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

Is the Sun Conscious?

Discussion in 'Human Potential, Self Discovery' started by Mimsey Borogrove, Nov 28, 2018.

View Users: View Users
  1. Mimsey Borogrove

    Mimsey Borogrove Crusader

    Let me see - If I cut and paste, I am doing shoddy research, but when you do the same it is the opposite? When I take the time to read a book by an author, or watch a well presented video, you don't, yet pontificate on what you imagine is the content?

    Man oh man.

  2. guanoloco

    guanoloco As-Wased

    This is a perfect response. This happens all of the time between undisciplined studies that have "theories" and disciplined studies that really seek truth despite its outcome that have real theories.

    Their approaches are completely opposite.

    Hubbard, feminists, cultists have "theories" that are really just ideas that serve their confirmation bias. Their theories are often not falsifiable and they cherry pick data, evidence and whatever to prove the "theory" (aka "hunch") correct. The theory doesn't predict unobserved evidence or outcomes. These restrict our knowledge, aren't factual and are polarizing.

    In science theory means observed and duplicatable universal results borne from exhaustive testing. Theories are falsifiable and they are rigorously tried to be proven false. They predict unknown and unobserved evidence and outcome. These expand our knowledge, aren't subjective and are universal.

    Mimsey doesn't argue from knowledge. Mimsey doesn't present info from knowledge. Rather it all comes from opinion...ideas...hypothetical hunches or world views. When given data to possibly refute his assumptions he doesn't study to ponder it. Instead, he goes into argument mode to preserve the assumption.

    I don't understand that. It's very facile towards understanding.

    I try to take a Socratic approach of not assuming a preconceived knowledge and then studying all sides of an issue that I can find in an attempt to safeguard from a favorite assumed idea.

    That's exactly what you're proposing, HH.
    HelluvaHoax! likes this.
  3. HelluvaHoax!

    HelluvaHoax! Platinum Meritorious Sponsor with bells on

    Thanks, I live with research, innovation, incubation and IP every day. I hire designers, engineers, physicists and a vast array of specialists of multi-faceted disciplines in order to create new technology, devices and tools. It is a constant battle of evaluating the RISKS and REWARDS of undertaking projects that MIGHT lead to a "proof of concept". It's inordinately expensive and thus if mistakes are made by simply "trusting" the "experts" opinions, millions of dollars can be lost. That's not government or grant or monopoly money, that's real money that came out of a person's bank account, lol.

    To survive in that world (and end up with an extensive IP portfolio that must actually work in the real world) one learns quickly to listen carefully but not simply accept engineers/scientists learned opinions. They are very often wrong because their thinking is often very narrowly focused on pet theories, hobby horses or shiny gimmicks/effects that they personally think are "really cool", lol

    Proof of concept is a working principal that helps navigate the perilously endless ocean of choices.

    What Mimsey does is not what professionals do in their fields. He makes noises and motions like he is researching and exchanging REAL INFORMATION about REAL FACTS. He picks up a bit of jargon and sometimes the cadence of the conversation too, and jumps in with---pure unadulterated garbage. It's not even close. Then he gets offended when his "facts" fall apart on the simplest questions.

    Usually I don't bother responding to his slogan-based "scientific research"; but here and there I call him out just to see what he will do when asked for "proof of concept". That's when rhetorical flailing, slogan-chanting and other misdirections ensues. I find it interesting that he repeats the well-worn patterns of thought/commentary hundreds of times, without any slightest regard to whether what he is saying produces any RESULTS or whether it's all just conjecture and theories.

    Take his epic battle against "racism" because half the country wants to build a border wall. Yet he cannot connect the dots and realize that he locks his own home/car doors. He sees no slightest connection nor the hypocrisy.

    Take his epic battle against "rich" people. He doesn't donate the surplus of money he works for (over minimum wage) to people who are not working. Yet, he lectures others that rich people are evil and THEY must do what he is unwilling to do.

    The list is endless.

    I perhaps have a morbid sense of humor in watching him play out his SJW identity so predictably and feebly that he cannot make a coherent argument. Instead of learning what he is talking about, he cuts-n-pastes hundreds upon hundreds of links to OTHER PEOPLE TALKING/WRITING.

    Bizarre, but entertaining nonetheless.
  4. HelluvaHoax!

    HelluvaHoax! Platinum Meritorious Sponsor with bells on


    KOAN DU JOUR: Why do the two (2) premiere SJWs on this and the Trump thread endlessly cut-n-paste links to OTHER PEOPLE'S articles?

    ANSWER: Same reason L. Ron Hubbard claimed that there were "over 10 million Scientologists".

    HOW THE GIMMICK IS SUPPOSED TO WORK: By pointing abstractly to a "whole lotta other people" who think the same way, it is supposed to "prove" that it must be true. Hubbard (or any cult member for that matter) cannot demonstrate any proof of concept, so they rely on inundating others with tonnage of words (or in Scientology terms "agreement", because "reality is agreement").

    FINAL COMMENT: Hubbard wrote over 10 million words on how his technology works. However, he never even gave one single demonstration of it working. Cult members don't need "proof of concept" when they have a grinning guru who is willing to do all then heavy lifting of saving mankind and personally making them happy, wealthy and immortal.
  5. HelluvaHoax!

    HelluvaHoax! Platinum Meritorious Sponsor with bells on

    Cutting and pasting is not research.

    No matter how many times you say it's research, it's not.

    Telling others to read books and watch videos is also not research.

    Speculative theories & hypothecations are not research.

    Feelings are not research.

    Using the word "SEEMS" endlessly to support your arguments is lame if not entirely pathetic.

    Credible people don't keep saying "It seems.......". If they know what they are talking about they give the facts. If they don't know what they are talking about they don't waste others' time with how things "seem" to them. It's about as pointlessly boring as someone coming up to you during a really fun party---interrupting the conversation--and starting to tell everyone in great detail about a dream they once had. Talk about "buzz-kill" LOL.
  6. guanoloco

    guanoloco As-Wased

    Sheila, what do you make of this? It's the old IQ thing again...

    Do pigmentation and the melanocortin system modulate aggression and sexuality in humans as they do in other animals?
  7. DagwoodGum

    DagwoodGum Squirreling Dervish

    Mimsey, what in hell does "you can rehab drugs" mean?
    I mean you took them, your body processed them and they dissipate from your system and then they are gone. So how do you rehab these drugs once they are gone and why would you even think to rehab long gone drugs. What are you saying?
    JustSheila likes this.
  8. JustSheila

    JustSheila Crusader

    You know my views on this. I think this article tries far too hard to link this to this to this to this to that, and those links are fragile and hypothetical.

    It's a fact that aggression is linked to testosterone levels, but stretching that to a generalized link to the entire melanocortin system is a huge stretch and I don't see it.

    Testosterone levels can be suppressed or enhanced by upbringing and environment, but they are also genetic. Low testosterone levels present health risks, high levels mean aggression, less intelligence and obsession with sex and violence.
  9. guanoloco

    guanoloco As-Wased

    Yeah. It's interesting and I don't know if it's factual regarding the bulk of mammals or not. However, without a dog in the fight I think we should be prepared for factual fact finding and be prepared to accept whatever implications stem from it.

    Like I've stated before, due to a very recently near extinction event we as homo sapiens are virtual genetic clones. It's amazing how much variety exists with minimal variance in genetics.

    Of course, I also embrace a doctrine of some sort of spiritual aspect to whatever we are and I think this is influenced and influences the physical.
    JustSheila likes this.
  10. Mimsey Borogrove

    Mimsey Borogrove Crusader

    In Scientology there exists this concept: They run process X on you "What are you doing that is logical and why is it logical?" They ask the question over and over until you have a cognition, F/N and VGI's. According to Hubbard, a part of your reactive mind that is causing you to do illogical things ceases influence you. It does not disappear - it is still there, but switched off. You are then called a release.

    Then one fine day you do something illogical, and worse, do that multiple times. Obviously, the mental mass connected with being illogical has woken up and has you in it's thrall.

    The C/S says we need to rehab that state of release, so you go back in session with your auditor. He will run rehab processes on you, such as asking you how many times did you go release on being illogical? ( it's called he counting method, there's another - the 65 style ) You hem and haw and brighten up and say 3! And you are all smiles, you needle floats and theoretically, the mental mass connected with being illogical has moved off. Your state of release has been rehabbed.

    You are rehabilitating an earlier state of release. Comprendez vous?

    Rehabbing drugs is based on much the same concept. According to Hubbard's extensive research confirmed by one (1) single session, a person can go release doing drugs. Let's say you have had a headache for days, and you smoke a massive doobie of Panama Red* and your headache goes away. You had a win, or, translated into Scientologese: a release from head aches.

    In the drug rundown, they compile a list of drugs from you: You say; "I smoked pot, snorted crack cocaine, ate Sterno, and drank gallons of Night Train, and got really baked eating a rancid Twinkie". Lets say Sterno reads. ( it got a fall on the meter - that electronic Ouija board the auditor stares at incessantly) The auditor asks you: "how many times did you go release on Sterno?" You look into the train wreck of your memory and come up with 5 times, and lo and behold, the meter F/Ns! You have been rehabbed on your release on Sterno.

    Is that clear?


    * yeah, yeah Panama red is nothing compared to the latest super pot, Bake-a-matic, and really dates me. Tough titty.

    Last edited: Dec 8, 2018
  11. DagwoodGum

    DagwoodGum Squirreling Dervish

    " fine day you do something illogical, and worse, do that multiple times. Obviously, the mental mass connected with being illogical has woken up and has you in it's thrall."
    "You hem and haw and brighten up and say 3! And you are all smiles, you needle floats and theoretically, the mental mass connected with being illogical has moved off. Your state of release has been rehabbed."
    "Is that clear?"

    Crystal. You are still a Scientologist. Gotta put you on ignore and I never enjoy having to do that.
  12. Mimsey Borogrove

    Mimsey Borogrove Crusader

    What the fuck? You asked for an explanation. I provided one. I never said it was valid. If I was a card carrying scio why would I say this: The e-meter - that electronic Ouija board the auditor stares at incessantly? That's not exactly complementary.

    I was a class 6 auditor - I know how to audit. I have done this shit. I told you what I learned. What did you expect for an answer?

    Am I still a Scio? Hell no.


    Edit: Also I said this: "According to Hubbard, a part of your reactive mind that is causing you to do illogical things ceases influence you."

    That's his theory. HIS. Not anyone else's. No one has proved the reactive mind exists.

    I dunno - I have been posting on here for 5 or more years and you think after hundreds of posts debunking Scientology, I am still a Scientologist, well, I am truly amazed.

    Edit #2: I fail to understand why you would put a Scientologist on ignore in the first place. Isn't the purpose of ESMB to provide information to non and practicing scientologists so they can disinfect themselves from his scam? Sheesh. Maybe you think I am an OSA plant. Why don't you call them up and ask? They know exactly who the person called Mimsey is. (323) 960-3500

    Last edited: Dec 9, 2018
  13. JustSheila

    JustSheila Crusader

    Mimsey, in all honesty, IMO, you still think like a Scientologist and you're still caught up in the mindset as much or maybe even more so than Terril.
    Neither of you are great believers in the E-meter mainly because L Ron hisself said auditing could be done just fine without it.

    Neither of you likes COS or the cult and you both write against it and that is wonderful.

    That you do another A=A and believe that if someone sees that you are still in the Scientology mindset, that what they really mean is you are an OSA plant is just another example or your flawed thinking. OSA and thinking like a Scientologist are not the same thing and nobody should have to tell you these things when you jump to wild conclusions and hang onto those conclusions regardless of facts presented to you. I don't blame DG. It's too difficult to carry on a genuine discussion with you because you won't consider any viewpoint but your own and don't seem to be able to take in others' information or respond to them without extreme emotion. I can't seem to carry on a genuine discussion with you, either, but I'm not ready to block you yet, either.
  14. Mimsey Borogrove

    Mimsey Borogrove Crusader

    Well, I guess if you say so it must be true. If believing that man has a spiritual nature makes me a scientologist - I am guilty.

    If I have had out of body experiences makes me a scientologist, I guess I am.

    If being declared an SP rather than leaving scientology on my own makes me a scientologist, what other proof is there?

    If continuing to explain the technology to who any who asks because I think they are wanting to understand the principles, makes me a scientologist, my bad.

    If having certainty in my political beliefs and posting them on the Trump thread, and not wanting to become a republican / conservative despite many many opposing posts calling me a SJW, A "useful Idiot" a socialist and other derogatives despite my objections, and attempts to explain my beliefs, makes me a Scientologist I am proud of it.

    If my music tastes suck, and yet I post songs I like, makes me a Scientologist - hot damn girl!

    If I make too many dad jokes / bad puns / 1.1 remarks / or lame ass comments such as suggesting I am an OSA plant, to suit people tastes - Ohh - that has to be J&D, and since A=A=A= Mimsey=Scientologist - Highest ARC to you.

    If my having feelings and other signs of HE&R makes me a Scientologist - oh fuck - do not pass the reg, I am going directly to the RPF.

    If my sending up / trolling HH and his soapboxery, that most sacred of ESMB cows, makes me a Scientologist - pickup the cans.

    If you find my response argumentative, emotional, spiteful, instead of tone 40 - hey - I'm not your scientology man. Just a wog with a spiritual bent who spent too much time drinking koolaid for his own good.

    Last edited: Dec 9, 2018
  15. HelluvaHoax!

    HelluvaHoax! Platinum Meritorious Sponsor with bells on

    Nobody is trying to make you into a republican.

    We are just all praying & postulating that you will one day handle and rise above your PTS condition.

    Potential Trouble Socialjusticewarrior.

  16. guanoloco

    guanoloco As-Wased

    There's a difference between knowledge and beliefs.

    For instance, during my Scientology phase I had certainty in my beliefs that L. Ron Hubbard was a philanthropist and had my best interest in mind. I wish beyond measure that I had had knowledge of what L. Ron Hubbard truly was. Had I but known that the courageous worldly scholar and benevolent friend of mankind was a cheap, lying, drug addled, wife beating, cowardly swindler I don't think I would've endorsed or espoused his "teaching".

    No one is trying to mold you into anything. They are trying to get you to examine what is a belief and what is matter where these items take you. Nature will do its work and you'll land on sound ground with knowledge.

    Read the history of Thomas Sowell in terms of his beliefs transforming into knowledge. Why don't you examine your beliefs and find out if they're knowledge?
    JustSheila likes this.
  17. guanoloco

    guanoloco As-Wased

    Also, don't conflate your desire to help others as a "belief". By this I mean to say that...we'll use minimum wage as an this I mean to say that you want to avoid conflating a belief that raising the minimum wage is equal to a desire to help someone and that by discarding the belief of raising the minimum wage must, then, mean a lack of desire to help someone.

    You do this often.

    So, in this example, Thomas Sowell wants to help the poor people. He begins his life with the false belief that raising the minimum wage helps poor people. When he discovered just the opposite (and he discovered this with personal observation) he discovered that raising the minimum wage factually injured poor people he maintained his desire to help poor people and was able to discard the false belief of raising the minimum wage.

    This takes a superior intellect...something that I have come to believe is a very rare thing indeed.

    To prove this, people who have the belief that raising the minimum wage will help poor people...when they are confronted with Thomas Sowell saying that raising the minimum wage is a false belief then these people attack Thomas Sowell, some with death threats, because they have conflated Thomas Sowell's knowledge as a belief that Thomas Sowell doesn't want to help poor people...that Thomas Sowell wants to take advantage of and exploit poor people.

    This is because (my personal belief) that people for the most part suffer from inferior intellects. Maybe they're just too damned ADHD or "busy" to stop and really understand the dynamics of the problem.

    This is where Zen and far Eastern philosophy comes into play that by easing up one actually gets what is intended and by pushing hard one gets the opposite of what one intended.

    You can see this concept in a golf swing. Trying to "kill" it for the Happy Gilmore drive equals a hook or a slice and by easing up you get that long beautiful in-control drive.

    The same can be said of boxing, baseball, sex...whatever.
    JustSheila and HelluvaHoax! like this.
  18. HelluvaHoax!

    HelluvaHoax! Platinum Meritorious Sponsor with bells on

    But Mimsey already has knowledge.

    He knows that Socialism works. He knows that rich white people are the problem. He knows that a border wall is bad, racist and that walls don't work. He knows that people who don't agree with him are "closed minded" and "attacking" him and somehow aligned to the evil cosmic force called Trump. He knows that Trump is a racist even though he single-handedly helped blacks and hispanics to achieve record low unemployment.

    HELPFUL TIP: Just because Bernie Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez don't post wall-portrait-sized selfies of themselves in naval costumes doesn't mean they aren't fronting a pernicious cult. LOL

    Last edited: Dec 9, 2018
  19. HelluvaHoax!

    HelluvaHoax! Platinum Meritorious Sponsor with bells on

    Great post. Sowell is a towering intellectual giant amongst giants.

    I have come to believe that it's not that SJWs are stupidly incapable of understanding cause and effect. It's that they just don't care. Decades of listening to SJWs sophistry, misdirection and refusal to answer specific questions has convinced me that what they are doing is a GIMMICK.

    They can't win on facts.

    They can't win on results.

    So, they had to find a successful GIMMICK that would give them an edge to win (elections, arguments, debates, et al).

    Their gimmick is willful stupidity and character assassination. "YOU'RE A RACIST!" "YOU HATE POOR PEOPLE AND DENY THEM A LIVING WAGE!" "YOU ARE A GENOCIDAL WHITE SUPREMACIST WHO WANTS TO MURDER ALL IMMIGRANTS!" This list is endless. . .

    This is how the Democratic and Socialist parties game the system.




    Character assasination.

    Big LIes

    Race baiting.

    Identity Politics ("divide and conquer")

    They really do not give a shit about black people living in squalor, murdering each other. They don't care if someone creates millions of jobs for them. They don't care if law enforcement is empowered to reduce the uncontrolled violent crime in the ghetto. If a Republican (or anyone else for that matter) helps blacks with jobs or better wages or a better economy---they are racists that must be viciously attacked.

    SJWs are not about social anything. Not about justice anything. They are about using cheap feel-good gimmicks (e.g. virtue signaling). They are about pretending to care.

    They are really about being in a cult that is no better than any other cult that promises to "save the world" by fair gaming anyone who dares threaten their power over others.
  20. JustSheila

    JustSheila Crusader

    @Mimsey Borogrove

    IMO means "In My Opinion," Mimsey. Opinions are opinions, not facts. When someone states their opinion as an opinion and you say, "it must be true", then there's the problem with your way of thinking. When people give their opinions, they are opinions and should be stated as such. That is not the same thing as a fact, and facts are not beliefs are not opinions, etc. You've got it all scrambled up.

    If, if, if, if, if... :violin: Oh the drama! :dramaqueen:

    Here's a tip: When you have a belief, state it is a belief. When you have an opinion, state it is an opinion and don't try to present beliefs and opinions as facts. Is that so hard?