The abstract simply says that e scios suffer longer and wih more problems than members of other sociological cults. Although I found use in the TR and other programs auditing and emeter are at the heart of cos no auditing with emeter no Scio. No Scio then no abuse of people, Rfp. Yes I know that indies argue the tech was warped by DM.
Sorry, but I can't let you duck out of that. If not to argue that since no one to this day can say with any certainty what Jesus' mental health was like and people will always question it, so too people will likewise always claim LRH was nuts, why make the comment at all? Was it just some non sequitur unrelated to the context of your opinion in that post about LRH's greatness? No, it wasn't and you know it.
Name 2. (inb4heNeverNamesEvenOne)
The Master is fiction. It's loosely based on the life of LRH without examining Scientology as a religion or its human right abuses and outright crimes. Lawrence Wright is a Pulitzer Prize winning investigative journalist with a spotless reputation. Not a single specific fact in his book has been refuted by the cult or anyone else. To be blunt you make a fool of yourself with that statement.
Realized you cant actually argue your point anymore using logic, reason, or science?
There are many spiritual masters in the world, most dead. But for a living one you might try reading something by the Dalai Lama, unlike LRH he has some good solid (time-tested) masterful advice about spirituality. The way things are going you must see that there is no way that Scientology will make it to 2500 years old. No. Scientology is not from the distant past on another planet, LRH was a bad scifi writer not a thetan from Coltus.
Sorry, but I can't let you duck out of that. If not to argue that since no one to this day can say with any certainty what Jesus' mental health was like and people will always question it, so too people will likewise always claim LRH was nuts, why make the comment at all? Was it just some non sequitur unrelated to the context of your opinion in that post about LRH's greatness? No, it wasn't and you know it.
Name 2. (inb4heNeverNamesEvenOne)
The Master is fiction. It's loosely based on the life of LRH without examining Scientology as a religion or its human right abuses and outright crimes. Lawrence Wright is a Pulitzer Prize winning investigative journalist with a spotless reputation. Not a single specific fact in his book has been refuted by the cult or anyone else. To be blunt you make a fool of yourself with that statement.
Realized you cant actually argue your point anymore using logic, reason, or science?
There are many spiritual masters in the world, most dead. But for a living one you might try reading something by the Dalai Lama, unlike LRH he has some good solid (time-tested) masterful advice about spirituality. The way things are going you must see that there is no way that Scientology will make it to 2500 years old. No. Scientology is not from the distant past on another planet, LRH was a bad scifi writer not a thetan from Coltus.
It's complicated.
Well, of course. Anecdotal "evidence" isn't worth spit no matter what is said.
But then your statement edges into "shifting the burden of proof". It isn't up to anyone to prove that Scientology technology doesn't do what Hubbard promised. That's not just silly, it's stupid. The burden of proof for any and all of Hubbard's claims lies solely with Hubbard and any of his followers who continue to make the same claims. Period.
When Hubbard and his followers fail to prove his claims, his claims may be rightfully be considered false. That's the way logic and science works. One would not logically consider unproven claims to be true - that is insane.
Bill
