HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: tsang@cs.washington.edu (Donald Tsang)
Subject: Re: Verbal Tech
Organization: Computer Science & Engineering, U. of Washington, Seattle
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 92 08:42:46 GMT

In article <> isds11990012@memstvx1.memst.edu writes:
>Hi Gang,
>
>   [lots of us don't understand the term "Verbal Tech"]
>
>   You should really find out what verbal tech means before you go
>around talking about it, because it really makes you look dumb.
>
>   The same also goes for the rest of the Dianetics and Scientology
>words that you misuse.  You should at least learn the basics of the
>subject such as the vocabulary before you try to discuss it, much less
>before you try to criticize it.  

The correct thing to is NOT TO USE SCIENTOLOGY DEFINITIONS AT ALL.
Surely your years of Scientology haven't "cleared your mind" (this is
the GENERAL definition of 'clear' here) of the normal definitions of
words?

By using Scientology's definitions for words that have DIFFERENT, NORMAL
meanings (whether in general English usage, or in the widely-understood
nomenclature of mathematics and the sciences), John Hollifeld and other
Scientologists *cause* the misunderstandings that are probably half the
flamage in the newsgroup.


>   Its fine to be skeptical, but at the very least get a clue about
>what your being skeptical of.

It would be a lot easier for the VAST MAJORITY of us to hear the
explainations in _plain English_, not some secret code that we need
a book (or three, or fifteen) to decipher [read and understand].

Consider: of the people who read (and post) to this newsgroup, only a
handfull are Scientologists.  The rest will (quite reasonably) assume
that a word means what they've always known it to mean.

Additionally, unless Scientology brainwashes its members (and it's been
stated that the Church of Scientology does not; no snide comments from
the peanut gallery please), you should all still be able to express
things with normal English, right?

We have a COMMON language ["Broadcast-Standard English"], where almost
nothing that's succinct and well-written should be easily misunderstood.

Why don't we use that, instead of Scientology-speak?  That way, we just
won't have "misunderstood words" [either definition here will suffice,
I believe].


-- 
Donald Tsang                    "Ho!  Haha!  Guard!  Turn!  Parry!  Dodge!
tsang@june.cs.washington.edu     Spin!  Ha!  Thrust!"
..!uw-beaver!june!tsang                       -- Robin Hood Daffy
From: lindsay+@cs.cmu.edu (Donald Lindsay)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: e-meter
Keywords: 3 - dimensions
Date: 13 Dec 92 22:54:04 GMT
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon

In article <6559@pdxgate.UUCP> sol@rigel.cs.pdx.edu (chris s de voir) writes:
>"The net resistance between your hands will be a complicated
>sum of resistances throughout your body 

Yes.

>they can be broken down into vector components

Not easily. The skin is a 3-D surface, not a line. The muscles underneath
are even more complicated. Resistance is a bulk property, and the
body is highly structured.

>even numerous
>complexly related smaller vectors have vector sum or "mean vector".

Very numerous, but yes.

>This mean vector can be broken down into the three component vectors
>and only the vector parallel to the leads will cause a positive or
>negative component.

Yes, but uninteresting, because the non-parallel components have
exactly zero strength. Resistance is considered to be scalar, because
(assuming no other electrical activity in the room) the vector is
just from one lead to the other, and all the current just goes from
one lead to the other. 

That's why *all* ohmmeters and multimeters (not just Scientology
E-Meters) have a scalar readout.
-- 
Don		D.C.Lindsay	Carnegie Mellon Computer Science
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
From: gisle@ifi.uio.no (Gisle Hannemyr)
Subject: Re: Read this before getting involved in Scientology
Organization: gisle@ifi.uio.no
	<1992Dec5.140421.4387@memstvx1.memst.edu> <raz.724303279@syzygy>
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 10:42:20 GMT
Originator: gisle@gyda.ifi.uio.no

In article <raz.724303279@syzygy> raz@socs.uts.edu.au (The Inimitable Raz) writes:
> isds11990012@memstvx1.memst.edu writes:
> [Re: Eric Hill]
>>   I'm glad you quit the SO.  I'm surprised they didn't kick you out.
>> Also, your violation of a sworn contract to the SO that you signed
>> of your own free will makes you a coward and liar.  The SO doesn't

> Given that you are discussing this in public, would you care to fill
> us in: What was the nature of hi contractual violation?

Well, John should of course answer this himself, but in case he
doesn't:  SO members sign a contact promising "a billion years"
of loyal service.  (Remember that these guys believe that
Scientologists live forever, so a billion years make some
sort of sense... :-)
--
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
------------------------------------------------
From: lindsay+@cs.cmu.edu (Donald Lindsay)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: e-meter
Date: 17 Dec 92 02:32:40 GMT
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon

In article <6575@pdxgate.UUCP> sol@rigel.cs.pdx.edu (chris s de voir) writes:
>If the current had no other meaningful component
>than the vector parallel to the two hand leads, how come a 12 lead 
>electrocardiogram has 12 unique voltage deflections in three dimensions.

>Could you please consult a cardiologist to explain to you what I am
>talking about so that you understand it before you casually dismiss it.

I am not dismissing it out of ignorance, but out of understanding.
On alt.religion.scientology, the only relevant discussion is about
E-Meters. They have two leads. They measure one scalar quantity.

A N-lead ECG can measure N-1 scalar values, and the *interpretation*
of those scalar values is done knowing *where* on the subject's body
the leads were placed. 

If you don't agree, then perhaps you should ask on sci.physics,
or sci.electronics, or some such. But on this newsgroup, we really
should stay relevant, which is to say, E-Meters and lie detectors.

-- 
Don		D.C.Lindsay	Carnegie Mellon Computer Science
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
From: houle@nmt.edu (Paul Houle)
Subject: Re: Tom Cruise: A Promotional Vehicle?
Organization: New Mexico Tech
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 18:40:33 GMT

In article <1992Dec13.232813.4584@memstvx1.memst.edu> isds11990012@memstvx1.memst.edu writes:
>
>   What?  What about "A Few Good Men"?  Also, some other film that I can't
>remember the name of that also featured his wife.  Also, "The Firm" which
>is shooting right now.

	The movie with his wife was "Far and Away",  which got uniformly
bad reviews,  although I enjoyed it. (I enjoy just about any movie if I
can see it for $2)  Although I think the plot was a little hokey,  the
photography was excellent and I think the reviewers may have been a
little bit unfair.  Anyway, I remember reading that his wife was a
scientologist too.


--
From: aabst5@vms.cis.pitt.edu
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: Source of qualms
Date: 14 Dec 92 19:38:41 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh

In article <1992Dec12.190441.762@u.washington.edu>, mkkuhner@phylo.genetics.washington.edu (Mary K. Kuhner) writes:

> It attacks those who disagree with it and harrasses those who leave it.  

This is true.

They were "attacking" me with threats to reveal my "secret crimes" if I
ever dared to post again.  When Scientology can't deal with facts, they
work with threats.
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
From: erichill@microsoft.com (Eric Hill)
Subject: Re: Rehabilitation
Date: 12 Dec 92 06:54:07 GMT
Organization: MICROSOFT MFG, 

In article <Bz2I4D.G7u.2@cs.cmu.edu> lindsay+@cs.cmu.edu (Donald Lindsay) writes:
>I'd like to know more about the RPF. You both agree it exists, and
>that people can be sent to it. Is this a place, these days? What's it
>like, and how long are people there? Can people decline to go?
>-- 
>Don		D.C.Lindsay	Carnegie Mellon Computer Science

An RPF exists at each major S.O. location.  Examples: flag land
base in clearwater florida, pacific base (pac) in hollywood, and 
'int' somewher in california for commodores messengers and the rest
of the top organizations.

I have not read the criteria for being assigned to the RPF.

While on the RPF one recieves something like 1/4 of the normal
$15. / week  in pay when upstat.  They black coveralls for a 
uniform.  The schedule is even worse than the regular .
Each must learn to audit and then they audit eachother as ordered
by a case supervisor.  They must run (jog) whenever going anywhere.
They are segregated from the rest to a large extent and eat after
everyone else.  An RPFer must address everyone as sir.

For the person who still has a personality even in this 
situation, there is the RPF's RPF.  Amazing what LRH could dream
up!

A person can be recalled from the RPF as the treasury chief
smi int was.  Or you can be there for many years like Colan Kee
from smi int, and chris morrisette (I don't remember which org).

If you decline to go, do so in a public place or step out into
public within seconds of doing so.  s.o. buildings come with
security guards who are also s.o. and do what they are ordered


Running a person around in small circles is a specialty of the
s.o..  Especialy if they are trying to change your mind.

Eric Hill

-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------
Views expressed in this article are the individual author's
and in no way refect the views of Microsoft, etc. ad nausium
-----------------------------------------------------------
From: aabst5@vms.cis.pitt.edu
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Dangerous ideas; Hidden Crimes; Lazy Scientologists
Date: 14 Dec 92 18:45:32 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh

In article <1992Dec12.105034.4551@memstvx1.memst.edu>, isds11990012@memstvx1.memst.edu writes:

>You're ideas are truly dangerous and have no place in a free society.

That's the whole point to a "free society":  There are no ideas "too dangerous"
to exist in a free society.  We don't need Scientologist Censors armed with
E-meters on course or at ramming-speed ready to tell us what is "safe enough"
for us to be "allowed" to consider.

I've come to the conclusion that Scientologists lazy.  They enjoy being told
what to do and think.  Scientology dulls the mind.

Take my little "contest".  No Scientologists has been able to come up with
my name.  Some have written and said "Since your going to post your name
eventually, I'm not going to bother trying to find out".  Really, how lazy!
Maybe I wouldn't post it, you lazy dogs!

And THIS from people who were going to reveal my "hidden crimes".  They can't
even reveal my name.  How could LRH know my crimes?
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
From: gisle@ifi.uio.no (Gisle Hannemyr)
Subject: Re: Ending scientology
Organization: gisle@ifi.uio.no
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 12:10:51 GMT
Originator: gisle@gyda.ifi.uio.no

In article <1992Dec12.105034.4551@memstvx1.memst.edu> isds11990012@memstvx1.memst.edu writes:

In article <schafmei.724038030@sfu.ca>, schafmei@fraser.sfu.ca (Chris Schafmeister) writes:
> I've pretty much come to the conclusion that 
> scientology like many other cults is an 'evil'
> organization that preys on people who are
> ignorant of the cult or confused.

Yeah,  I guess that's more or less how I feel as well.

> As an open question to non-scientologists:
> 
> What kinds of laws or programs could be created
> that would limit the damage done to society by these
> cults?

If you're thinking about laws targeted specifically against these
"cults" freedom to exist and express themselves, my answer would
be: None whatsoever!

I believe freedom of speech, thought and association is a very
precious thing.  I am saddened when I hear about people who get their
lives damaged by Scientology, but this happening is IMHO a lesser evil
than the alternative.

But there exists a number of laws that in various ways protect the
public and society against fraudulent and exploitive practices, and I
believe that it should be possible to use these against the CoS when
it engage violates these laws.

For example: In Norway ex-scientologists has been very successful in
court using the consumer protection act to get some of the money
they've lost refunded (the CoS doesn't pay its bills, even when
ordered by a court of law to do so -- but that's another story).  The
CoS should also be vulnerable to laws dealing with the safety of
medical and therapautical practices, laws governing labour conditions,
and of course laws regulating taxes and accounting practices.

I don't know how successful this approach would be in the US.  I am
fairly ignorant about the US legal system, but am under the impression
that being a religion and labeling goods as "religious artifacts" and
services as "religious services" gives you immunity from US law in a
number of areas (I guess that's the reasoning behind the cute, little
disclaimer that the Church now sticks on all E-meters).

In that case, it might be a good idea to look into the legal immunity
that the society gives religious organizations, and amend the laws to
make sure that this immunity isn't abused.


--
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
From: schafmei@fraser.sfu.ca (Chris Schafmeister)
Subject: No definition for 'verbal tech'
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 21:59:52 GMT


So I went down to my friendly neighborhood used book
store and what did I see there?  A wide selection
of Scientology books, including the:
'Scientology and Dianetics Technical Dictionary' $39.95 (used). 

I looked up a few terms: 'charge', 'energy', 'homo-sapiens',
'engram'...

Please, scientologists, don't take offence, but
I think the book is a load of verbal diarrhea.

How do you read this stuff?  Every definition
contains several words that have to be looked up
somewhere else in the dictionary.
This happens sometimes in regular dictionaries, but
in the 'Scientology and Dianetics Technical Dictionary'
it happens in every definition I read and several times
for each definition.

There was no mention of the term 'verbal tech' in
the dictionary or any of the other books.

Oh, now if anybody has questions about scientology terms just post
a message with heading 'CHRIS: Definition of xxxxxxxxxx'
If I have time I will post the definition and my interpretation
of what it means.

I am now 'ON SOURCE'!

.Chris.

Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
From: erichill@microsoft.com (Eric Hill)
Subject: Re: XEMU Revisited
Date: 15 Dec 92 09:49:45 GMT
Organization: MICROSOFT MFG, 

In article <Bz87EH.3u.2@cs.cmu.edu> lindsay+@cs.cmu.edu (Donald Lindsay) writes:
>
John:
>>   What could the Church possibly have to gain by keeping the Xemu
>>story a secret if they openly sell books and tapes that describe much
>>weirder things such as implants, the GE, the Marcab Confederacy, etc?
>
Don:
>I hadn't heard of the GE or the Marcab Confederacy. What are they? Are
>they side issues, or integral in some way?
>-- 
>Don		D.C.Lindsay	Carnegie Mellon Computer Science

The GE stands for genetic entity, and is supposed to be the "spirit"
or motive force in bodies wether or not the body  has a thetan
in it.  The reference is the scn book A History of Man.  According
to this, one can address auditing to the genetic entity and
thereby trace the various lives the GE has been through.

The book appears to be fiction or based on hallucinations 
including reference to the piltdown man as a fact rather than
as a hoax.

Reference to the marcab confederacy can be found in the dianetic
and scn technical dictionary.  It is supposed to be a political
confederacy from a long time ago that included our part of the
milky way.  No proof is provided there or during the sea org
basic training.

Eric Hill
-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------
Views expressed in this article are the individual author's
and in no way refect the views of Microsoft, etc. ad nausium
-----------------------------------------------------------
From: aabst5@vms.cis.pitt.edu
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: XEMU Revisited
Date: 16 Dec 92 18:55:22 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh

> I presume that this means that if you get to OT III and discover that
> its materials do contain substantially the same story as stated here,
> that you will agree that this story is ridiculous and quit Scientology?

Of course not!  If he has that type of money parted from him he'll be
too embarrassed to quit.  It costs big bucks to get to OT III.

If the Xemu story wasn't true, why was Scientology so afraid that their members
might hear of it.  They could simply tell their members (oops, "customers")
that it was bogus and to ignore it.  Or does being part of Scientology
acknowledge that you now can't "know" about certain things?  Scientology
weakens you?

No I think the whole point of having the members buy up the copies was to
prevent the public from finding out what type of BS is being sold.  While
you have a "clear mind" (before Scientology conditioning) you read the LA
Times story and understand that you are seeing is BS.  After Scientology
conditioning, you believe so many lies, what's one more?

Note that when the TIME article hit, Scientology didn't deny the story.
Instead they took out advertisments in USA today trying to discredit stories
that TIME published back in the 50s and 60s.  Stories dealing with mental
health.  Scientology preys on those with mental disorders.
From: sol@rigel.cs.pdx.edu (chris s de voir)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: e-meter
Keywords: 3 - dimensions
Date: 14 Dec 92 20:22:27 GMT

Quotes are From raz@socs.uts.EDU.AU Sun Dec 13 21:07:46 1992

"Re: The three dimensional nature of a vector: This is only relevant if
you are considering 3 dimensional movement."

I respond: But I am considering 3 dimensional movement.  And to illustrate
the three dimensionality of the human body, I referred to electrocardio-
graphy and other physiologic measurement, by which I meant electroenceph-
alography.  The three dimensional nature of electrical phenomenon is
a fundamental principle of these diagnostic practices.  To elucidate,
the amplitude of the the voltage of the electric cycle of the heart is
monitored simultaneously in 12-pairs of leads.  Six form the Frontal
*Plane*.  The other six form the Precordial *Plane*.  The intersection
of these two planes completely describes three dimensional electrical
activity.  The human body is a container of 3 and actually 4 dimensional
activity.   The human body cannot be reduced electrically to a two
terminal variable resistor.

"(Another example: Would you argue with a traffic cop who booked you
for speeding that he had missed 2 entire dimensions of your movement
and thus couldn't book you? I think not :-))"

I respond: Actually breaking down the movement of a car into component
vectors in two dimensions, has constituted successful defense against
speeding tickets.  I have been in court and have seen this done.
3 dimensional travel, such as flying airplanes, is also regulated.  And
in order to travel at legal velocities, vector analysis in at least three
dimensions is necessary.  I used to be a pilot.  However, I think the 
traffic cop analogy may be digressive.
From: aabst5@vms.cis.pitt.edu
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: I Have *No* Integrity!
Date: 16 Dec 92 18:34:46 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh

In article <1992Dec15.183143.4634@memstvx1.memst.edu>, isds11990012@memstvx1.memst.edu writes:

>> WRONG PAL!!!! The basis of your religion is on verifiable proof. The basis 
>> of Christianity is faith. You can not prove faith. On the other hand it is 
>> claimed by you and your church and LRH that he has proof for what he 
>> believes. OKAY. Show us. Gee... I hope you were not naive enough to join
>> this group of yours on the faith that proof existed?

>    I can experiment with Scientology teachings and verify them for myself
> anyone can.  If your not willing to do that Fine, but I don't owe you any
> obligation to prove anything to you.

In other words he can't demonstrate the validity of "Scien"tology.  This
leads one to accurately conclude that there is very little "science" in
Scientology.  LRH's claim that Scientology has been "tested" is hogwash.

With that understood, one can dismiss Scientology as just another crackpot
religion who's followers are dupes and pawns of the people who are living
high on the hog from the sweat and toil of those dupes and pawns.

In short: Scientology is a CULT.
Newsgroups: alt.religion.santaism
From: twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce)
Subject: [soc.motss] weird trees
Keywords: aluminum, tacky, unfathomable
Organization: Elitist Usenet Administrators, Turkey Division
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 09:10:51 GMT

Found in soc.motss.  Could this constitute some sort of pagan altar to
the anti-Santa?

In article <17572@umd5.umd.edu> jns@elea.umd.edu (J. N. Shaumeyer) writes:

>Speaking of tacky Christmas decorations, there is one
>persistent image in my mind that I can't seem to get rid
>of.  Some will no doubt remember, some will have tried
>to forget, and perhaps some will never have known it.
>
>Yes: the aluminum Christmas tree.
>
>Is there any greater mystery that haunts this season
>than: why the aluminum Christmas tree?
>
>For those who may not remember [or thought to have
>escaped], the aluminum tree was an infernal device,
>usually six feet tall, consisting of a central pole
>from which radiated, at upward angles, stiff wires
>outfitted with little strips of aluminum arrayed rather
>in the manner of a feather duster.  These limbs were
>arranged in a "natural" manner so that the entire device,
>shaped like a cone, might resemble a fir tree.
>
>As additional decoration, these devices were often
>decorated in one color of ornamental globes, typically
>blue, and generally of spun fiberglass.  Delightful.
>
>Ah, but the best part of all...  Since it was extremely
>dangerous to outfit the devices with the traditional
>strings of electrical lights [the entire device being
>electrically conducting so that one little short might
>cause the entire unit to weld itself], a novel idea
>was found for its illuminational magic.
>
>The color wheel!  A large disk with its four quadrants
>made of colored gels: blue, red, green, and orange.
>The disk was placed in front of a flood lamp and made
>to rotate slowly, and aimed at the aluminum unit. 
>As the wheel turned, the light reflected from the lustrous,
>ersatz leaves gradually changed color.  The total effect
>was, well, beyond words.
>
>Will we ever know whence came this ghastly invention?
>Why an *aluminum* tree?  Was this the state of the
>art in artifical flora?  Was it some sort of response
>to the Sputnik challenge?  A conspiracy perpetrated
>by Alcoa?  A symbol of the dawn of the modern age?
>
>I'd also like to know whether blue-flocked spruce trees
>were some sort of challenge to the ascendancy of the
>aluminum tree, or whether they were merely a fad that
>passed away with bell-bottoms, love beads, and really-big-
>polka-dot mini dresses.
>
>Whither the aluminum Christmas tree?  Are they now
>only collectors' items?  [Would anyone dare?]
>
>Things like this trouble me when I can't sleep.  And
>it all came about from Isaac's telling a story of a
>competition once to find the tackiest Christmas decoration
>possible.  The winner, unanimously conceded, was a little
>manger scene set in a forest of little aluminum trees.
>
>Complete with color wheel.
>
>--jns


-- 
____ Tim Pierce                / 
\  / twpierce@unix.amherst.edu /               Rocks say goodbye.
 \/ (BITnet: TWPIERCE@AMHERST) /