Very rare? audio of Ron (for scientologists?)

Rene Descartes

Gold Meritorious Patron
All the individuals that were "apparently" healed from a distance...

How does anyone know that they in fact did not heal themselves and that the healing was not from a distance but from right there at the source.

They might have googed the study.

I mean, did anyone ask them?

Rd00
 

13heathens

Patron with Honors
OH I LOVE IT! I took a class from Dr Carroll and argued scientology with him in the '70's! (He's a jerk by the way).

So in rebuttal to scientific studies published in reputable journals, you find on google a link to a former philosophy instructor (not professor)(not a scientist) who is noted for his antagonism to anything he doesn't believe already. On a skeptic site no less!

...

And as to the prayer studies, I would say that what I think of as distant healing is subtly different than prayer. In my opinion prayer is not the same, as it is generally addressed to god...

Your rebuttal reminds me of the kind of thing that goes on, on the periphery of any post graduate research, some poor guy with some whacky notions who believes he cant get his thesis published because of some conspiracy against him, when in fact it is the facts not supporting the thesis, yet he hangs around the academic environment for years, becoming more and more bitter...

You discount the facts because they do not support your hypothesis.

Please do not use skeptic sites in substitution for published scientific research.

The power of prayer falls into distant healing. I find it fascinating that you seem to discount that. It' as valid as any other distant healing claim. There's also more "proof" of the power of prayer as there are of the techniques you prefer.

Most of the links I come across are journal of paraphychology, are those more acceptable - Oh wait most of the studies are still the power of prayer!

http://www.goodsamiam.com/distant_healing_research.htm

Then again that linking page, even with its agenda also shows an agenda..
Perhapse this one would be more to your liking.

http://www.noetic.org/research/dh/research/ResearchMethodology.pdf

In an instance in which the researchers must cull the stats collected for evidence that their desired result was achieved, any conclusions are highly suspect.

I a person doesn't BELIEVE that the distant healing will work, it wont work for them. I personally loved the prayer study, in which they found minor correlations and insisted it would have been more dramatic if it wasn't for the likelihood of family members of those in the control group praying as well.

---------------

It all comes down to the preferences in results.

http://www.mietekwirkus.com/western.html

The agenda being promoted and dismissal of counter evidence is vital to such claims;

http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/hoax/weblog/permalink/healing_power_of_prayer_study/

Really, what happens when the placebo effect is taken out of the equation?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/14/AR2005071401695.html

--------------

Fine.. I'll refute LRH's clip in full. The volume of faith based research corrupting scientific results is a mess. I presume you'd prefer if I refute it based on metaphysics/mysticism instead of refuting faith with science.

But before I do, I invite any of who who speak of the brilliance of LRH to exteriorize, swing on by here and tell me what I have on top of my computer monitor.

And don't tell me that you'd need to know where I AM to do that. You don't need a name, location, personal item or any of that crap. :>
 

alex

Gold Meritorious Patron
The power of prayer falls into distant healing. I find it fascinating that you seem to discount that. It' as valid as any other distant healing claim. There's also more "proof" of the power of prayer as there are of the techniques you prefer.

Most of the links I come across are journal of paraphychology, are those more acceptable - Oh wait most of the studies are still the power of prayer!

http://www.goodsamiam.com/distant_healing_research.htm

Then again that linking page, even with its agenda also shows an agenda..
Perhapse this one would be more to your liking.

http://www.noetic.org/research/dh/research/ResearchMethodology.pdf

In an instance in which the researchers must cull the stats collected for evidence that their desired result was achieved, any conclusions are highly suspect.

I a person doesn't BELIEVE that the distant healing will work, it wont work for them. I personally loved the prayer study, in which they found minor correlations and insisted it would have been more dramatic if it wasn't for the likelihood of family members of those in the control group praying as well.

---------------

It all comes down to the preferences in results.

http://www.mietekwirkus.com/western.html

The agenda being promoted and dismissal of counter evidence is vital to such claims;

http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/hoax/weblog/permalink/healing_power_of_prayer_study/

Really, what happens when the placebo effect is taken out of the equation?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/14/AR2005071401695.html

--------------

Fine.. I'll refute LRH's clip in full. The volume of faith based research corrupting scientific results is a mess. I presume you'd prefer if I refute it based on metaphysics/mysticism instead of refuting faith with science.

But before I do, I invite any of who who speak of the brilliance of LRH to exteriorize, swing on by here and tell me what I have on top of my computer monitor.

And don't tell me that you'd need to know where I AM to do that. You don't need a name, location, personal item or any of that crap. :>

You have yet to refer to any science.....

A troll sticky note holder.
 

13heathens

Patron with Honors
You have yet to refer to any science.....

A troll sticky note holder.

Did you follow any of those links? I'll deal with this in video form as part of a proper refute when I have the time.

"It's all socks on the carpet."

http://www.annals.org/cgi/reprint/132/11/903

I see article after article which states that it merits further study. The issue is separating correlation from causation in many of the studies.
 
Last edited:

alex

Gold Meritorious Patron
Did you follow any of those links? I'll deal with this in video form as part of a proper refute when I have the time.

"It's all socks on the carpet."

Like I said you cant refute science with links to skeptics....

Quote published scientific papers.
 

Rene Descartes

Gold Meritorious Patron
I shall not make any statements along the lines of stating that healing by prayer does not work or will not work.

However I will make a statement that states that it might be more than impossible to conduct a scientific study or research that proves that it does work.

Rd00
 

me myself & i

Patron Meritorious
You have yet to refer to any science.....

Alex, your short prose is disingenuous (need I say: 'from my point of view?').

You have seemingly fallen into the trap of believing that words trump meaning. Or that words create meaning. Ron lived there.

For the record words do not trump meaning Alex. They point to meaning.

For a scientologist to demand scientific evidence to contradict or otherwise expose the complete absence of science in scientology is in equal parts absurd and ridiculous. Which does however fit in quite nicely with Ron's technology of attack never defend.

Ron's words on his tape are indefensible. Where truth has any meaning whatsoever. Which it does.

The question at hand is not one of faith based healing at a distance. It is one of L. Ron Hubbard's pure bull-shit disquised as truth.

Did you listen to the tape? Recently?

Seemingly not.

mm&i
&w

Listen newly (if you can) to the words of your teacher of spiritual truth.

The obvious video mockery set aside, this sounds a lot like Ron to me. I may have been there when the original recording was made. Maybe not.

The pure eloquence of speech is there. The brilliance of his discoveries about the inherent powers of a scientologist-cleared, (called 'a clear' by Ron) undeniable. His uncanny ability to warn each of us of our own secret-hidden-enemies, remarkable. Which made us just smile and wink knowing we were the ones that soon would be healing the entire world at a distance. Oh my goodness what a rush that caused. Gives me goosebumps all over again.

Healing a loved one at a distance.

Healing the world up close.

If I am not mistaken I may have already personally paid for Ron's scripture-in-titanium in a-vault in a-desert for the-sake of humanities-future project (a few times over and again, lol). And if so, hearing this rare audio, of L. Ron Hubbard in his absolute prime, makes that money well spent for me.

Listen closely to the very-detailed account of what a true scientologist-cleared can do. The abilities revealed (for us) are astounding !!! And the entire lecture is based on factual-data, researched data, stable-data. This isn't L. Ron Hubbard speaking folks, this is the Tech itself speaking.

Ron was simply a humble messenger.

What can a cleared-scientologist (called a clear by Ron) really do? Listen...


http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=Mh4z3XclGSE&feature=related
 
Last edited:

alex

Gold Meritorious Patron
I shall not make any statements along the lines of stating that healing by prayer does not work or will not work.

However I will make a statement that states that it might be more than impossible to conduct a scientific study or research that proves that it does work.

Rd00

I'm with you that proving prayer works may well be extremely difficult.

I'm not much a believer in prayer. Distant healing is another thing entirely. Different protocol, different mind state, different efficacy.

Distant healing has a more defined structure, and more definable connection to scientific principles such as the recently expanding research into non locality.

I believe that distant healing is more amenable to scientific study.
 

alex

Gold Meritorious Patron
Alex, your short prose is disingenuous (need I say: 'from my point of view?').

You have seemingly fallen into the trap of believing that words trump meaning. Or that words create meaning. Ron lived there.

For the record words do not trump meaning Alex. They point to meaning.

For a scientologist to demand scientific evidence to contradict or otherwise expose the complete absence of science in scientology is in equal parts absurd and ridiculous. Which does however fit in quite nicely with Ron's technology of attack never defend.

Ron's words on his tape are indefensible. Where truth has any meaning whatsoever. Which it does.

The question at hand is not one of faith based healing at a distance. It is one of L. Ron Hubbard's pure bull-shit disquised as truth.

Did you listen to the tape? Recently?

Seemingly not.

mm&i
&w

I am NOT discussing or defending faith healing. Read closer.

And I have given reference to scientific study to support the premise of healing at a distance, which was referred to in the audio, and challenged by the heathen.

I was answered with a less rigorous level of reference in rebuttal. It is then that I suggested "scientific evidence".

I am not engaged in defending the notion of "science in scientology".
Although I have in the past.

It is apparent that "Hubbard lies" in your opinion, because, well he does.

I realize that proving Hubbard wrong in his assertions is not easily done, but your assertion that it is bullshit, certainly is not even an attempt.
 

13heathens

Patron with Honors
I am NOT discussing or defending faith healing. Read closer.

And I have given reference to scientific study to support the premise of healing at a distance, which was referred to in the audio, and challenged by the heathen.

I was answered with a less rigorous level of reference in rebuttal. It is then that I suggested "scientific evidence".

Many of the links provided referenced, and in some cases included published scientific articles - the last one in particular.. which is why I'd asked you if you'd followed any of those links.

I've been looking for the article by that 4th grader (Emily Rosa) that challenged the base premise of auras/energy fields.. it was published in JAMA. We're talking therapeutic touch in that particular case, but I see that as lumped in with the rest of it.. along with the whole magnet therapy foolishness (The premise of which is countered by the use of MRI machines :melodramatic: )

and my statement stands, that a study with marginal results, and a small control group, in which the data was culled after its conclusion does not constitute proof. although it may "Merit further study" that doesn't constitute proof. the US govt spent 350 million on a study of touch therapy, and published results, and it took a 4th grader to invalidate it.
 

Rene Descartes

Gold Meritorious Patron
Update:

I shall not make any statements along the lines of stating that distant healing does not work or will not work.

However I will make a statement that states that it might be impossible to conduct a scientific study or research that proves that it does work.

Unless one can harness radiation across miles of space to zap cancer.

Rd00
 

13heathens

Patron with Honors
Update:

I shall not make any statements along the lines of stating that distant healing does not work or will not work.

However I will make a statement that states that it might be impossible to conduct a scientific study or research that proves that it does work.

Unless one can harness radiation across miles of space to zap cancer.

Rd00

It's all socks across the carpet.

A dear old friend of mine was a Medicine Man. When people would hear about this they'd say stupid things like "can you shoot lightning bolts". He answer was always the same; "Sure give me wool socks, shag carpet and a few moments to demonstrate"

Naturally they'd insist that static was hardly magic, however if you look back far enough in history it would have been. The power of positive thinking falls under the placebo effect. Any potential benefit from well-wishes is equally as dramatic as the spark generated by socks on the carpet.

The most generous and realistic study of the group had a 57% success rate, which is slightly higher than the expected 50/50. However not by a broad enough margin to provide true credibility. It's just not a substantial enough statistic.

If both parties truly believe in the benefit it will more likely help, however this is covered under the placebo effect, and begs the question of is it the helper that's helping, or the belief in the person needing the help.

Reality can only be "bent" so far, and attempts to do so - once explained - are no more dramatic than that little jolt of electricity in my old friends analogy.

--------------
EXAMPLE ONE;

While exploring an old Native American grave site, a friend of mine had a major panic attack, which rapid spiraled into a asthma attack. I took a deep breath and traced my hand down his forearm. He was immediately calm, and could breath fine.

(a friend of mine, while looking on was prepared to laugh when it didn't work.. but when it DID work was shocked, and became an instant believer. UNTIL I explained how it really worked.)

The physical contact, as well as the uncharacteristic tenderness of the touch startled him out of the attack.. Sure I altered my personal energy flow to give things a little push, but it's no great healing feat. It's just socks on the carpet.

EXAMPLE TWO;

A coworker of a friend of mine had been having terrible luck, believing VooDoo was being used against her. My friend asked me if I could do something about it. I tossed together some random things in a small bag.. crow feather, animal tooth, some dirt, a couple stone beads, etc..

I instructed my friend to tell their coworker that it was a powerful gris-gris, and to bury it under their doorstep. Their luck turned around virtually overnight, and they haven't had a problem since.

What did the bag really do? It countered their belief that they would have nothing but bad luck. As a result they stopped manufacturing their own bad luck. Any basic energies put into the bag as well as the nature of the contents only reinforced their belief that it would work.

Once again, socks on the carpet.

---------------------------------------------------

Moral of the story; There IS power in belief, but in the end it's all head-games and can't be considered a reliable form of treatment.
 

alex

Gold Meritorious Patron
It's all socks across the carpet.

A dear old friend of mine was a Medicine Man. When people would hear about this they'd say stupid things like "can you shoot lightning bolts". He answer was always the same; "Sure give me wool socks, shag carpet and a few moments to demonstrate"

Naturally they'd insist that static was hardly magic, however if you look back far enough in history it would have been. The power of positive thinking falls under the placebo effect. Any potential benefit from well-wishes is equally as dramatic as the spark generated by socks on the carpet.

The most generous and realistic study of the group had a 57% success rate, which is slightly higher than the expected 50/50. However not by a broad enough margin to provide true credibility. It's just not a substantial enough statistic.

If both parties truly believe in the benefit it will more likely help, however this is covered under the placebo effect, and begs the question of is it the helper that's helping, or the belief in the person needing the help.

Reality can only be "bent" so far, and attempts to do so - once explained - are no more dramatic than that little jolt of electricity in my old friends analogy.

--------------
EXAMPLE ONE;

While exploring an old Native American grave site, a friend of mine had a major panic attack, which rapid spiraled into a asthma attack. I took a deep breath and traced my hand down his forearm. He was immediately calm, and could breath fine.

(a friend of mine, while looking on was prepared to laugh when it didn't work.. but when it DID work was shocked, and became an instant believer. UNTIL I explained how it really worked.)

The physical contact, as well as the uncharacteristic tenderness of the touch startled him out of the attack.. Sure I altered my personal energy flow to give things a little push, but it's no great healing feat. It's just socks on the carpet.

EXAMPLE TWO;

A coworker of a friend of mine had been having terrible luck, believing VooDoo was being used against her. My friend asked me if I could do something about it. I tossed together some random things in a small bag.. crow feather, animal tooth, some dirt, a couple stone beads, etc..

I instructed my friend to tell their coworker that it was a powerful gris-gris, and to bury it under their doorstep. Their luck turned around virtually overnight, and they haven't had a problem since.

What did the bag really do? It countered their belief that they would have nothing but bad luck. As a result they stopped manufacturing their own bad luck. Any basic energies put into the bag as well as the nature of the contents only reinforced their belief that it would work.

Once again, socks on the carpet.

---------------------------------------------------

Moral of the story; There IS power in belief, but in the end it's all head-games and can't be considered a reliable form of treatment.

You are referring to touch based healing or healing with some sort of contact of awareness on the part of the person healed. This is something different than the "distant Healing" that Ron was discussing or that was the subject of one of the studies I made reference to.

You are in effect asserting that one thing is invalid because it is another thing.

Not very rational. In the one study, the persons targeted for healing did not know if they were specificaly targeted, thus your proposition is not valid.

Yes the placebo effect is something to consider. But you have yet to refute the evidence that I have provided with anything of comparable rigor.

I do not assert that cancer can be cured across distances by me or anyone I know of, but only that the effect of distant healing is scientifically proven.

I wonder why you resist so much.....when sound scientific evidence exists?
 

13heathens

Patron with Honors
You are in effect asserting that one thing is invalid because it is another thing.

Not very rational. In the one study, the persons targeted for healing did not know if they were specificaly targeted, thus your proposition is not valid.

Yes the placebo effect is something to consider. But you have yet to refute the evidence that I have provided with anything of comparable rigor.

I do not assert that cancer can be cured across distances by me or anyone I know of, but only that the effect of distant healing is scientifically proven.

I wonder why you resist so much.....when sound scientific evidence exists?

http://www.annals.org/cgi/reprint/132/11/903.pdf
(again)

I've been looking for the study referenced by the washington post. Most of the journal sites I've come across require membership, which is somewhat limiting.

The studies - even the one's you mentioned were not conclusive proof. they indicated that it merited further study.

magnets, touch and distant healing have all been 'proven' by questionable science. Touch and distant healing both (theoretically) work based upon similar principals.

The minor claims associated with each I have no real interest in. It's the grand claims made that I object to. I admit I did find the studies you put up interesting, but the results shown are minimal. Additionally the percentages of those minor benefits derived fall well within the range covered by the Placebo Effect.
 

Wisened One

Crusader
Oh God, I just heard a few minutes of lconblubbard's voice, and now I must do a cleansing spell :witch2: and take 8 hot showers, Ugh!!! :melodramatic: :no: :melodramatic:
 
Last edited:

Rmack

Van Allen Belt Sunbather
It's all socks across the carpet.

A dear old friend of mine was a Medicine Man. When people would hear about this they'd say stupid things like "can you shoot lightning bolts". He answer was always the same; "Sure give me wool socks, shag carpet and a few moments to demonstrate"

Naturally they'd insist that static was hardly magic, however if you look back far enough in history it would have been. The power of positive thinking falls under the placebo effect. Any potential benefit from well-wishes is equally as dramatic as the spark generated by socks on the carpet.

The most generous and realistic study of the group had a 57% success rate, which is slightly higher than the expected 50/50. However not by a broad enough margin to provide true credibility. It's just not a substantial enough statistic.

If both parties truly believe in the benefit it will more likely help, however this is covered under the placebo effect, and begs the question of is it the helper that's helping, or the belief in the person needing the help.

Reality can only be "bent" so far, and attempts to do so - once explained - are no more dramatic than that little jolt of electricity in my old friends analogy.

--------------
EXAMPLE ONE;

While exploring an old Native American grave site, a friend of mine had a major panic attack, which rapid spiraled into a asthma attack. I took a deep breath and traced my hand down his forearm. He was immediately calm, and could breath fine.

(a friend of mine, while looking on was prepared to laugh when it didn't work.. but when it DID work was shocked, and became an instant believer. UNTIL I explained how it really worked.)

The physical contact, as well as the uncharacteristic tenderness of the touch startled him out of the attack.. Sure I altered my personal energy flow to give things a little push, but it's no great healing feat. It's just socks on the carpet.

EXAMPLE TWO;

A coworker of a friend of mine had been having terrible luck, believing VooDoo was being used against her. My friend asked me if I could do something about it. I tossed together some random things in a small bag.. crow feather, animal tooth, some dirt, a couple stone beads, etc..

I instructed my friend to tell their coworker that it was a powerful gris-gris, and to bury it under their doorstep. Their luck turned around virtually overnight, and they haven't had a problem since.

What did the bag really do? It countered their belief that they would have nothing but bad luck. As a result they stopped manufacturing their own bad luck. Any basic energies put into the bag as well as the nature of the contents only reinforced their belief that it would work.

Once again, socks on the carpet.

---------------------------------------------------

Moral of the story; There IS power in belief, but in the end it's all head-games and can't be considered a reliable form of treatment.



hehehe, you would have made a great auditor,
 

Rene Descartes

Gold Meritorious Patron
I do not assert that cancer can be cured across distances by me or anyone I know of, but only that the effect of distant healing is scientifically proven.

If so then this experiment could be repeated again and again with reasonable repeated results within some degree of certainty.

If this were repeated again and again with reasonable repeated results I think that by now my doctor would be maing house calls from his office.

And yours too.

Rd00
 

alex

Gold Meritorious Patron
If so then this experiment could be repeated again and again with reasonable repeated results within some degree of certainty.

If this were repeated again and again with reasonable repeated results I think that by now my doctor would be maing house calls from his office.

And yours too.

Rd00

I dont know if you truly believe this or are being sarcastic.

The effect can and has been proven in repeated studies of different levels of scientific rigor.

The effect is proven. But the application of it is in it infancy. There are not a large number of people who are capable or highly effective at the techniques. Many of the barriers to this are the same things scientology, meditation, religious studies and even science is trying to understand and overcome.

Hubbard said in the lecture mocked in this thread, that these abilities were possible, not that we knew how, or actually did use them.

I tend to optimism. I like to find bits of potential and work at them rather than giving up in the face of the difficulty of it.

There are doctors who do use distant healing techniques, some charlatans and thieves, and some genuine.

Should we discard the bit of good for the taint of bad? The possibility for the difficulty?
 

13heathens

Patron with Honors
The effect can and has been proven in repeated studies of different levels of scientific rigor.

The effect is proven. But the application of it is in it infancy. There are not a large number of people who are capable or highly effective at the techniques. Many of the barriers to this are the same things scientology, meditation, religious studies and even science is trying to understand and overcome.

Alex. Please provide more supporting links. It's an interesting enough subject, even with the minimal differences displayed in the fore-mentioned studies. There's a bit of a correlation vs causation issue here.

You did hit the nail on the head in terms of there being many fakes and charlatans. I have seen some amazing things over the course of my lifetime while dealing with those within 'occult' communities..

however 90% of those who claim to have ability are either deluding themselves, or don't have enough natural (inborn) talent to be able to do much of anything.

So between the deluded, the frauds, the hoaxers, and the many manipulated studies.. I just don't see this as something that can or will ever be scientifically verifiable beyond what is already covered by the placebo effect.

Additional note; I've never met someone with legitimate ability, that didn't have serious moral issues with the idea of using it for profit (or personal gain).

But, in all seriousness.. I would love to see links to more studies.
 
Top