From: gisle@ifi.uio.no (Gisle Hannemyr)
Subject: Sources for skepticism
Organization: gisle@ifi.uio.no
	<GISLE.92Dec10175051@gyda.ifi.uio.no><1992Dec10.163559.4521@memstvx1.memst.edu>
	<GISLE.92Dec11153401@gyda.ifi.uio.no>
	<1992Dec12.115454.4556@memstvx1.memst.edu>
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 11:20:29 GMT
Originator: gisle@gyda.ifi.uio.no

In article <1992Dec12.115454.4556@memstvx1.memst.edu> isds11990012@memstvx1.memst.edu writes:

> Sorry.  Human beings do that sometimes.  How can the skeptics
> make such claims about Scientology without looking to the original
> sources but some half-baked misrepresentations such as TIME magazine?

"Skeptics" is a generalization -- and a generalization is a very BAD
thing on some circles I've been told.

As far as _this_ particular skeptic is concerned, I can only state that
I don't.  Period.

I challenge you (or anyone else) to find _one_ article by me in this
group that cites the TIME magazine article, Atack's book or a similar
source as the main proof for its argument.

John, I honestly think you are attempting to set up a strawman.

As an example of the sort of arguments I'd like to answered by
scientologists, below is yet another repost of my investigation of
Narconon.  You've probably read all of this before in some form of
other in this group, and it pisses the hell out of me that you (or any
other Scientologists) NEVER respond to this sort of thing.

Ok, here goes...


Narconon is a drug rehabilitation program affiliated with the CoS, and
based upon Scientology "tech".  In Narconon's own literature, and in
some CoS literature promoting Narconon, it is claimed that there there
exists a number of "independent scientific studies" that verify that
the Narconon drug rehabilitation program is successful in at least 76%
of cases.

Now, I haven't the time, abilities, funds or facilities to set up my
own Narconon franchise in an attempt to prove or disprove the 76%
figure, and since I'm not a drug addict -- I can not even try it out
on myself.

What I can do, however, is to investigate the claim that there exist a
number of independent scientific studies that substantiate the 76%
figure.  Given my resources, I think this is the best approach to
varifying or disproving the validity of Narconon's claims.

So, my rationale for starting this project is as follows: If the
"independent studies" exists and is carried out with rigor and
adequate controls -- then I must conclude that the Narconon program
have some merit.  If, on the other hand, the independent studies
do NOT exist, then Narconon has been caught lying, and it is quote
likely that the 76% figure _also_ is a fabrication.

So the first thing I did was to contact our library, to set up a
database search for scientific studies concerning the effectiveness of
the Narconon program in various citation indexes all over the world.
This search was negative.  Not a single paper or report turned up.

I then turned to this group, asking the Scientologists here if any of
them knew about these references or knew how to get them from sources
within the Church, ABLE or Narconon.  This was also negative, but
scientologist Brian Wegner offered to help.

So, with the assistance of Brian Wegner, I got in contact with
Miche'le Berry at the Narconon Chilocco New Life Center (the Narconon
HQ) who promised to help me locating the references.  As a control, I
also arranged for Miche'le to send Brian the same material she sent me
(to safeguard against me misrepresenting the material when reporting
the result to this group).

The material I received from Miche'le Berry/Narconon did not contain
the references I had requested (in fact it didn't answer any of my
questions except one adressing the cost of the program).  Brian dryly
commented that "the material obviously wasn't tailored for your
needs", but he was still optimistic about getting a valid response if
I followed this up with Narconon.  So I followed up with a new fax to
Mich'le where I again carefully explained what I wanted.  The response
to this was a new package with the same material they sent me first
time around.  Subsequent faxes and letters to Narconon Chilocco has
remained unanswered.  Unfortunately, Brian Wegner dropped out of this
group in the middle of this, so I longer had his valuable assistance
in getting the Narconon people to communicate with me.


So, there you have it.  After investigating this for myself, I now
think that it is not very likely that there exist any real independent
scientific studies that verify that the Narconon program has a success
rate of 76%.  What I wanted you to know by posting the essay above is
that that opinion is _not_ based upon reading TIME magazine.

To me, it looks like it is the _Scientologists_ in this group that
doesn't bother to check out the original sources for things.  For
example, most Scientologists I've discussed Narconon with seem to
believe that there actually exist independent scientific reports
verifying that the Narconon program is 76% effective. Has any of them
ever _attempted_ to locate the original sources for this claim?
--
Meta-disclaimer: A society that needs disclaimers has too many lawyers.
 
- gisle hannemyr  (Norsk Regnesentral)
  OSI:   C=no;PRMD=uninett;O=nr;S=Hannemyr;G=Gisle (X.400 SA format)
         gisle.hannemyr@nr.no                      (RFC-822  format)
  Inet:  gisle@ifi.uio.no
  UUCP:  ...!mcsun!ifi!gisle
------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology