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

Scientology is all bad

Discussion in 'Evaluating and Criticising Scientology' started by Veda, Aug 5, 2012.

View Users: View Users
  1. Gottabrain

    Gottabrain Guest

    ^^ I thought what Gib meant was just taking the EXACT SAME TEST would do that.

    Nobody is supposed to ever take the exact same IQ test, or any exact same test in the educational sphere for a qualification, aptitude or IQ - because the test score will always go up once the person is familiar with the questions!
  2. Infinite

    Infinite Troublesome Internet Fringe Dweller

    Ahhh . . . DOH!
  3. Gottabrain

    Gottabrain Guest

    LOL! :biggrin: :duh:
  4. Gib

    Gib Crusader

    Actually you both are missing the point of my post.

    The point of the post is simple. Just re reread it.

    Somebody does drugs, does IQ test = 100.

    The person gets off drugs by whatever means, person does IQ test = 120. Could be the same IQ test or another IQ test, doesn't matter. The point is a person goes off drugs and their IQ increases. The point is Scientology PR's this. Do other forms of drug rehabilitation PR this? That a persons IQ increases once off drugs due to their program..
  5. Helena Handbasket

    Helena Handbasket Gold Meritorious Patron

    It used to be, you run your own BTs and Cs, then you run "your own OT 3". Then they cancelled that last step. Now RONS Orgs has put it back again, not in OT 3 but in a later step. I remembered what I was doing at the time.

  6. Panda Termint

    Panda Termint Cabal Of One

    That's true, Helena. In my comment I'm just explaining how the "recently arrived" concept is explained in BT theory.
  7. Gottabrain

    Gottabrain Guest

    Oh! :duh:

    Honestly, Gib, what threw me off was you mentioning Narconon gets people off drugs. It doesn't. At least, not very often.

    Consider this - Narconon never follows up on whether someone stays off drugs when they leave, so actually has NO (ZERO!) statistics kept of whether a person STAYS off drugs - so they never verify whether they really got an addicted person off drugs in the first place. That's no more effective than putting someone in a locked room in a hospital rehab.

    Narconon includes staff members who are already off drugs in their program statistics to pad them up (staff members do the Purification rundown for everything from nosesprays to aspirin and call it an addiction.. lol)

    Narconon also counts "retreads" (doing the program over again after failure and drug reversion) as a SUCCESSFUL RECOVERED ADDICT - but never subtracts the failure from the statistic, either. So the same person gets counted over and over and over and over again. One person equals SIX recovered drug addicts. That's not even talking about the staff members who do it every year or so as some sort of general body cleansing.

    As an aside, some drugs, when taken, will rock up any IQ or other test score. Amphetamines do this - I've taken them before tests when I was a teen and scored in the 1% percentile with time left to spare on a test and NO sleep the night before - LOL! Lots of college kids use them for that. I hear that epenephrine does this too but I dunno what kids use to up their scores these days. :confused2:
  8. Panda Termint

    Panda Termint Cabal Of One

    I'm just guessing but I suspect that the only real "successes" from NN are amongst those who become full-blown scientologists. The Group mores tend to constantly reinforce the no-drugs message/standard and so, as a scientologist, one tends to avoid drug usage and such avoidance is enforced by scientology's "Ethics" regulations.

    It may even be considered that, in such a scenario, one is swapping one addiction for another. :confused2:

    Drugs vs Scientology, are they comparatively addictive and harmful in the long run? My experience is that such isn't the case but others may think/know differently. Thoughts?
  9. Demented LRH

    Demented LRH Patron Meritorious

    Narconon does not get people off drugs because its procedures do not include the use of medications that block drug cravings.
    Some llght drug users who had undergone Narconon procedures got off drugs simply because they did not have access to the substances for a month (the length of Narconon "treatment"). But they could have achieved the same result at home without paying $30,000 to Narconon.
  10. Bravo, Bill! :clap: the risk of :duck: here's another generality! :biggrin:

    May I please add that it also helps to make "I" statements, such as "When I read what you wrote in that post I felt this way about it", or "it made me think of this..."

    In other words, "I think, I feel, I want, in my I experience", etc. rather than the "Jane, you ignorant slut!" :)biggrin:) type of comments about what someone else has posted, no matter what the topic is about. :hattip:

    Thank you! :)
  11. Caroline

    Caroline Patron Meritorious

    Well, Hubbard wrote Scientology "is the only agency anywhere that can raise IQ and resolve human problems," so if some other drug rehab makes these kind of IQ claims, I'd suspect another Scientology front group...
  12. AussieCase

    AussieCase Patron

    I would say it is pretty bad. Hubbard set out a framework that constrains thinking right from the get go. If here is some common sense it is generally obscured by the constraining framework.

    Lets start with Dianetics. It's bullshit. It has been studied and it does not pass muster with regards to Hubbard's claims of increasing intellectual intelligence, increasing mathematical intelligence, and increasing interpersonal skills. The study originally published at NYU in 1953 is available on Andreas' site.

    Scientology has not been studied, but all claims are hidden behind religious fine print.

    Perhaps there are some gains from examining parts of one's life or talking to a sympathetic person, but they have not been shown to be more consistent than a placebo.

    The framework of saying one has all the answers is problematic. There are many questions without answers, and often Scientology gives unnecessarily simple answers to complex questions.

    I am in favor skepticism.
  13. R6Basic

    R6Basic Patron Meritorious

    Narcanon use to be a feeder line into our mission. The newly former drug addict would be sent to us and our Reg. would get them to buy a Life Repair.

    This "worked well" (kept some GI coming in the door) for about two years or so but then they stopped sending them to us.
  14. Dulloldfart

    Dulloldfart Squirrel Extraordinaire

  15. Gizmo

    Gizmo Rabble Rouser

    That post remains one I go back & read over & over again.
  16. Gizzy, and Gib, I love Helly deeply, broadly, mightily! :biggrin: :happydance:

    If I ever meet him in person, I will probably jump on him like a duck on a june bug...and hug and kiss him till he squeals! :biggrin:
    Last edited: Jun 18, 2015
  17. WildKat

    WildKat Gold Meritorious Patron

    Me too! There are at least 10-20 people on this board, some now gone (like Gadfly) that I would give big hugs and a kiss to. Some really stellar people, and HH is one of them!
  18. Hypatia

    Hypatia Pagan

    I think iq can be raised. But Hubbard refused to do any double blind studies and he lied all the time. He falsified stats and it still goes on there. So there's no evidence whatsoever to show that Dianetics or Scio raises IQ.

    My belief in IQ being potentially raised is only belief.