Life Superheroes | Yoga International
https://yogainternational.com/article/view/yogis-real-life-superheroes"

https://scholar.google.co.uk/schola...ved=0ahUKEwiMxJizlaXXAhVPahoKHTK2DWUQgQMIJDAA

Terril, I'm confident I am not the only one who respects you both as a fellow human being and as a simple honest poster.

Have you yet seen how you arrived at the shindig on the "Part Game!" thread?

 

[Terril park]

Terril, I'm confident I am not the only one who respects you both as a fellow human being and as a simple honest poster.

Have you yet seen how you arrived at the shindig on the "Part Game!" thread?

Not familiar with that thread.

 

[Bill]

Terril, I'm confident I am not the only one who respects you both as a fellow human being and as a simple honest poster.

What a bizarre idea: To "respect" someone one must agree with them. I know Terril is honest in what he believes, that has never been the point.

 

[Wilbur]

To clarify something: As your own, personal story; it should not be discounted, nor was it. You believe it and who can argue with that? However, as proof that "Scientology works", of course it should be discounted -- that cannot be nor should it be considered "proof" of anything.

In Terril's defence, there's no such thing as scientific proof. There is only evidence. And Terril's anecdotes are a form of evidence. In fact, from his perspective, it's the most convincing evidence possible.

It's quite interesting, because even though I don't believe that the Church of Scientology is making good on its claims, I still kind of accept Hubbard's words on people asking you to "prove it" when it comes to spiritual truths. It just doesn't seem like the right kind of way of ascertaining whether there is something valid in a spiritual practice. Spiritual practices seem to require a kind of suspension of disbelief in order for you to get anything out of them. To fold your arms and say "go on then, prove it" in an ill-humoured sort of a way has never been something I would do when I was checking out a religion or spirituality group. When I used to check out such groups, I would always engage with them with a (public) willingness to assume that what they were saying was valid, but with a (private) willingness to conclude later that it was bullshit. Pointing to abuses the group is committing is another matter entirely, and completely valid, in my opinion.

I don't think Terril should be pushing Scientology on this board either - he should do it on a board where people want to read that kind of stuff. Though to be honest, I like reading his posts, and the flurry of reposts that he gets ridiculing the fact that he is still a Scientologist.

W.

 

[HelluvaHoax!]

Why make fun of what I post? This was a personal experience I had for a couple of days. There is a long history of people having intermittent or even permanent unusual abilities, especially in the area of bodily control. Google |"abilities of yogis". "This sounds like the stuff of science fiction, yet a number of yogis have demonstrated their extraordinary abilities under rigorous laboratory protocols. For example, the Menninger Foundation researchers observed Swami Rama demonstrating telekinesis—the ability to move objects without touching them.23 Sep 2014 Yogis: Real Life Superheroes | Yoga International https://yogainternational.com/article/view/yogis-real-life-superheroes"

The reason people (myself included) frequently make fun of what you post is that you frequently post absurdities based on unfounded assumptions you have made---which you then blinklessly expect others will just blindly accept as truth.

Oft times you relay "scientific proof" that is really just another's unfounded assumption, never bothering to invest the 5-15 minutes required to discover if has already been debunked as a hoax.

EXAMPLE Your assured presentation that Swami Rama "demonstrated telekinesis" to researchers in the Menninger Foundation. To make this statement, you would had to have assumed that:

-- the Menninger Foundation was staffed with highly qualified researchers, scientists and others skilled in the practices/techniques of stage magicians.​

​

-- the experiment was done with strict protocols (e.g. control group, et al) that eliminated any factors/influences that might have skewed test results.​

Clearly, you just accepted (as fact) that the test performed was scientific, accurate and that the interpretation of results was correct. But you don't know anything about any of the above factors, and you didn't think it was important to your conclusion.

Had you very briefly looked into the series of tests the Menninger Fdn ran on Swami Rama, most of those were dedicated to whether he was able to influence his own physiology (heart rate, et al). The additional test on telekinetic power was done by setting up a highly sensitive needle and challenging Rama to use the power of his mind to move the needle. Precautions were taken to mask his face so that he could not influence the needle with his breath. However, observers were not convinced that needle motion indicated paranormal powers. They noted, for example, that there could have been "drafts" or other "air currents" in that room that could have been the cause of any needle motion.

Famously, all other scientific efforts to confirm telekinetic power over the the past two centuries have failed to find even one instance of such abilities. Swami Rama's test results were, at very best, a reason for further testing. Particularly to isolate the needle from all random atmospheric influences.

I hate to say it this way, but THIS is why all the good EX-SCIENTOLOGISTS on this message board (myself included) got duped by "Dr" Hubbard in the first place! Assumptions. Untested, unverified assumptions.

The fact that anyone's assumptions are delivered very enthusiastically or framed as a "big win" does not in the slightest make them anything other than credulous assumptions.

 

[Bill]

In Terril's defence, there's no such thing as scientific proof. There is only evidence. And Terril's anecdotes are a form of evidence. In fact, from his perspective, it's the most convincing evidence possible.

It's quite interesting, because even though I don't believe that the Church of Scientology is making good on its claims, I still kind of accept Hubbard's words on people asking you to "prove it" when it comes to spiritual truths. It just doesn't seem like the right kind of way of ascertaining whether there is something valid in a spiritual practice. Spiritual practices seem to require a kind of suspension of disbelief in order for you to get anything out of them. To fold your arms and say "go on then, prove it" in an ill-humoured sort of a way has never been something I would do when I was checking out a religion or spirituality group. When I used to check out such groups, I would always engage with them with a (public) willingness to assume that what they were saying was valid, but with a (private) willingness to conclude later that it was bullshit. Pointing to abuses the group is committing is another matter entirely, and completely valid, in my opinion.

I don't think Terril should be pushing Scientology on this board either - he should do it on a board where people want to read that kind of stuff. Though to be honest, I like reading his posts, and the flurry of reposts that he gets ridiculing the fact that he is still a Scientologist.

W.

Yes, and no. While it is perfectly reasonable to not demand proof about claims of spiritual betterment in general ... that does not apply to Scientology.

Why? Because Scientology demands a specific amount of money for specific, "guaranteed" results. That isn't spiritual and that isn't religion. Because Scientology demands money for specific results that requires full and complete proof of delivery. As far as I'm concerned, there can be no other way to look at it.

 

[Wilbur]

Yes, and no. While it is perfectly reasonable to not demand proof about claims of spiritual betterment in general ... that does not apply to Scientology.

Why? Because Scientology demands a specific amount of money for specific, "guaranteed" results. That isn't spiritual and that isn't religion. Because Scientology demands money for specific results that requires full and complete proof of delivery. As far as I'm concerned, there can be no other way to look at it.

Yah, you have a point there. I think, given the amounts of money involved, one is at least entitled to say to them "let's see some OTVIIIs, and have a look at their lives". Look at what examples these people set in their lives.

 

[Terril park]

-- the Menninger Foundation was staffed with highly qualified researchers, scientists and others skilled in the practices/techniques of stage magicians.
​

​

Swami Rama's test results were, at very best, a reason for further testing.​

I agree with this.

" Swami Rama's test results were, at very best, a reason for further testing."

The Menninger foundation appears to be as at least
as authoritive as any one else.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Menninger_Foundation

http://www.menningerclinic.com

 

[HelluvaHoax!]

I agree with this.

" Swami Rama's test results were, at very best, a reason for further testing."

The Menninger foundation appears to be as at least as authoritive as any one else.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Menninger_Foundation

http://www.menningerclinic.com

Just so you understand. . .

If you now agree my post statement (above)--that Swami Rama's test results were INCONCLUSIVE with regard to telekinetic powers, then you are also debunking your own claim (below) that telekinesis has been scientifically proven.

(previously posted on this thread by Terril Park)

Google "abilities of yogis".

"This sounds like the stuff of science fiction, yet a number of yogis have demonstrated their extraordinary abilities under rigorous laboratory protocols. For example, the Menninger Foundation researchers observed Swami Rama demonstrating telekinesis—the ability to move objects without touching them.

As you so often do with Scientology, you seem quite content to sift through tens of thousands of debunked paranormal claims (by Scientologists and Hubbard himself) in order to find one (1) miraculous "win" that you promote as proof of OT powers.

It would be much healthier for people reading your supernatural success stories if you simply attached a disclaimer that reads:

NOBODY KNOWS IF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED PARANORMAL EVENTS EVER OCCURRED. THE PARTY MAKING THIS CLAIM MAY ONLY BELIEVE IT HAPPENED--DUE TO LACK OF CRITICAL THINKING SKILLS, COGNITIVE DISSONANCE, DELUSION AND/OR MAGICAL THINKING. THE PARTY MAKING THE MIRACULOUS CLAIM(S) HAS A HIGHLY SUSPECT TRACK RECORD, EVIDENCED BY THE FACT THEY ALSO PRACTICE OR BELIEVE THAT MIRACULOUS POWERS CAN BE GAINED FROM THE FULLY DEBUNKED & DISGRACED PSEUDOSCIENCE CALLED SCIENTOLOGY. ​

 

[TheOriginalBigBlue]

I'd just like to interject here that Scientology gains are supposed to be "stable". The value of a win is diminished to the degree that it cannot be maintained or replicated at a later date. It is not sufficient to be able to find a parking space every now and then with new gained abilities - you should be able to do it all the time. If you can do it all the time then statistically it should be demonstrable that you can find a parking space more often than the average person even with deliberate obstacles or variables. There are people who would pay the big bucks for this ability so why not prove it? In fact, I don't think this should have to be an OT ability. Is there any course or process that shouldn't be able to increase a person's ability to find a parking space? Just a good set of TRs should make a statistically provable difference.

PCs and students are rushed to the examiner in the heat of the moment after completing a course or reaching the end phenomena of the session but what would the examiner find a week later? There is good reason to put the reg next on the routing form before the win buzz, cert presentation, self aggrandizement and adulation of the cheering throngs wears off. Just believing in that win years later is meaningless unless the stated gains can be replicated. If these wins were stable then the bell curve for activity in Scientology should be extended but what is the average active involvement of a Scientologist now compared to previously? Maybe this bell curve is more demonstrable of self delusion within a class of people so you try to define the qualities that make up that group as distinguished from another or maybe it reflects the improvement of Scientology in it's ability to delude people.

Or, do we dismiss the failure to replicate abilities due to the long list of excuses such as SPs, invalidation, evaluation, going back into agreement with MEST, restimulation, failed purposes, etc.? There are more courses and processes to fix all that and LRH was constantly finding new entry levels that needed to be undercut to address society's problems which explained why earlier approaches failed, ka-ching.

 

[Clay Pigeon]

"life is change; how it differs from the rocks"

Grace Slick "Crown of Creation"

 

[HelluvaHoax!]

"life is change; how it differs from the rocks"

Grace Slick "Crown of Creation"

So so so nice!

I should have stuck with JEFFERSON AIRPLANE instead of being taken for a long ride
aboard HUBBARD DC-8.

And now, a short lovely visit to the time of bare-feet, bell-bottoms and endless psychedelia, lol.

 

[programmer_guy]

<snip>

PCs and students are rushed to the examiner in the heat of the moment after completing a course or reaching the end phenomena of the session but what would the examiner find a week later?

<snip>

Yes, no one knows how long that brain endorphin rush will last.
It could be days or only minutes.

And if the F/N does not happen with the examiner in Qual then the C/S will try to find something wrong with the auditing session and then send the auditor to cramming in Qual (really because the endorphin effect did not last long enough).

 

[Terril park]

Had you very briefly looked into the series of tests the Menninger Fdn ran on Swami Rama, most of those were dedicated to whether he was able to influence his own physiology (heart rate, et al).

There were many comments disparaging my claims
of controlling static electricity. This above is what I​

wanted to point out it was maybe possible.The quote I used​

also brought up the possibility of telekinesis, I hadn't​

wanted to discuss this.​

​

Having brought this up I'll give my thoughts. This​

effect lasted 2 days so I never had an opportunity to​

work with this and test it. I could feel a tingling in my arm​

and to my surprise I found I could direct this sensation​

around my body. I then held a small piece of paper in​

one hand and brought my fingers from the other hand​

close and moved the tingling sensation to those fingers​

and this caused the paper to be attracted in that​

direction. I assumed I was working with static electricity.​

 

[TheOriginalBigBlue]

There were many comments disparaging my claims
of controlling static electricity. This above is what I​

wanted to point out it was maybe possible.The quote I used​

also brought up the possibility of telekinesis, I hadn't​

wanted to discuss this.​

​

Having brought this up I'll give my thoughts. This​

effect lasted 2 days so I never had an opportunity to​

work with this and test it. I could feel a tingling in my arm​

and to my surprise I found I could direct this sensation​

around my body. I then held a small piece of paper in​

one hand and brought my fingers from the other hand​

close and moved the tingling sensation to those fingers​

and this caused the paper to be attracted in that​

direction. I assumed I was working with static electricity.​

We can assume that lots of things are possible. Just for the sake of discussion it is probably more difficult to prove that something isn't completely impossible somewhere, some time, some how. You can pretty much define Scientology as the study of what people consider to be possible. Imagining the possible is a great thing, but it can also be a serious liability.

Weather systems strongly effect static electricity and two days for weather conditions to exist which create a notable difference sounds about right. If we rub our socks on the carpet and get zapped by the door knob it is true that we are to some extent controlling electricity but to somehow attribute this to Scientology should properly be viewed with a certain amount of incredulity, yes?

As others have pointed out it is extremely difficult to remove or account for all variables in a theory or experiment. Scientology highly touts it's basis in science yet there seems to be a blatant absence of any attempt by the organization or community to verify stated wins or claims with strict scientific controls. If anything, to attempt to do so would most likely result in some kind of punishment.

 

[HelluvaHoax!]

.
Jeez, this whole discussion of Scientology producing scientifically verified miracles is really getting some tone arm action!

Originally posted by Billy Blowdown

When I first heard about Scientology, I was duly skeptical about the paranormal powers that L. Ron Hubbard claimed would result from applying Scientology. In fact, I had grave concerns as early as the moment I first encountered Dianetics and its bold claim to the the "modern science" of mental health.

I should probably explain here that (before Scientology) I had a very serious background in science[sup]1[/sup] and was not about to just blindly accept someone blithely labeling their work as "science"--unless it could be held up to the exacting demands of the scientific method, testing protocols and peer-reviewed replication of the results!

Eventually, my own inquiry into Scientology advanced enough that I determined I would test out Hubbard's paranormal theories on myself, by receiving auditing. Within a few hours of my first intensive, we were running a painful somatic that had turned on during session. My auditor kept asking for "earlier similar" incidents, and then SUDDENLY I found myself running wholetrack incidents! In fact I went back 13 trillion years ago to a time I was blowing up galaxies and an errant boulder (planetary shrapnel) collided with my foot, causing an engram of considerable pain. At that moment (in present time) I got a sharp pain in my foot and instinctively grabbed it. That's when I realized that my shoelaces were really tight, so i loosened them up and took off my shoe----AND THE SOMATIC TOTALLY BLEW!

You cannot even imagine how blown out I was to see Ron's tech working so perfectly! As I told the auditor my win, i felt my space growing with the cognition that I am an all-powerful being trapped in a body! When I originated that to my auditor he just stared down at the meter with a look of astonishment--probably because he had never seen such a huge blowdown and floating TA! As I began line charging, I wondered if maybe I had just gone exterior---a paranormal miracle! Then, as if on cue, the auditor said "YOUR TONE ARM IS FLOATING!!!". OMG! Wow! WHOA!!

So, there I was, just a few hours into my Scientology journey and I already had gone fully exterior! It wasn't just some imaginary thing, the needle and TA had floated. That's real! A real scientific diagnostic device! Real electronics! Real electrons really floating!

THIS IS REAL SCIENCE, PEOPLE!!!

ML,

William "Billy" Blowdown
OT VIII




[sup]1[/sup] "I had a very serious background in science": For starters, I was exposed to scientific thinking as early as I can remember, because my dad had a subscription to 'Scientific American Magazine'. Add to that, in the 4th grade I won 2nd Prize in a science contest and almost certainly would have one 1st Prize had I not forgotten to bring those foaming pellets for my volcano exhibit. One of the judges told me that geniuses like Albert Einstein and Tesla were often likewise absent-minded, so I think that tell you a lot about how advanced and precocious I was as a child, in terms of scientific awareness!