What's new

David Mayo, Bill Robertson, Robin Scott -More Truth Revealed and Realities uncovered

Terril park

Sponsor
Mary's link takes you to MR's response immediately after your post. BTW, you double posted, both on MR's blog as well as the copy you made on esmb.


Mark A. Baker

So I did. Not the smartest tool when it comes to typing etc. Had to look through hundreds of posts on his blog to cut and paste doing so off his blog then copying the whole lot. I screwed up.
 
T

TheSneakster

Guest
So I did. Not the smartest tool when it comes to typing etc. Had to look through hundreds of posts on his blog to cut and paste doing so off his blog then copying the whole lot. I screwed up.

As I posted before, use Google Advanced Search ( http://www.google.com/advanced_search ) with the Search within a site or domain: field set to: markrathbun.wordpress.com and you won't have to browse hundreds of posts to find what you need.

Wordpress.Com's Search feature is complete suxage. It will not search the contents of comments!!
 
Regarding David Mayo having outgrown Scientology as suggested by Veda:
...
To my mind David Mayo was a nervous type. He was constantly filling his coffee mug in the kitchen and smoking those dang MORE mini cigar cigarettes.
...

He quit smoking in 1985 while at the AAC in Santa Barbara. I was there.
 
T

TheSneakster

Guest
It's called a strawman argument. Invent something your opposition is saying, and then challenge that, rather than what they actually are saying. Works especially well when the opposing argument is abandoned in favor of the strawman.

Yep. Nobody on ESMB ever does that. :eyeroll:
 
Regarding David Mayo having outgrown Scientology as suggested by Veda:

The area Palo Alto and Menlo Park and where they lived in Atherton has a lot of mental health depts, colleges etc ?? I can't imagine what effect Sarge had on David being a psychiatrist and all. You got two schools. One handling the aggregate factors of evolution, trauma experience and hereditary factors and neurology who had his PHDs. The other handling postulates and trauma and the dwindling spiral of man and the self sabotaging of of ones spirit. It is interesting also that these two guys are so similar, coming up with the Journals for Research in Metapsychology. Individuals like the Volkmans came up with a meld writing a book Beyond Trauma. Some got licenses to work for the state as therapists handling PTSD cases. ... .

FWIW, I always have seen Sarge's initial work with Metapsychology as an attempt to lay an intellectual groundwork for those aspects of dianetics & scientology which are most useful for clinical purposes. DMSMH contains some useful ideas about a workable procedure, but it is poorly written, confused, confusing, and not well grounded on fact. Hubbard was a popular writer, not an analytical one. Similarly with the greater body of the Hubbard source materials.

Sarge was able to provide an intellectual basis founded on empirical clinical research and contemporary medical practice for much of the basics of auditing/counselling. This was something of which Hubbard was himself incapable. Metapsychology was established to create a solid intellectual foundation for what was workable in scientology practice and to introduce those practices into the clinical counselling professions as a standard training manual. Later developments in Metapsychology have built on that earlier work. There is certainly a great deal of conceptual 'cross over' between the subject of scientology and the approach to counselling taken in Metapsychology. But fundamentally they serve two different audiences.

Without doubt the development of David's understanding and thinking were influenced by the exchanges he had with Sarge during the development of the latter's work. Sarge openly acknowledges the assistance he had from David. Both men are highly intelligent and interesting conversationalists. It would be more remarkable if their thinking had remained stagnant than that each evolved in his own views as a result of their collaboration.

Similarly without a doubt each has continued to evolve his own views independently since that time. One more reason to desire from each of them a greater degree of participation in the public dialog. That however, is solely their choice to make.


Mark A. Baker
 

anonomog

Gold Meritorious Patron
Interesting times at the blog over on the dark side :p.


I did not expect to see so much dissent in the Martyite ranks.
I wonder if it came as a surprise to Marty.
Or if he was gauging the loyalty of his troops.

Mark's posts were brilliant, but Marty let them through. IMO Marty doesn't do anything that doesn't benefit him now or in the future.

Perhaps he posted further because he believed he could sway the potentially mutinous ones by playing his martyr card "look how they attack me!" and expecting the usual rush of support.

Why would anyone test the loyalty of the people around them? Possibly doing a bit of market research before expecting them to believe or support something a little bigger than normal.

Just my 2c worth of friday night pondering.
 

AnonyMary

Formerly Fooled - Finally Free
Martin, I look forward to your reply to Ralph, who seems to be :kma: up to Marty at the expense of mocking you.

Ralph Hilton | April 12, 2011 at 2:45 am |

Marty,
Thanks for posting that.
I agree totally. It matches my observations and accumulated data over the years.
I felt that Mayo lied and his motives in doing so were to keep to the tech available outside the CofS but that is uproven and not really the main point and is an opinion. I met the guy and felt he was somewhat PTS. I also felt that he had his own agenda but then who doesn’t?
I have seen write ups of what the CofS is doing with NOTs and consider them an abyssmal tech degrade which violate basic principles of Scientology.
There are a couple of small points which seem of value from the write ups of later versions which I have seen. Obviously I won’t detail them here.
In my own auditing of self and others I have stayed with the 1978 versions as made available by those brave people.
I disagree with the statement “Robin Scott and some cohorts” as he was just a minor accomplice. The plan and its execution were put together by another far stronger individual. Robin received the strongest attack from the CofS as he was the most prominent after setting up a castle in Scotland as an AO. He doesn’t even consider himself a Scientologist any more.
In my not so humble opinion if you are auditing NOTs in the way written up in the original issues then you are doing the right thing for your PCs

other comments[..]


OTDT | April 12, 2011 at 9:07 am | Reply

Who’s the “stronger individual”?

Ralph Hilton | April 12, 2011 at 2:17 pm | Reply

Jon Atack and Ron Lawley appeared to me to be the major organizers of the event. Despite Jon’s later denigration of LRH and Scientology, at that time he was the strongest influence in the UK Independent Field. After a meeting with Gerry Armstrong Jon changed considerably, started attacking LRH and reverted to drugs.
It was Jon who insisted that the materials were not to remain exclusively in the hands of the AACs and ensured that they were distributed broadly.


martin ruston | April 14, 2011 at 3:53 am |

Ralph – Hi!!
You are wrong – Jon was not aware of the plot before the event. He was just as surprised as me when the packs ended up in EG.

I wasn’t aware that you were party to any of the events you talk about. Correct me if I am wrong.

I was close to Jon and he was a true influence. Jon took it on himself to collect as much information as he could and to communicate it. As such he interviewed many many people. However he wasn’t responsible for everything that went on.

I think we all agreed the materials should be broadly distributed as a safeguard to their permanent “release”. I don’t recollect any argument or persuasion regarding that.

Neither Ron Lawley, Morag Bellmain (or her partner Steve Bisbey) or Robin Scott were/are weak or feeble people and they were quite capable of hatching the plot all by themselves! David Mayo was not aware of it before the fact and as far as I know no one else was either.

Whatever people here think of Robin Scott I have always found him an honourable man. After all when the cof$ tried to bribe him to implicate me in the event and he refused the bribe. He was asked to say that I had couriered the NOTs packs to David Mayo. They offered him a reduced time in prison. I for one do respect Robin Scott regardless of the other matter he was involved in. I don’t necessarily condemn anyone for growing high grade cannabis for medical purposes or any other purpose. There is so much contrary information regarding cannabis that I won’t make up my mind about it yet.

Steve Bisbey DID take a set of packs to David Mayo but Steve told me personally that Mayo refused to accept them, he wouldn’t allow them onto the premises. Steve said he left the packs “with someone” else in California.

Harvey Haber had always insisted that no one was to do anything illegal – that it wasn’t worth it.

With regard to others here condemning Mayo for giving up the struggle and taking the money and running. Well Ralph you are the ONLY person I know of out of the hundred (if not thousands) who left in the 80′s who is still involved with scientology.

That is because the rest of us have all moved on – scientology stopped being a factor in our lives once we had decompressed. Maybe that happened to Mayo as well?

Just to straighten a bit of the “record”.

regards
Martin Ruston

Ralph Hilton | April 14, 2011 at 10:20 pm | Reply

I daresay Marty allowed that just for me to comment on :)

I must admit that I am a little proud to be one of those who did not “move on”.
Maybe you and Mayo decompressed and got splattered all over the universe.
I am not a mushroom! Don’t try to feed me bullshit.
Robin Scott made half a million out of his altruistic desire to provide medical grade Cannabis to needy souls.
As Nancy Many pointed out David didn’t accept then but Allen B. did.
Please post some more! I haven’t laughed so much in months.
 
Interesting times at the blog over on the dark side :p.


I did not expect to see so much dissent in the Martyite ranks.
I wonder if it came as a surprise to Marty.
Or if he was gauging the loyalty of his troops.

Mark's posts were brilliant, but Marty let them through. IMO Marty doesn't do anything that doesn't benefit him now or in the future.

Perhaps he posted further because he believed he could sway the potentially mutinous ones by playing his martyr card "look how they attack me!" and expecting the usual rush of support.

Why would anyone test the loyalty of the people around them? Possibly doing a bit of market research before expecting them to believe or support something a little bigger than normal.

Just my 2c worth of friday night pondering.

I had similar thoughts.
 

afaceinthecrowd

Gold Meritorious Patron
As I inferred awhile back here somewhere, Marty has “Blind Spots” because he hasn’t spent the time to read the wealth of good, solid, first hand and credible information and Doc Links here on ESMB.

If Marty would invest a little time and effort he wouldn’t keep steppin’ into cow pies. But, I don’t think he’s much interested in doing any real serious reading re: the factual history of El Ron and Scn.

What I think Marty is doing is trolling his own Board to separate the “wheat” from the “chaff”. What I don’t think he realizes and IMHO is happening is that a whole bunch of the Lurkers on ESMB are Indies and they're here, with Us, reading and thinking and learning. I’m glad their here and I’m glad all of Us are here for them.

Lurkers, I knew El Ron…personally. I was in the “Inner Circle” when Marty was showboating and cheating in playground roundball pick-up games and DM was pulling wings off of flies for fun in South Philly. The folks here are for real; they are your friends; they just want to know the rest of the “The Story”; they just want you to have the rest of “The Story” and, after that, it’s up to you.:yes:

Face:)
 
Martin, I look forward to your reply to Ralph, who seems to be :kma: up to Marty at the expense of mocking you. ...

I don't know that I have much to say to Ralph that would be likely to be printed on MR's blog. All Ralph has stated are essentially his views of Mayo's tech. He is certainly entitled to state his view. All I could reasonably offer in turn would be my opinion of Ralph's opinions and the 'why' I don't set store by them. That would almost certainly result in an argumentum ad hominem and not something I wish to enter into as a distraction from the discussion of David Mayo's history with the church.

I don't know Ralph personally. My only experience of Ralph has been solely via the internet. As I have seen him behave via the internet he has been consistently one of the most vicious individuals I've seen online in the freezone with regard to his treatment of others. Ralph in full stride is as every bit as vicious & treacherous as Ekaterina or Pierre when he is piqued.

Nick Warren is a friend of Ralph's and Nick holds Ralph in some esteem. I respect Nick's opinion on most things, but with regard to Ralph I consider him someone best left to wander his alpine glens - far far away.

What is clear about Ralph is that he is a 'wannabe xii'. Whether or not being a 'xii' is to viewed by someone as a good thing, Ralph clearly thinks it is and wants desperately to have that cachet. The common denominator of those of his posts I have seen has been to rip other auditors apart for their auditing, usually without adequate data. He especially targets those with a reputation as excellent auditors. Additionally, he asserts that he is himself the 'top technical person on the planet'. Heard that song before. :eyeroll:

[side note: that whole 'pissing contest' among independent auditors of whatever stripe gets really really old after a decade or two. :coolwink:]

As a result I'm not surprised at Ralph's bashing of Mayo. It fits his pattern. I'm not interested in going to MR's blog just to trash Ralph for stating his opinions of Mayo's tech. They are his opinions. As a result of his all too many public 'meltdowns' & abuses, I don't happen to think Ralph's opinions are worth squat, but he is entitled to them for what they are worth. Those of MR's following who accept Ralph's pronouncements as truth, are going to be in for another rude awakening at some point in the future. Their choice.

As, for Ralph, ask him about 'Revenius'. I think that little prank reveals more about Ralph than he would be comfortable admitting. :eyeroll:


Mark A. Baker
 

AnonyMary

Formerly Fooled - Finally Free
I don't know that I have much to say to Ralph that would be likely to be printed on MR's blog. All Ralph has stated are essentially his views of Mayo's tech. He is certainly entitled to state his view. All I could reasonably offer in turn would be my opinion of Ralph's opinions and the 'why' I don't set store by them. That would almost certainly result in an argumentum ad hominem and not something I wish to enter into as a distraction from the discussion of David Mayo's history with the church.

I don't know Ralph personally. My only experience of Ralph has been solely via the internet. As I have seen him behave via the internet he has been consistently one of the most vicious individuals I've seen online in the freezone with regard to his treatment of others. Ralph in full stride is as every bit as vicious & treacherous as Ekaterina or Pierre when he is piqued.

Nick Warren is a friend of Ralph's and Nick holds Ralph in some esteem. I respect Nick's opinion on most things, but with regard to Ralph I consider him someone best left to wander his alpine glens - far far away.

What is clear about Ralph is that he is a 'wannabe xii'. Whether or not being a 'xii' is to viewed by someone as a good thing, Ralph clearly thinks it is and wants desperately to have that cachet. The common denominator of those of his posts I have seen has been to rip other auditors apart for their auditing, usually without adequate data. He especially targets those with a reputation as excellent auditors. Additionally, he asserts that he is himself the 'top technical person on the planet'. Heard that song before. :eyeroll:

[side note: that whole 'pissing contest' among independent auditors of whatever stripe gets really really old after a decade or two. :coolwink:]

As a result I'm not surprised at Ralph's bashing of Mayo. It fits his pattern. I'm not interested in going to MR's blog just to trash Ralph for stating his opinions of Mayo's tech. They are his opinions. As a result of his all too many public 'meltdowns' & abuses, I don't happen to think Ralph's opinions are worth squat, but he is entitled to them for what they are worth. Those of MR's following who accept Ralph's pronouncements as truth, are going to be in for another rude awakening at some point in the future. Their choice.

As, for Ralph, ask him about 'Revenius'. I think that little prank reveals more about Ralph than he would be comfortable admitting. :eyeroll:


Mark A. Baker

Thanks, Mark. Revenius discussed here:

From: [email protected] (The Pilot)
Subject: SUPER SCIO - CONGRADULATING RALPH ON LRH2
Date: 29 Aug 2000 00:00:00 GMT
Newsgroups: alt.clearing.technology


SUPER SCIO - CONGRADULATING RALPH ON LRH2
http://www.upguitarhill.com/Helpme/The Pilot Posts/pilot/posts/2000/lrh2.txt

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?t=7074

I was looking for Martin aka Rockyslammer, to reply :D
 

Infinite

Troublesome Internet Fringe Dweller
Scientology vs science

FWIW, I always have seen Sarge's initial work with Metapsychology as an attempt to lay an intellectual groundwork for those aspects of dianetics & scientology which are most useful for clinical purposes. DMSMH contains some useful ideas about a workable procedure, but it is poorly written, confused, confusing, and not well grounded on fact. Hubbard was a popular writer, not an analytical one. Similarly with the greater body of the Hubbard source materials.

Sarge was able to provide an intellectual basis founded on empirical clinical research and contemporary medical practice for much of the basics of auditing/counselling . . . <snip> . . .

Huh? There are *no* aspects of dianetics and Scientology auditing which are of use for clinical purposes. This was established in 1958. The fact was reinforced when Judge Gerhardt A. Gesell ruled that e-meters must carry the following advisory:

The E-Meter is not medically or scientifically useful for the diagnosis, treatment or prevention of any disease. It is not medically or scientifically capable of improving the health or bodily functions of anyone.

cf: Stephen Barrett, MD, and William Jarvis, PhD (editors), "The Health Robbers", Prometheus Books, Buffalo NY (1993). Chapter 23, "The Gadgeteers", by Wallace Janssen, pp. 321-335.

"After eight years of litigation, with two complete trials and three rulings of the Court of Appeals, the E-Meters and literature were returned to the Scientology headquarters. Was anything accomplished? Most definitely. The courts saw the necessity to uphold the food and drug law even in a situation that involved the First Amendment. The court upheld the right of believers to believe even in science fiction -- provided that they do not violate the laws that protect the public health."
 

Infinite

Troublesome Internet Fringe Dweller
. . . As, for Ralph, ask him about 'Revenius'. I think that little prank reveals more about Ralph than he would be comfortable admitting.

Heh!! Excellent. Just when you think it can't get any more bizarre, up pops Bakes with data that's it been even weirder in the past. What a crazy episode.

(Ralph writes) . . . I think its about time to confess. As several suspected I created the LRH2 and Revenius identities.

I did it at a point where I felt the FZ was suffering a bit from Pilot being exposed. It was also a point where I hit a lot of cognitions that didn´t match with my normal beingness.

Quite a few things happened at the same time and I wanted to create a new approach without being encumbered by my usual identity...

I wonder, for you old hands, are things getting less crazy these days or is it about the same?
 
Top