ESMB has entered archive mode. All posts and threads that were available to the general public are still readable. The board is still searchable. 

Thank you all for your participation and readership over the last 12 years.

If you want to join in the conversation, please join the new ESMB Redux at

Featured From Miss X - About Annie Broeker

Discussion in 'Stories From Inside Scientology' started by Lulu Belle, Nov 5, 2007.

  1. Terril park

    Terril park Sponsor

    The data series is quite strong on observtion. And then evaluating data gained by observation. One compares datums with other datums.

    It dosn't specifically deal with statements, beliefs and arguments. One first gathers data and then evaluates it per plus points and outpoints. One may then find something pertinent re beliefs.
  2. Terril park

    Terril park Sponsor

    Thats a good point. They weren't around in my time, but there are div 6 courses on data series.

    However doing a full data series course adds a lot of runway to becoming an auditor.

    I'd suggest the div 6 course with student hat and data series course after interning grad 5.
  3. Alan

    Alan Gold Meritorious Patron

    Without taking a lot of charge off an area and having a great deal of know-how and experience the Data Eval material becomes a super-imposition course for fitting facts to fixed beliefs or fixed ideas.

    I doubt if there is a more perfect two-edge sword material than the Data Eval Series.

  4. Veda

    Veda Sponsor

    Jim Logan, apparently, still believes that Ron Hubbard's publicized goals for Scientology were his actual ("real") goals.

    The primary corrupting factor in Scientology was Hubbard's hidden agenda.

    The counseling "tech" and "policy" - about which near endless argument is possible - are secondary and subordinate to Hubbard's actual agenda. And that is still the agenda of the Scientology Cult.

    Reforming or revitalizing the subject of Scientology, without recognizing that hidden and corrupting agenda, is impossible.

    In time I think he'll figure it out.

    However, it will take time.

    It always does.
  5. Alan

    Alan Gold Meritorious Patron

    Has anyone done this - duplicated the Axioms on ARC or have duplicated the terms?

    The mood levels that abound in or connected to Scio says they have not.

    The reason being is quite simple - for the above to be fully duplicated - you would experience a caseless, chargeless state. :)

    Plus that above Affinity is Love - above Reality is Truth - and above Communication is ?????? (Telepathically projected holographic imagery.):omg:

  6. Alan

    Alan Gold Meritorious Patron


    Mirror, mirror - that reflection that I see - is that he or is it me? :unsure:

    The ability to rant and rave allows a separation to take place - once the separation can be held still - then the charge and its emanating points can be found - poof goes that which you are resisting. :happydance:

    Maybe it was our finest hours :)

    Definitely a "cluster buster!"

    Good to meet you Jim!

  7. Alanzo

    Alanzo Bardo Tulpa

    Hi Jim -

    I remember from The Perception of Truth tapes that Hubbard placed a basic premise at the top of a pyramid of data and then all other data in that subject flowed from that.

    For instance, the primary urge of existence is SURVIVE!

    All other data would flow in relation to that datum.

    Well that's very different from how basic premises are handled in real logic. Basic premises are tested in real logic in relation to various forms of valid evidence for the premise.

    Hubbard's pyramid was simply a self-referential system that did not allow real testing, evaluation of various forms of evidence, etc.

    And remember, it was Hubbard who said "those who need proof can't LOOK". He also said that if you were to study a book on logic, that it would drive you quite mad.

    The missing elephant in the data series, and in the Logics, and in his few and limited descriptions of "infinity valued logic" is the discipline of recognizing the parts of an argument, evaluation of valid forms of evidence, logical fallacies, and other essential skills of critical thinking.

    They aren't there.

    And they aren't there for a reason: Hubbard did not want disciplined scrutiny of the beliefs of Scientology.
    Last edited: Nov 26, 2007
  8. Leon

    Leon Gold Meritorious Patron

    I agree with this. LRH's instructions in '71 were that everyone doing evals first had to have the HC outpoint/pluspoint lists done on them so as to defuse outpoints in their own lives. Then lots of clay-demoes on them to show they really got it. It was an action called Management Power Rundown, which (disregarding its slightly over-the-top name) was a really cool action to do.
  9. Terril park

    Terril park Sponsor

    In old management series Data series 54, cancelled, but taken from OODs item 27 jun 1974.

    " At this writing it is doubtfull if there are half a dozen truly skilled evaluators on the planet. There are a few hundred who know of the system and can use it to some degree. There are a few thousand who know the title of it and use some of its words loosely."

    I've concluded a flaw in this series is expressed by

    Data series 49


    Yet these are probably the most important areas to evaluate.


    " Periodic sweep outs of of antiquated and didactic laws (rather than general concepts and subpurposes ~must~ be undertakenby a being, organisation, group or race or species."
  10. Jim Logan

    Jim Logan Patron

    Jim Logan

    Again with marvelous insight. The ARC thing is a bit strained though. Not the 'caseless state' aspect, the 'above'. But the mechanics of 'poof' well, that's just so clean.
    Last edited: Nov 26, 2007
  11. Jim Logan

    Jim Logan Patron

    Jim Logan

    With you here I think we've got a quorum.

    Again, with the mistaking Scientology for Hubbard. Wha'sup wi dat?

    As to the time thing...what is time? Seriously, what is it from your understanding, point of view, etc. Since you have proposed it as what will aid my figure out, do me a favor and let me know what it is so I understand what you are saying and how that's gonna work that way. Jim
    Last edited: Nov 26, 2007
  12. Jim Logan

    Jim Logan Patron

    Jim Logan

    Well spoken Leon, not just because it is accurate, but because it is 'old school' in it's non HE&R (human emotion and reaction) presentation of a point of view and conclusions made there from. Just like the Academy, the Greek one.
  13. Jim Logan

    Jim Logan Patron

    Jim Logan

    Familiarity is DS 7. There's also the one entitled The Missing Scene. Don't forget about the 'heart of review', that is, humility, no thirst for always being right. Of course if one evaluates from fixed, false stable data, as in a 'case' then one isn't evaluating in the DS sense, he is running his 'evaluations' (the reactive minds concept of 'viewpoint').
  14. Veda

    Veda Sponsor

    I'm not going to explain "What is time?" Or debate about "What is time?"

    Again, the old "mistaking Scientology for Hubbard" assertion. Wha'sup wi dat?

    I'm not "mistaking" Scientology for anything.

    In time you'll probably understand. You may even understand what I mean by "time" in time.

    If you want to that is.
  15. lionheart

    lionheart Gold Meritorious Patron

    LRH is an issue in as far as you said it was inconceivable that LRH was on a money-grab (or words to that effect). I simply pointed out that there is evidence that that is exactly what he was doing! What he spent the siphoned-off money on is a different issue. But there are reports on the internet from those around at the time about couriering suitcases of money to him and his hoarding of precious jewels.

    Perhaps someone else with a better handle on Internet links can refer Jim to these accounts?

    Part of the process of becoming an ex-staff member is separating the actual facts from what LRH said. The two were not the same. He said none of our fees went to him. This was a lie.

    I applaud your attempt to separate application of policy from the reason behind the policy. But as you will have found over your freeloader bill, that is a difficult thing to get the CofS to do.

    I didn't feel patronised. :)

    I'm not saying he was solely in it for the money, just that there was this aspect to some of his behaviour. I agree with others that he was a multi-layered personality - as we all are! One aspect of his personality was to control and punish. One way he did this was in his application of freeloader bills. Another aspect of his personaility was to aquire wealth, he did this by making SO officers bring him suitcases of cash from our fees and freeloder bills.

    Poor Ron!
  16. Alan

    Alan Gold Meritorious Patron

    How embarrasing! You just used DS Policy to confront me with! :)

    How many Tech Divs has DM built?

    How many Orgs had the Data Evaluators built?

    Fake Tech produces fake identities.....

  17. Mick Wenlock

    Mick Wenlock Admin Emeritus (retired)

    actually his polemic does not lack "substance". The acquisition of money and jewels and gold have been reported on and attested to by many people who were responsible for transferring them, delivering them to Hubbard or accounting for them.

    I am surprised that you do not appear to be aware of those facts. If you do some searching and checking I am sure you could find them out. Google is your friend.

    AS for Creston being a "modest estate" - how much did it cost, how much did the landscaping that was done cost? Just as a "for instance". There are many many much cheaper rural locations - so it doesn't look like "economy" was the name of the game.
  18. Mick Wenlock

    Mick Wenlock Admin Emeritus (retired)

    The worth of a theory in science is the accuracy of its predictions. For example - the theory of gravity states that objects will fall at a constant acceleration within a gravitational field. Observation confirms the expected result.

    Theories are tested again and again, especially in the light of newer, more expansive theories.

    Unfortunately Hubbard seemed to think that a hypothesis was a theory and that "research" was talking about the hypothesis.

    If Hubbard had actually had an education in the scientific method and in data analysis then maybe his insights could have led to something better than DM, the Sea Org, and all the rest of it.
  19. Zinjifar

    Zinjifar Silver Meritorious Sponsor

    His confusion on what an 'axiom' is was even more embarassing (had He had shame). Apparently, upon realizing that a 'theory' could be rejected, disproved and dumped, he compared that lamentable situation with that of an 'axiom', which suffers no such weaknesses. So, Ron made lots of Axioms, while science tries to get along with a bare minimum, and then eliminated the 'theory' stage entirely, in favor of 'knowing how to know' certainty.

  20. petraph33

    petraph33 Patron with Honors

    That is EXACTLY the point: only being able to use actions and data that are covered in Policy or HCOBs made SURE that no one would "drift off that ideal scene called KSW". To get an eval approved by AVC, it MUST be on-policy and in-tech. I want to point out that there is no way around that in Scientology - and what may appear as a "keeping the subject working" issue, becomes rather a "Don't you dare try use this data series for your own way of thinking!". Even worse more to the present, and the above dataum most definitely in suppressive use now: In the mid 90's when I was on management lines, there was no way you would get any eval approved that would contradict the IG Network Bulletins of the Golden Age Of Tech - God/DM had found the real why of Scientology and this was it. No matter how "properly" you would use the Data Series, there is ALWAYS one result, and that is a controlled result; So how does that go along with real freedom? It is "controlled free thinking", isn't it?? If you look at the way even KSW is written it is a completely controlled subject, there is only one way and that is the LRH or now DM way. Policy can be used suppressively and can be used sane. But the way it is even written only points in that one and totally controlled direction. It is built so well on gradients that you would not be able to even notice the increase of control until you are controlled yourself. Even the fact that the Data Series is not on the Student Hat (good point...) is clearly showing that one is not in a position to "use this thinking technology yet" mind you, there used to be a short investigatory checksheet on the VM course, kinda mini hat. But I have been looking at all this from a distance now for 5 years, and I am very much aware of the fact that those policies are written in a very determined direction: Total control.
    Last edited: Nov 26, 2007