From: nistuk@unixg.ubc.ca (Richard Nistuk)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: "Why can't I say It's a crock of shit?"
Date: 18 Nov 1992 05:55:53 GMT
Organization: University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada
NNTP-Posting-Host: unixg.ubc.ca
Summary: Subject says it all.
Keywords: fibber



O.K..  Here we go again.  

	So I go to one of the local Scn Orgs, and I say to one
of the scientologists "Hey!  Before I join up and give you my
student loan money I want to know If this stuff really works.
Show me some proof!".  So in true Scn tradition the lady shows
me a _HUGE_ stack of file folders and says "Here you go, here is
your proof.  _All_ of these people have used Scn tech to better
their previously miserable, insignificant lives".  And I walk
over to the stack and, at random, select few files and take a
peek(not ethical, I'm sure, but I have an honest face).   


	Now I open one of these "success" and I find stories similar
to the one noted here by John Holifield
(from the article <1992Nov16.205441.4107@memstvx1.memst.edu> 
isds11990012@memstvx1.memst.edu--John Holifield):

NB:some of the thoughts that may run through my head are interspersed.

>...I [Holifield]
>was talking to my girlfriend on the phone one evening while she was
studying.
>I went exterior and went in to her house.  I could clearly percieve the
>books and things that she was using to study.  I also knew what page she
>was on, what the words on the page were, etc.  On one occasion, I even
>knew what words she was reading at a particular instance.

	Right!! ;)

>     Another time I was walking to the parking lot from school.  I had
>to walk by the music building, and as I went by, I noticed that the 
>Suzuki violin class was having a performance inside the building.  I moved
>my body into the building 

"moved his body" !?!?!?!  Are you usualy just "hovering" outside your
body?  Do you control it from the exterior? WIERD.

>			   and waited for the performance to end.  It was
>a really good performance by the way.  

How nice.

>					Anyway, when it was over, I left the
>building and it had started to rain.  I thought I would just wait untill
>the rain quit, and then I would cross the street to the parking lot.  I
>noticed that a lady and her two kids were about to cross the street.
>They didn't have an umbrella, 

	OH NO!  :o

>				and I knew they would get wet.  I decided to
>change my considerations and do something about the rain, so that the
>children and the lady wouldn't get wet.  

	How nice of you!

>					  The lady looked at me and asked,
>"Are you waiting for it to stop raining?"  I made a Tone-40 postulate and
>said, "No, it is waiting for me."  

	I AM A MESSENGER OF GOD!!!  I WILL PROVE IT TO YOU!!! FEAR ME!!
I WILL STOP THE RAIN NOW!!!!

>				   The rain stopped instantly and we all
>crossed the street.  

	You seem to imply a causal relationship between you and the
rain stopping.  Maybe you were the cause of the rain too!!  ;)

>		    As soon as we were all in our cars, I allowed the 
>rain to start again.

	How nice!  He "allowed the rain to start again".  Why didn't you
clear all the clouds away and make the stars appear and take your
girl friend out for a moonlight stroll?


	So after reading a few _stories_ like this, about all
these peoples "wins" do you know what I'm going to say?  Sure you
do!  I'm going to say:

	"that's nice, but I wanted proof, not the winners of
your creative writing contest!"

	Do you see what I'm saying?  I _beleive_ that the CoS can
produce  tens of thousands files of successful cases.  I beleive
that!  Hell, I'm sure that the _real_ number of files is in the 
hundreds of thousands.  Here's a quick "back 'O the envelope"
equation here to back me up!

	assume 500,000 cases in the past ten years.
	we know that there are approximately 450 Orgs
	so

	(500,000 cases / 10 years)/450 orgs = 111 cases /year/ Org

So in this estimate each Org handled 111 cases / year.  Thats only 9 
cases per month!  I suggest that the reason why the CoS claims a such
a small number of successes is because there are so many failures(of 
Scn of course)!  There are probably MANY more failures than successes,
but I digress.

	As I said, I beleive that the CoS can produce tens of thousands
of success stories BUT 

	WHY can't I say that they are a crock of shit?

All you've done is produce evidence of many many anecdotal stories, and
it is highly probable that even _they_ aren't representative of the
truth!


In article <1992Nov16.205441.4107@memstvx1.memst.edu> 
isds11990012@memstvx1.memst.edu--John Holifield writes:
>In article <Bxrnvy.Ept.2@cs.cmu.edu>, lindsay+@cs.cmu.edu (Donald Lindsay) writes:
 
>> [John Holifield - if I'm not in your kill file - could you try, while
>> exteriorized, to learn a fact that wouldn't be known to your body?
>> You seem honest: I'd like to hear your report.]
>
>    Don, this isn't really any big deal.  

	It is a big deal John, YOU have made it a big deal by
trying to throw this stuff at us with no proof.

>					   Yes, I could go exterior and
>do something like this.  

	I doubt it.

>			  I've done it many times before with friends of mine.
>I'm not trying to sound like I have these great magical powers or anything
>like that.  All I've been trying to say is that Scientology provides a means
>where you can find this out for yourself.  

	But it doesn't.  Not independantly at least!  I need PROOF,
real proof, clinical proof. 

>    Last spring I wrote to this newsgroup and said that I had looked into 
>the mailbox before opening it, and had been able to see the contents.
>The anti-scientology camp really loved that, many people posted that I
>must be on drugs, was delusional, was a compulsive liar, etc...

	These are very probable explanations.


>     It seems to me that the majority of the anti-scientology posters here
>have no intention at all of finding out if scn has anything to offer.

	Bullshit!  We ask serious questions with the sole purpose of
finding out what Scn has to offer.  You just can't give straight, honest
answers to any of them!


>Mostly they only intend to:

>A.  Expose Scn as an incredible and dangerous hoax.  

	Well, we all have our reasons, maybe Scn _IS_ an "incredible
and dangerous hoax".  There has been lots of evidence to show that,
for example the purification rundown has been shown to be dangerous.


>B.  Have some fun taking pot shots at other peoples religious beliefs.

	Again I must disagree.  Few of the posts could be described
as "pot shots", implying random attacks.  Most of the skeptics of
Scn have brought up valid questions.  See Mary H.(?)'s posts about
Scn ethics and how they treat the students of scn if they decide
to leave a class.  She was extremely thoughtful and fair(IMHO), 
using examples of apparent contradictions staright from Scns' own
books.  

>     Now, I haven't done any kind of tests that you might call scientific
>or anything.  

	Then don't bother posting such crap!  If you haven't done
the research that we want then why waste our time?

>		But, I have been able to experience and percieve space 
>independent of my body on many occasions.  

	No you haven't!  You can't prove it.

>     I already told you about the mailbox.  Here is another example: 

	Why can't I say that story is crap as well?

[snip:  Two "Astounding Stories" composed by John Holifield (see above)]

>     I don't know if I could just do this everyday, but I caused this
>to happen that day.  

	You can't, and you didn't.

>			Some of that last paragraph was a little off the 
>subject, but I was able to know that the violin class was performing and
>there is no way my body could have found that out from outside the building.

	You might have read an ad in the school newspaper!

>     I don't expect you to believe it, 

	Then why post it?

>					 because I'm not interested in
>prooving anything.  

	Your not interested in proving it because you can't!

>		     You can proove it to your self, and if you can't I
>won't say a word.  

	I can't prove it, I know, I've tried.  Here's how:  I had a
friend put one of his _HUGE_ art history books open on the shelf in
his bedroom at his house.  I did likewise for him, with a physics
text.  We then tried to "imagine"/"wish"/"think" ourselves to
each others' room to read the open pages.

	Two of my friends went home from school and at a pre determined
time we tried to "imagine"/"wish"/"think" ourselves to a predetermined
area.

	Guess what!  It didn't work!  We couldn't exteriorize. 

>		    If you won't, I don't think you are really interested
>in knowing.

	Oh.


[snip!: stuff about relaxation, hypnotism UFO's]
 



>   Personally I have memories of past lives.  Some are real, some I'm not
>sure about. 

	Which are real, which are false?  How can you tell?  Who
told you about these live?  Who said that they could get rid of the
bad ones?  For how much money?
 
>	     Mostly, Scientologists are more interested in how we are doing
>right now.  We want to improve conditions as they exist, rather than blame
>all our troubles on that time we were molested by satanic aliens when we
>were four.

	No, scientologists just blame them on thetans, bad lives 
from the past.  Wow!! that's just as believable as the satanic aliens!


>    If they actually were abused by satanists, or molested by aliens Then
>they should stop screwing around with hypnotism and those stupid support
>groups.  

	Who are _you_ to say, maybe you should stop screwing around with Scn!

>	  When they go on TV and talk about how after years of therapy they
>have discovered that they are screwed up because of satanic aliens I'm
>personally inclined to disbelieve it.

	As if your stories are any more believable!

>					  If they knew the real reason why,
>it wouldn't be a problem anymore would it?  

	Again, who are you to say?

>    The people I have met and seen on TV who make claims of Satanic Abuse
>or Alien Abduction often come from very disturbed families, use drugs, etc.
>They have problems.  Its obvious that whatever type of therapy they are
>currently using isn't working.  Its obvious because they Still Have the
>Problem!  If the therapy worked, why are they still screwed up?

	Right!  Give me evidence!  From what reports do you get
this information?  Give references!


>    I guess the main point of difference is that the real WHY allows the
>situation to be handled (As-ised).  Not finding the real WHY (avoiding
>as-isness) causes the condition or problem to persist.

	More scn mumbo jumbo.  What is "As-ised", "as-isnes".

>    In Scientology, we just ask the PC if the problem is handled, and if
>the PC is VGIs (Very Good Indicators--he feels good about it) and its no
>longer a problem to him, then great-- we can go on to something else that
>he would like to improve.  He knows that its handled, and he doesn't need
>more therapy sessions to help him cope with it or anything else.  He's 
>not even interested in it anymore.  Nobody has to tell him that this
>happened, or that didn't happen because he knows for himself what happened,
>he has confronted it fully, and its no longer a problem to him.

	Sure!   Whatever!

>-ARC,
>John Holifield
>ps.  Everyone is a Scientologist, some just haven't cognited yet!!



Richard Nistuk
nistuk@unixg.ubc.ca




Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology