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


Discussion in 'Evaluating and Criticising Scientology' started by HelluvaHoax!, Apr 30, 2009.

View Users: View Users
  1. HelluvaHoax!

    HelluvaHoax! Platinum Meritorious Sponsor with bells on

    The 59th Anniversary of Dianetics The Modern Science of Mental Health is being celebrated in worldwide events in a few weeks. Here is the surreal part that you won't believe until you see/hear it yourself:


    But, Scientologists ignore that and celebrate it anyways! I told you it's surreal, do you want to see it for yourself?

    Around 3:15 to 3:45 of this LRH EVENT he states: "We had in Book I, simply no more and no less than a rather adequate description of the reactive mind, the mental image picture, the engram, the secondary and so forth. We had ways to run these things but those ways were not the ways used to clear people. Now, that's very interesting that I could be guilty of an oversight to that degree."

    It gets more bizarre....

    Since 1951 Hubbard and the Church has ranted and raved about precision scientific technology that has been proven to work 100% of the time. They have promoted millions of copies of The Way To Happiness worldwide to teach people not to lie. Hundreds of millions of dollars have been spent promoting Dianetics courses and auditing so every man, woman and child on Earth could go Clear. The book DMSHM has been re-published over and over again, most recently with the release of "The Basics". It is continually asserted, stated and written that Dianetics is a science of the mind and that in about 20 hours of Dianetic auditing, anyone can reach "Clear".

    But around July 4, 1958 (when this congress was filmed) Hubbard admitted that DMSMH could not produce a clear.

    In spite of that, for the past 50 years, the church has continued to sell the book and the courses and the auditing.

    They never revised the book to tell the reader that the author said there was other technology he later developed (allegedly) that was needed to make the state of clear. They never even hinted that anything was less than perfect in this book. Not one person in the past 59 years ever was produced by Scientology as evidence that the abilities of a clear were even real. It was just a claim... But back to the point, even if Hubbard later figured out how to make a Clear (which he clearly did not) then why would they sell a book that they knew was incorrect about the precious, scientific technology to free mankind. (hint: their total dedication to freeing mankind with the miraculous tech of Dianetics must not very "total"...or at least less total than their dedication to getting people to pay MONEY for a shiny car that doesn't run.

    Have to admire the boldness of it! They take a broken down car, give it sparking new paint and then sell it for wayyyyyy more than blue book value, claiming it is not only a car but it is a super-car, capable of winning every race.

    That is knowing and outright consumer fraud.

    They know it doesn't work. But they still sell it and make all the false claims and misrepresentations without hesitation.

    And they get Scientologists to go to events to celebrate something that Hubbard says doesn't work.

    Marvelous hoax, isn't it? A masterpiece of deception. Belongs in an art museum in the Baroque Brainwashing Gallery.

    See section from 3:15 thru 3:45.
    Last edited: Aug 7, 2011
  2. 3rdman

    3rdman Patron

    I just shat a brick wall. Wow. Mind if I quote all this at WWP? They'd jump on this like candy out of a pinata. :D
  3. HelluvaHoax!

    HelluvaHoax! Platinum Meritorious Sponsor with bells on

    Delighted if you or anyone can use this info to wake up those who slumber... Good to go, partner!
  4. Iknowtoomuch

    Iknowtoomuch Gold Meritorious Patron

    Holy shit.....
  5. Veda

    Veda Sponsor

    It's not news. For years (starting around 1952, see "Don Purcell") Hubbard stated that 1950 Dianetics, and Dianetics generally, did not produce Clears (except when he used it, of course). Theta Clearing became the thing, which meant that one was stably outside the body ("Be three feet back of your head," etc.) Then, around 1958, he announced that - through other means - Scientology was finally making Clears. That faded away, and was replaced with GPM (Goal, Problem, Mass) Clearing of multiple goals, etc., then came the (Implant GPMs, which aren't really a GPMs, but a kind of engram that mimics GPMs) Clearing Course of 1965/66 and the announcement of the "first real Clear." This was followed by OT 2 the next year, which was originally presented as "another bank" - If I recall the materials correctly. (Another bank in addition to the recently discovered "R6 Bank"), and, then, the next year or so, it became part of R6 again as the CC, OT 2, and OT 3 all becoming manifestations of R6, implanted 75 million years ago, with the original dates on the CC and OT 2 having been artificial, implanted, dates - then, around 1978, Hubbard became concerned with the reputation of Dianetics, and wanted Dianetics to be regarded as routinely making Clears, so he said, "Dianetics makes Clears," and presto! Suddenly thousands of Scientologists discovered they were Clear, and were sent - with their credit cards and check books in hand - "up lines" to Flag for their OT levels.
  6. HelluvaHoax!

    HelluvaHoax! Platinum Meritorious Sponsor with bells on

    Brilliant post! Yes, I am aware of all the miraculous breakthroughs that "now made it possible to achieve clear" or the revelations that unlocked for the first time the "mysteries of the universe that make it possible to go full Operating Thetan" etc. etc. etc. I did the Briefing Course, audited and C/Sed and and many other things....S.O. exec, data series, on OT VII, etc. But I thought it was very poignant to focus on one thing in particular....

    ...that for over a half century after the books miraculous claims were mercilessly debunked (by Hubbard, himself!) not one attempt was ever made to inform the loyal, paying customers who continued to be hard-sold books, courses and auditing!

    Any book of any kind that gets re-published is updated and diligently corrected. The customer is buying information and the publisher and author with any slightest integrity tries their damnedest to give them what they pay for....true and current data. But not DMSMH! Scn knowingly sold a lie and promised Clear in 20 hours when their own Founder said it could not be done with Dianetics at all!

    How freaking crazy, sleazy and criminal is that? ! ?
  7. alexm

    alexm Patron with Honors

    What I love about this congress on DVD is that at one point in one of the originals lecture Ron's son Nimbs pushes a box or something on stage but on the DVD he is completely editted out. :confused2: It is on YouTube somewhere and so hilarious :roflmao: sad :bigcry: sick :omg: reprehensable :screwy: but hilarious :roflmao: !!
  8. Peter Soderqvist

    Peter Soderqvist Patron with Honors

    Soderqvist1: This is what L. Ron Hubbard has said in 1958 to Religious professor Stillson Judah!

    LRH: To make a long story short, after the war I returned to writing, but mostly to Dianetics and its preparation. And I found out what was entangling man—he was tangling himself up with combinations of mental image pictures. And if you could do something to the pictures you could do something to the man. Quite interesting. And I entered now in a safe sound field, where I was concerned. We were in a sound field of engineering. There was an energy, you could measure these pictures, they weren’t imaginary. I found out they were measurable, and did measure them. You had your hands on some mass, and you could produce a positive effect, and things were traceable. I was persuaded by Hermitage House to write a popular book on the subject. And that book, Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health, brought me a lot of embarrassment. And the embarrassment was this: I had no organization, I had no finance, I had nothing, and all of a sudden the world was pounding on my door.

    Dr. Judah: This was the new mousetrap.

    LRH: Always the new mousetrap, that’s for sure. College students came from every part of this country, people from all over the world. And I found they presented cases I had never seen before. They presented greater difficulties than I had seen. And I didn’t know what to do with many of these people—I knew my study was a long way from end. I wanted to get the answers to this, and get this story written just a little further. In the fall of 1951, I found out what was looking at the pictures. Here we had mental image pictures, and up to that time I had been studying them and their behavior, which is the reaction, stimulus-response mechanisms that psychology itself had been familiar with, but never had analyzed. I found out what was looking at the pictures. And described it. And found out that you could do things with it from a very practical standpoint that nobody had ever done before, and found myself suddenly in the field of religion, whether I wanted to be or not, there I was. Very simple—the human soul was the fellow.

    This rather upset things, because most religions speak to men about “you’ve got to take care of your soul.” This wasn’t the case according to my findings. The fellow I was talking to was the soul. I knew how many years a Buddhist can sit and meditate, and how long a Lama priest can work, in order to get a detached view of things. And I found out that on a great many people, some 50 percent of the people I ran into, I could attain this detached view of things in a matter of minutes. So I knew I wasn’t looking at a weird phenomenon, or a psychotic manifestation. I found out that psychiatry had known something about this but they merely said that was a sure sign of craziness. But man was his own spirit. And whether I liked it or not, I was in the middle of a religion.
  9. Voltaire's Child

    Voltaire's Child Fool on the Hill

    Certainly not news to me. Nor was it when I was in. I don't have a problem with it.
  10. HelluvaHoax!

    HelluvaHoax! Platinum Meritorious Sponsor with bells on

    I am curious about what you said. I completely respect your freedom to think any way you wish...but I am just wondering what you think about the Church selling DMSMH books which do not reveal that the author (later) said that the techniques in that book do NOT produce clears. I can't think of any way to justify this very profound contradiction.... how does that work for you?
  11. Mark A. Baker

    Mark A. Baker Sponsor

    Sheesh! This is news? :eyeroll:

    Have you ever even read the basics? :)

    Mark A. Baker
  12. Mark A. Baker

    Mark A. Baker Sponsor

    She's been a prominent ex & critic of the church for many years now. Does that answer your (silly) question? :whistling:

    Mark A. Baker
  13. Björkist

    Björkist Silver Meritorious Patron

    I think Hubbard even jokes about writing another book which implies/states, "You are a victim!" which, Hubbard says, would go to the top of bestseller lists...
  14. Lesolee (Sith Lord)

    Lesolee (Sith Lord) Patron Meritorious

    Well DMSMH is a tricky one. Of course when we were "in" we couldn't add any "degrading" comments to it per Tech Degrades. I can't see LRH, or anyone else, re-writing it. And that wouldn't be correct anyway. It was what it was. A chronological study of the materials requires it to be intact, as it was. And of course that tech still works, as much as it did then.

    The only thing one can responsibly do is to sell it on the basis of the Tech Degrade. Basically that was the Tech in 1950 and there were 30 years development on top of that, hence the need for other books. You would have to be pretty stupid to think that DMSMH was the final word in technical developments. Yes it is over sold, and then some. But so is all of Scientology/Dianetics.

    Those still in can't sell it with the appropriate R-factor. Independants/Freezoners can recommend it as a useful book for NED auditors and those doing the Clearing Course, although they might be selective about which chapters were relevant.
  15. Tiger Lily

    Tiger Lily Gold Meritorious Patron

    I remember him saying that too -- can't remember where though. . . but I remember how clever he thought he was, having that kind of control over people.

  16. Mark A. Baker

    Mark A. Baker Sponsor

    A. Shopped a bookstore's "inspirational/self-help" section lately? :whistling:

    B. Why are you so certain your own conclusion "how clever he thought he was, having that kind of control over people" represents his attitude & intention at that time rather than your own justification of what you know now? :)

    C. Hubbard was complex & mutable. VERY VERY mutable. :omg:

    Mark A. Baker
  17. Voltaire's Child

    Voltaire's Child Fool on the Hill

    I've said many times that he should have revised DMSMH. He didn't- and yes, he should, but one thing he did do was revise Dianetics itself. He just did that separately, along with revising other auditing actions and adding new ones to the "Bridge" many times.

    I'm sure he believed in what he was doing but as he created and revised processes, found that the recipients (aka "PCs"- plural of "pc") never reached the state envisioned and planned for. However, he noticed that changes and effects were taking place so he kept going with it. I'm pleased he did but I have said on many many occasions that Scn Clears and OTs aren't consistently able to evince any abilities/states of being. I've seen effects and that's great. For myself, I place Scn - among (many) other things- under the half a loaf is better than none category.
  18. Iknowtoomuch

    Iknowtoomuch Gold Meritorious Patron

    You go Mark, you defend your leader all the way! And your responses are still at or below 2.0 on the tone scale.....might want to work on that is your upcoming sessions big guy!:thumbsup:
  19. Mark A. Baker

    Mark A. Baker Sponsor

    A. Not my leader. NEVER was. :)

    B. I prefer to regard others with some degree of compassion & tolerance. Especially those who were/are especially troubled. I consider LRH was to all appearances.

    One man's "below 2.0" is another's "intentional irony". If you prefer, you can just think that I'm "applying arc by matching tone levels". :)

    Mark A. Baker
  20. phnx3

    phnx3 Patron

    Ditto what Mark & Claire said